T.R.
Supreme Court
18.CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
MAIN NUMBER: 2015/4471
DECISION NO:2015/6667
DECISION DATE. 06/10/2015
The decision given by the Local Court was appealed, and the file was discussed according to the duration of the application, the nature of the decision and the date of the crime:
Since there were no reasons for the rejection of his clean request, we moved on to the substance of the matter.
In the examination made according to the minutes, documents and justification content reflecting the hearing process in which the conscientious opinion was formed, no other reasons were found to be appropriate.
However;
The legal value protected by punishing insulting acts is the honor, dignity and prestige of people, and for this crime to occur, the behavior must occur with the aim of humiliating the person. Whether an action is insulting or not is relative in some cases and may vary depending on time, place and situation. Any harsh criticism or disturbing words directed at individuals should not be evaluated within the context of the crime of insult, and the words must clearly constitute an attribution of a concrete act or fact that may offend honor, dignity and prestige, or an act of swearing. On the day of the incident, the defendant said to the complaining police officers, “What is it, why do you keep blocking my way? Is what you are doing humane? Is there such rudeness? What is it that you are stopping me now? You go and look at the Kurds, deal with Uğrak Bar, they are swearing at the police officers, you do not do anything to them, you do not give them any peace when it comes to us, what do you want from me, go away” Giving a decision of conviction on an illegal and inappropriate basis, regardless of whether it is not offensive to one’s reputation, is in the nature of a vulgar language, and does not constitute the elements of the crime of insult,
Since it was deemed unlawful and the defendant F..