davood_keshavarz_david_keshavarz_criminal_conviction_prison_sentence_judgement
                     REPUBLIC OF TURKEY
ESKİŞEHİR
CRIMINAL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE NO 6
CONVICTION-IMPRISONMENT/DEFERMENT
CASE NO : 2021/1482
DECISION NO : 2022/33
PROSECUTION FILE NO : 2021/10846
JUSTIFIED VERDICT
ON BEHALF OF THE TURKISH NATION
JUGDE : CEREN HEKİM DEMİRCİ 119174
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR : MEHMET AKİF AKBAŞ 189493
CLERK : EMİNE GÜLHAN 126356
PLAINTIFF : PUBLIC LAW
PARTICIPANT : DEVAKUMARAN JASWANT KUMAR, son of xxx and 
xxx,
born in 1960 in the USA., registered in the USA, residing at 2738
PARKPLACE LANE APT 48 JANESVILLE WISCONSIN WI
53545 USA
ATTORNEY : Att.  SERDAR  DURDAĞI,  Levent  Mah.  Ballı  Sk.  No:3
Beşiktaş/İstanbul 1. Levent Beşiktaş/İstanbul
ACCUSED :  DAVOOD KESHAVARZ  , son of Ezzat Allah and Farangis,
born on 18/11/1985 in Borujen, registered in Iran, residing at
Bahçelievler Mah. Balkan Cad. No:18 İç Kapı No:1
Tepebaşı/Eskişehir. T.R. Identity No: 99710341824
DEFENSE COUNSEL : Att. AYBERK GÜNTAY ÖZTÜRK, Pınarbaşı Mah. 704. Sk.
Palmiye Sit. B Blok No: 6/5 Konyaaltı/Antalya
CRIME : Successive Blackmail
DATE OF CRIME : 03/23/2021
PLACE OF CRIME : Eskişehir/Central District
DATE OF THE VERDICT : 01/13/2022
Following the public hearing before our Court about the accused whose information is
written above:
VERDICT:
ACCUSATION:
By the accusation dated 10/14/2021 and numbered 2021/10846 of the Chief Public
Prosecutor's Office, a criminal case has been filed against the accused before our Court to
punish him for the crime of successive blackmail under Articles 107/1, 43/1, and 53 of the
Turkish Penal Code.
You can access this document on UYAP Information System at http://vatandas.uyap.gov.tr 
with mwICVM/ - yzfcR6V - MFVg1xO - MWvAOc=. 1/5
IN THE CONSIDERATION ON THE MERITS, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
said: “We do not request the extension of inquiry. When the event and the entire file are
evaluated  together,  it  is  understood  that  the  accused  committed  the  crime  of  successive
blackmail against the participant. We consider and request on behalf of the public that the
accused be punished under the provisions of Article 107/1, 43/1 and 53 of the Turkish Penal
Code No. 5237., which are in compliance with his crime.”
DEFENCE:
 In the defense taken with an interpreter-expert, the accused said  “ I do not know
Turkish. I will do my defense with the translator. I am a graphic designer, and I design. I am a
freelancer. I met the complaint on the internet because of my work. I created designs through
the application called SLACK. The complainant was able to enter this application with his
own password, and both of us could see the designs that I created through this system. There
is  no system in which the projects  of the complainant  are stored. I have been resident in
Turkey for 6 years. it is the website named GITHUB that is mentioned in the indictment. This
is an application used in the U.S.A. I am registered with this program. Coders are registered
there,  their  codes  are  also  visible  to  all  other  users.  The  correspondence  stated  in  the
indictment is not mine. I did not write these messages to the complainant. I do not accept the
accusation.”. As it is deemed necessary to ask some questions by means of the interpreter, the
accused  said  “The  complainant  added  me  to  the  site  named  GITHUB.  He  was  the
administrator there, and I was able to act as much as the complainant allowed. I was able to
act  under  the  control  and supervision  of  the  complainant.”.  He continued  his  defense  by
saying “The Court has the authority to accept the request to participate. My e-mail address on
Slack is “[email protected]”. He continued his defense by saying “I do not
accept  the  evidence  and  documents  submitted  by  the  complainant.  I  did  not  write  these
messages. Also, there is no evidence about that. I repeat my previous defenses exactly. I do
not accept the consideration. I want to be acquitted. The complainant does not live in Turkey.
If I get acquitted in this case, how can I complain about him?”
 The  defense  counsel  said  in  the  defense  : “We  totally  agree  with  the  accused’s
defense. We do not accept the statements of the complainant’s attorney. The Court has the
authority to accept the request to participate. Firstly, we request the court to exempt our client
from hearings. My client did not write the messages on Skype in the file. The authenticity of
these messages has not been approved. For this reason, we request the Court to deliver the
case to IT experts in order to make research about which IP addresses, Skype ID, internet
networks  were  used  for  these  messages.  Again,  we  request  detailed  research  about  what
actions were carried out in the program named GITHUB. When this research is done, it will
be revealed that my client is innocent. The reason for complaining about my client based on
false documents is an agreement of $50,000 between my client and the complainant. This
price has not been paid by the complainant. My client doubts the identity of the complainant.
The business relationship was terminated by our client because of the loss of confidence. The
complainant produced fake correspondences and complained about our client based on these
fake correspondences. we request the collection of evidence stated by us. Considering the
receipts submitted by the complainant’s attorney and us, it has been proved that a higher price
was paid to my clients. This is proof that my client did not commit the alleged crime. We
request that our client be acquitted of the alleged crime.” He continued the defense by saying
“We repeat our previous written and oral defenses. We request that the file be delivered to the
IT specialist, as we have just stated the details. However, the Court did not accept it. Again,
we have a hard disk in which our client stored all the related data. We can submit this to the
Court. The hard disk has a passcode. If it is deemed necessary, we can submit the password
with a petition. We do not accept the consideration. We request that our client be acquitted.”
You can access this document on UYAP Information System at http://vatandas.uyap.gov.tr 
with mwICVM/ - yzfcR6V - MFVg1xO - MWvAOc=. 2/5
EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE AND JUSTIFICATION:
The participant’s attorney said in her declaration: “We do not accept the defense
of the accused. The complainant and accused corresponded on Skype. We have submitted
these correspondences to the file. The receipts about the relation between the accused and
complainant are in the case. The accused may flee abroad. We request the Court to impose an
international  travel  ban  on  the  accused.  We  complain  about  the  accused.  We  request  to
participate in the case.”
After assessing the indictment, the complaint petition of the participant’s attorney and
screenshots about the correspondences in its annexes, the accused’s defense, and all the file
together, it is understood that the accused and participant met online; the accused is a graphic
designer and computer programmer; the accused worked with the participant for a while; on
the date of crime the accused accessed the data storage system where the projects being done
by him were stored, transferred the whole data in the system to his computer, and then deleted
all of them from the system; then the accused called the participant and requested him to pay
2000 USD; the accused threatened to delete  and sell  this  data to third parties  in case the
money  was  not  paid;  then  they  corresponded  on  Skype,  and  during  the  conversation  on
03/23/2021 the accused blackmailed the participant by saying: “I removed all source codes
from github just there is in my computer. In next 3 days I will delete it or upload in on your
google drive. Send me 2k in next 3 days and I will upload this folder to your google drive or I
will delete them all. And this 2k for lose time. Its for cover my mentally losing time till I get a
new job. 3 days, then will delete any thing. Any way its up to you. 27th March I will delete
every  thing  and will  block you from everywhere”;  the participant  sent  1000 USD to the
accused;  the  accused  kept  threatening  the  participant;  the  accused  kept  blackmailing  the
participant on 04/13/2021 by texting "You send me 1000$ and I will send the link and a
promise to be loyal to you and dont use any of these apps orcodes. you ignore me and I didnt
get the respond i want so I just will block you, forgot you, dont answer to any pm or email
from you or any body that name you in future and also I will use all this data toe my will.
Maybe I sell them maybe I publish them maybe destroy them any thing I decide in future. I
think its better for you to give me the money, take your codes apps designs etc and we forgot
each other in peace. And I will promise dont even use 1 single image or line of code of your
apps for myself. What will happen to 1 k? I will just give it all to a charity here that take care
of animals. And will send you receipt and evidence. Dont send me angry messages or any
thing. it couse I decide to do even some thing 2x worse. After end of this month I will block u,
and then I decide what I want to do with data I have. Sell, or delete them any thing. I don’t
tread any one. I will sell (maybe) the data I created, or code I wroted. But 99% I will delete
them  all.  See  don’t  play  here”;  and  he  thus  committed  the  alleged  crime  of  successive
blackmail.
Although  the  accused  did  not  accept  the  accusation  and  declared  that  he  did  not
correspond  with  the  participant  and  that  he  communicated  with  the  participant  via  the
application called Slack, it is understood that the accused’s information submitted to the file
by the participant includes the accused’s phone number, email address and account numbers
in Ziraat  Bank; this  information is same with the information by the accused; the dispute
between  the  accused  and  the  participant  relates  to  the  information  in  GITHUB;  the
correspondence in question is of the similar subject; there is no reason for that the participant
accuse the accused without motive; the correspondence confirms the claim of the participant.
Since it is established that the accused’s defense is abstract and for escaping punishment, the
defendant's defense was not taken into consideration.
Since  it  is  understood  and  established  that  the  accused  sent  multiple  blackmail
messages to the participant at different times for committing the same crime, it is established
that the accused committed the crime of successive blackmail. Under the provisions of the
successive crime, the Court applied Article 43 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 about the
accused.
You can access this document on UYAP Information System at http://vatandas.uyap.gov.tr 
with mwICVM/ - yzfcR6V - MFVg1xO - MWvAOc=. 3/5
Although the defense counsel requested that the file be delivered and examined by an
IT expert, it is understood that the correspondence in question is on the participant’s Skype
address; it is not possible to conduct research using this address by IT experts; and the alleged
crime was proved by the documents submitted by the participant. Therefore, it is decided to
reject the request of the defense counsel and adjudge as follows:
VERDICT: Considering  the  above-mentioned  justifications,  it  is  decreed on
behalf of the Turkish nation, in the presence of the accused, defense counsel, participant’s
attorney, and public prosecutor and the absence of the participant,  in accordance with the
consideration of the public prosecutor:
(1) TO  SENTENCE  THE  ACCUSED  TO  1  YEAR’S  IMPRISONMENT  AND
IMPOSE A PUNITIVE FINE OF 5 DAYS ON HIM under Articles  61 and 107/1 of the
Turkish Penal Code no. 5237 considering the intensity of the accused’s intention and how the
crime  was  committed  because  it  is  understood  that  the  accused,  Davood  Keshavarz,
committed the crime of successive blackmail against the participant, Devakumaran Jaswant
Kumar,
(2) To increase the punishment by 1/4 under Article 52/4 of the Turkish Penal Code 
no.
5237, SENTENCE THE ACCUSED TO 1 YEAR AND 3 MONTHS’ IMPRISONMENT 
AND
IMPOSE A PUNITIVE FINE OF 6 DAYS ON HIM considering that the accused the crime in
a successive way,
(3) To decrease the punishment by 1/6 under Article 62/1-2 of the Turkish Penal Code
no. 5237, SENTENCE THE ACCUSED TO 1 YEAR AND 15 DAYS’ IMPRISONMENT
AND IMPOSE A PUNITIVE FINE OF 5 DAYS ON HIM considering the possible 
negative effects of the sentencing on the future of the accused,
(4) TO DETERMINE the punitive fine as TRY 20.00 for one day and as TRY 100.00
for 5 days considering the economic and social status of the accused under Article 52/1-2-3 of
the Turkish Penal Code no. 5237,
(5) NOT TO APPLY Article 52/4 of the Turkish Penal Code no. 5237 to the accused
considering the economic and social status of the accused and warn the accused about the
application of Article 106/3 of the Law no. 5275, amended by Article 81 of the Law no. 6545
on 06/28/2014, in case of non-payment of a criminal fine (the accused was warned by means
of the interpreter),
(6) APPLY the paragraphs 1, 2, and 3/1 of the Turkish Penal Code no.5237 to the
accused, considering the annulment  decision dated 10/08/2015 of the Constitutional  Court
and the amendment by Article 10 of the Law no 7242 entered into force 04/15/2020,
(7) NOT TO DEFER the announcement of the verdict under Article 231 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure no. 5271 because the conditions are not met and the announcement of
the verdict about the accused has been deferred in the criminal case with case no 2020/238
and decision no 2021/172 of the Criminal Court of First Instance no 2 of Eskişehir,
(8) SUSPEND the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the accused under Article 51
of the Turkish Penal Code no.5237 because the Court is convinced that the accused would not
commit such a crime again in the future due to his regret in the hearings and the fact that the
accused had not been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for more than 3 months of an
intentional crime, and his regret in the hearings,
IMPOSE A PROBATION PERIOD OF 1 YEAR AND 2 MONTHS for the 
accused under Article 51/3 of the Turkish Penal Code no.5237,
NOT TO IMPOSE any obligation or  ASSIGN an expert  for the probation period
considering the personality and social status of the accused under Article 51/6 of the Turkish
Penal Code no. 5237,
(9) INFORM the Criminal Court of First Instance no 2 of Eskişehir when the verdict
is finalized because it is understood that the announcement of the verdict about the accused
has
You can access this document on UYAP Information System at http://vatandas.uyap.gov.tr 
with mwICVM/ - yzfcR6V - MFVg1xO - MWvAOc=. 4/5
been deferred in the criminal case with case no 2020/238 and decision no 2021/172 and the
accused committed a crime during his probation period according to the criminal record of the
accused,
(10) COLLECT the attorney’s fee of TRY 5,100.00 calculated under the Attorney’s
Fee Minimum Tariff of 2022, which is in force at the date of the verdict, from the accused and
GIVE this amount to the participant because the latter is represented by an attorney,
(11) STORE 1 wd my passport  ultra hard disk and a connection cable,  which are
registered in the file numbered 2022/239 of the Property and Evidence Unit  of the Chief
Public Prosecutor Office of Eskişehir, AS EVIDENCE IN THE FILE,
(12) COLLECT TRY 31.50 FROM THE ACCUSED, which is for the expense of 2
notifications paid by the State, and REGISTER it as revenue, without including the fee of the
interpreter assigned for the accused who does not speak Turkish under Article 324/5 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure no. 5271,
(13) SEND to the relevant judicial law unit the defender-defendant decision tracking 
form filled after the finalization of the verdict together with a copy of the finalized verdict.
The verdict  was clearly read and duly explained.  The accused and participant may
APPEAL against  the  verdict  before  the  Our court  or  through a petition  or  a  declaration
written by a clerk, approved a judge, and submitted to the Criminal Court of First Instance of
his place of residence within 7 days from the pronouncement of the verdict. 01/13/2022
Clerk 126356 Judge 119174
e-signed e-signed
You can access this document on UYAP Information System at http://vatandas.uyap.gov.tr with mwICVM/ - yzfcR6V - MFVg1xO - MWvAOc=. 5/5