Counsel for defendant 2 added in this context that the course of events in which a police officer who was allegedly not involved (Investigator Malichi) spoke with defendant 2, later the commander of the police unit, and immediately afterwards defendant 2 was taken for interrogation under a warning, was a planned move; which was carried out while trampling on the rights of defendant 2 and promises that he would not be indicted, or that the indictment would be negligible and would allow him to return to work.
Thirdly , it was argued that at the very beginning of the interrogation conducted for Defendant 2 by the Commander of the Special Operations Unit and Investigator Malichi, in which Defendant 2 gave a first version regarding his and Defendant 1's involvement in the incident, it was clear to the investigators that Defendant 2 was suspected of murder. Despite this, he was not warned on suspicion of murder and was not denied his right to consult a lawyer, and the commander of the Central Intelligence Unit even urged him to tell the truth, threatening him that if he did not cooperate he would be charged with murder. And even after defendant 2 tied himself to the incident during the interrogation, the investigators did not stop the interrogation and did not warn him. It was claimed that the interrogators presented defendant 2 with a false representation that if he gave a version imposing full responsibility on defendant 1, he would leave the interrogation unscathed, and if he did not cooperate with them, he would get involved in a murder case; From the course of the conversation, it can be understood that Defendant 2 gave his version, while believing that it cleared him of the crime of murder and that he did not need legal advice.
Fourthly , it was argued that even in the interrogation after the interrogation, even though Defendant 2 was warned on suspicion of murder and asserted the right to counsel, in practice it was evident that he believed that the version he gave to the commander of the Central Intelligence Unit satisfies the investigators and clears him of the offense of murder and that the further interrogation constitutes only a formal matter after which he will return home; and it is clear that he did not understand his rights, and therefore he asked why he needed a lawyer and how a lawyer could help him.