The old woman had her leg amputated! Verdict in the pit bull case!

A pit bull attacked 83-year-old Yücel Ata who was walking in Üsküdar, Istanbul. The pit bull case of Yücel Ata, who lost his leg in this attack, was concluded.

Anadolu Ajansı

Anadolu Ajansı

27 May, 2024

pitbull davasi

The lawsuit filed against 3 owners of the pit bull breed dog that attacked 83-year-old Yücel Ata, who was taking a walk in front of his house in Üsküdar, Istanbul in 2022, causing his leg to be amputated, on the grounds that they caused the complainant’s injury by not taking protective and preventive measures, was concluded.

In Istanbul, the complainant Yücel Ata (83) was attacked by a pit bull breed dog, which is called “banned breed”, on September 18, 2022, while he was walking in front of his house in Üsküdar Mehmet Akif Ersoy Neighborhood, and he was injured in his leg in such a way that he could not heal in a simple way and bone fractures occurred in his body.

HIS LEG WAS AMPUTATED WITH AN OPERATION

3689956 0f4529b6bbf6e3fa01566c04a2c55afb

According to the news in AA, Ata, who could not regain his former health despite the surgeries, had his leg amputated with the operation.

PARTIES DID NOT AGREE TO RECONCILIATION

3689956 17496e0dbd160853e40d4703f8a3ecfe

The defendants, who caused injury to the complainant by failing to take protective and preventive measures, were offered reconciliation since their actions were within the scope of reconciliation, but the parties did not accept reconciliation.

UP TO 1.5 YEARS IMPRISONMENT REQUESTED

In the indictment prepared, Hakan Çakmak, Hüseyin Çakmak and Cafer Polat, the owners of the dog, were demanded to be sentenced to imprisonment from 4.5 months to 1 year and 6 months each for “causing injury to a person with negligence in such a way that bone fractures occur in the body”.

FILE FINALIZED

As a result of the investigation conducted by the Anatolian Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, the lawsuit filed was held at the Anatolian 38th Criminal Court of First Instance. The court, which held a simple trial procedure, concluded the case after the parties submitted their defenses.

NO EVIDENCE OF “INTENT TO INJURE”

In the reasoned decision prepared for the case, it was explained that the dog in question was not kept under supervision without a leash or chain by the defendants despite the prohibition, but was released in a way that could be dangerous for others, but it was noted that there was no concrete evidence that the defendants did this with the intent to injure.

22 MONTHS AND 15 DAYS IMPRISONMENT EACH

The court sentenced defendants Hakan Çakmak, Hüseyin Çakmak and Cafer Polat to 15 months imprisonment each for “conscious negligent injury” and increased the sentence to 22 months and 15 days each, taking into account that the complainant was injured in a way that caused bone fracture in her body.

NO POSTPONEMENT OF SENTENCE

In the verdict, it was stated that the defendants had previous convictions for intentional crimes, the damage of the complainant was not compensated and the court did not have a conscientious opinion that the defendants would not re-offend, and it was emphasized that the announcement of the verdict was not deferred and the sentence was not postponed.

STATEMENTS OF THE DEFENDANTS ARE AS FOLLOWS

The court’s reasoned decision also included the statements of the defendants during the investigation phase. Accordingly, the defendant Hakan Çakmak stated that he kept dogs because of his love for animals and that the other defendant Cafer Polat, who was staying as a guest on their land from time to time, also took care of the dogs.

On the day of the incident, Hakan Çakmak stated that he and his brother Hüseyin Çakmak sat in the field for a while, then got in the car and were heading home when they heard shouting and saw a crowd on the street, “I stopped my car. I saw a dog biting an aunt I knew from the neighborhood. I separated the dog from the aunt by twisting its tail to help her. Meanwhile, the citizens gathered around were hitting the dog with sticks. When the dog was separated from the person, I took the dog in my lap and walked away from there. Afterwards, the dog tried to bite me on my right arm while I was trying to put it down. When I put it down, it ran away. Later, they said that the dog that bit me belonged to me because they knew from the neighborhood that I had a dog. This dog does not belong to me.”

Defendant Hüseyin Çakmak stated that the dog named “Ares” belonged to them and that Cafer Polat was walking the dog on the day of the incident.

Stating that they saw Ares biting the complainant on the leg, Hüseyin Çakmak said, “Hakan made a move and separated the dog. After a while, the dog jumped off Hakan’s lap and started to run away. Afterwards, we couldn’t find the dog anyway. Hakan then went to the police officers on duty and surrendered himself. As far as I remember, the dog was not muzzled. However, Cafer took off the muzzle thinking that he was going to lead the dog around the land. When we saw the dog attacking Aunt Yücel, we immediately intervened and saved her. I have no intent and negligence in this incident.”