The trial of the driver continues in the service accident in which 6-year-old Ela lost her life

In the case regarding the service accident that caused the death of 6-year-old primary school student Ela Tabakoğlu in the Gebze district of Kocaeli, the 3rd hearing held against the defendant İ.C has been completed. At the hearing at the Gebze 12. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi, the defendant İ.C, who is under house arrest, reiterated his defense regarding the moment the incident occurred, stated that he did not accept the allegations against him, and requested release. The victim family's lawyers and Ela's mother Serpil and father Fatih Tabakoğlu attended the hearing and made statements against the defendant. According to the defendant's statement, it was claimed that the parent was contacted because the student could not be reached, and they set off to switch to another school on a different route empty. İ.C expressed his regret over the incident and said he wished condolences to the family.

Taking the floor at the hearing, father Fatih Tabakoğlu emphasized that the defendant's side constantly disturbed them and that he believed his daughter was intentionally killed by the defendant, requesting that the defendant be punished in the heaviest way. Due to the increasing tension and accusations between the parties, the court panel decided that the defendant's detention should continue in the form of house arrest. Additionally, because the expected report from the İstanbul Adli Tıp Kurumu Trafik İhtisas Dairesi had not yet arrived, a decision was made to ensure this report is completed as soon as possible. As a result of the evaluations, the hearing was adjourned to a future date to address deficiencies and await the expert report. The delay in the forensic medicine report, which is necessary for the completion of the justice process, is deepening the family's trauma.

The legal and technical dimension of the incident becomes even more complex with the contradictory results in the expert reports. In the indictment prepared by the Gebze Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı, it was determined that defendant İ.C violated the turning rules under the Karayolları Trafik Kanunu, but it was claimed that the deceased little girl also did not comply with the rules pedestrians must follow, and she was found 'primarily at fault'. While the driver was considered 'secondarily at fault' according to the first expert examination, a prison sentence of 2 to 6 years and a ban from profession for 3 months to 3 years or confiscation of the driver's license is sought against the defendant for the crime of 'causing death by negligence'. This situation caused serious debates regarding the legitimacy of the incident and the distribution of fault, and the first report was met with great reaction by the family.

The most critical development that could change the course of the case was the emergence of a second expert report, which was prepared anew and is claimed to be more comprehensive. The new report stated that, in addition to the driver İ.C, the persons responsible for the child getting on the service were also 'primarily at fault'. On the other hand, this new review includes a finding that 6-year-old Ela Tabakoğlu, who lost her life, was faultless. This result reveals, contrary to the first report, that there was no negligence on the part of the child and that all responsibility lies with the service owners and drivers. This report will play a decisive role in determining the defendant's penalty and the nature of the act.

Looking back, this tragic event occurred on February 4 in the Cumhuriyet Mahallesi of Gebze district. The service vehicle with license plate 41 P 3597, driven by İ.C., hit Ela Tabakoğlu, a 1st-grade primary school student trying to cross to the opposite side of the road while turning from 2232. Sokak to 2230. Sokak. Despite the intervention of health teams at the scene, little Ela could not be saved and lost her life, and after the incident, driver İ.C. was arrested and sent to prison. The conversion of the detention to house arrest in the last hearing on June 19 was recorded as an important step in terms of the defendant's partial return of freedom. While it is eagerly awaited whether the perpetrators of the incident will receive the punishment they deserve, the finalization of the safety reports is being awaited.