The verdict was announced in the 6th hearing of the case of Mattia Ahmet Minguzzi, who was stabbed to death by his peers in the marketplace where he went to buy skateboarding equipment in the Kadıköy district of Istanbul on January 24.

U.B., B.B., M.A.D., and A.Ö., who were in custody and were dragged into the crime, were connected to the hearing at the Anatolian 2nd Juvenile High Criminal Court via the Audio and Visual Information System (SEGBİS). The victim's mother, Yasemin Akıncılar Minguzzi, her father, Andrea Minguzzi, and the lawyers for both parties were also present at the hearing.

Extensive security measures were taken in front of the courtroom and in the corridor. Some citizens inside and outside the courthouse held signs reading"Justice for Mattia Ahmet" and chanted slogans.

Reiterating his opinion on the merits from the previous hearing, the public prosecutor requested that U.B. and B.B. be sentenced to 24 years in prison each for"premeditated murder of a child." The opinion also requested that M.A.D. and A.Ö. be sentenced for"aiding in the crime of premeditated murder of a child."

When asked for his final words before the verdict, B.B. said,"I regret everything I did, I'm very sorry," while U.B. also expressed his deep regret. A.Ö. stated that he wanted to go home to his parents, saying,"Uncle Judge, I want to go home to my parents. I want to sleep with them. I'm not guilty. I'm not at fault. I'm very regretful for being at the scene."

DECISION ANNOUNCED

M.A.D. stated that he categorically denied the accusations and requested the court to acquit him. The panel that ruled on the case sentenced B.B. and U.B., who were dragged into the crime, to 24 years in prison each for"premeditated murder of a child." The panel did not reduce the sentence and ordered the continued detention of B.B. and U.B. The panel acquitted M.A.D. and A.Ö. of"aiding in the crime of premeditated murder of a child" and released them.

OBJECTION TO THE DECISION FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE

In a statement regarding the case, the Istanbul Anatolian Chief Public Prosecutor's Office reminded that the prosecutor's opinion on the merits requested that B.B. and U.B. be convicted of"premeditated murder of a child" as joint perpetrators, and A.Ö. and M.A.D. be convicted of"aiding in the crime of premeditated murder of a child" and that their detention be continued.

The statement stated that at the final hearing held today, B.B. and U.B., who were dragged into the crime, were each sentenced to 24 years in prison for"premeditated murder of a child" and that their detention would continue.

In the statement, it was noted that A.Ö. and M.A.D., who were dragged into the other crime, were acquitted and released, and it was stated that legal remedies would be pursued regarding the issues that were found to be contrary to the prosecutor's opinion.

“WE WILL START THE OBJECTION PROCESS IMMEDIATELY”

The Minguzzi family's lawyer, Ersan Barkın, made the following statement:

“Approximately ten months have passed since the loss of our child Mingüzzi. After this ten-month period, we have reached the sixth hearing of this case. In this case, there were actually two separate cases. The first of these cases was the case filed with the first indictment, in which two defendants were held responsible for the act of ‘intentional child murder.’ The second case, on the other hand, was the consolidated case whose first hearing was heard in the previous hearing. The Public Prosecutor, presenting his opinion on the merits, requested punishment, considering that the two defendants in the first case committed this act intentionally as participants, while the two defendants in the second case were involved in the act as aiders.”

Despite the court's demonstration of how four defendants surrounded the child, using camera footage and other material evidence, and despite the public prosecutor's participation in this effort and conviction, the court sentenced two defendants to aggravated life imprisonment. Under the Turkish Penal Code, this corresponds to a 24-year sentence under juvenile criminal law. The court did not apply a discretionary reduction under Article 62.

However, despite the fact that the other two defendants involved in the action were clearly involved in surrounding the child at every point of the action and determining the escape route, a decision was made for the acquittal of these two defendants of the combined case due to lack of evidence and their release was ordered.

We've been involved in criminal proceedings for many years. Today, in a manner unusual in Turkish political history, security measures have been taken around the courthouse. Security measures have been taken to seal off corridors within the courthouse. Of course, these measures are acceptable for security and safety. However, the moment I saw these security measures, I knew this verdict was not one that would meet the national conscience. In other words, in my opinion, the security measures implemented today were primarily to protect the court's acquittal.

As a result of this court decision, the decisions made in this case are unacceptable, both in terms of the facts and the security measures in the case file. We believe that these decisions will be overturned upon our appeals, both regarding the acquittal and other matters at the legal stage.

Because, look, this decision was made in violation of over a century of judicial tradition, the unity of participation, and the existing decisions regarding the form in which these participations should take place. Therefore, it is unacceptable in its current state. We are confident that it will be overturned by the higher courts.

However, this case was more than just a case; it was also a precedent-setting decision that ensures all of our children can live on the streets without facing life-threatening safety issues. Unfortunately, we were unable to achieve this precedent-setting decision. The decision, in its current state, is unacceptable. Therefore, we believe that this decision will be overturned and overturned by the higher courts. We will immediately initiate the appeal process regarding the evictions.

'I TRUST IN DIVINE JUSTICE'

Speaking to the press in front of the courthouse, Matti Ahmet Minguzzi's mother, Yasemin Akıncılar Minguzzi, said,"I only trust in divine justice now." His father, Andrea Minguzzi, said,"He gathered all these wonderful people here. These wonderful people are working together, and we're discussing this. This decision is an insult. It's an insult because two defendants were released. Releasing him after committing this most heinous crime is a very wrong decision. I want to believe in justice again. I thank everyone. Our struggle continues for all our children. We want this decision to be historic, and we believe it will be."

The family's lawyer, Ersan Barkın, reminded that two of the four people on trial were sentenced to 24 years in prison, while two were acquitted and released"due to lack of evidence, despite being involved in the action."

Barkın noted that they believe this decision will definitely be overturned in the appeals review, and continued:

"This decision was made in violation of over 100 years of judicial tradition, the unity of jurisprudence, and the existing decisions regarding the form of participation outlined in these precedents. Therefore, it is unacceptable in its current form. We are confident that it will be overturned by the higher courts. It was a precedent-setting decision that ensured that all of our children could live on the streets without facing life-safety concerns. Unfortunately, we were unable to achieve this precedent-setting decision. The decision, in its current state, is unacceptable."

The court, which sentenced B.B. and U.B., who were being tried as"children dragged into crime," to 24 years in prison each for "premeditated murder of a child," did not reduce their sentences. M.A.D. and A.Ö. were acquitted and released on charges of"aiding and abetting the crime of premeditated murder of a child."