Level crossing accident case in Mersin started

Level crossing accident case in Mersin started: The first hearing of the case opened regarding the train disaster, which resulted in the death of 12 people and injuring 3 people in Mersin, was held at the Mersin 12th High Criminal Court.

The first hearing of the case regarding the train disaster, which resulted in the death of 12 people and injuring 3 people in Mersin, was held at the Mersin 12th High Criminal Court. Detained defendant level crossing officer Erhan Kılıç, 28, accused the service driver, 30-year-old Fahri Kaya, who was also under arrest, in his testimony at the court and said, "It was too fast, I threw a lighter, I shouted, but it did not stop."

The incident took place at the level crossing in the central Akdeniz District Adanalıoğlu District on 20 March. Sinan Özpolat, Oğuzhan Beyazıt, Mine Serten, Onur Adlı, Ayhan Akkoç, Mehmet Akşam, Ünal Acar, Harun Salık, Cavit Yılmaz, Kenan Erdinç, as a result of the passenger train running from Mersin to Adana direction, crashed into the minibus with plate number 62028 M 33. While Mustafa Doygun and Halil Demir lost their lives; driver Fahri Kaya and Servet Çelik and Uğur Ateş in the vehicle were injured. In the investigation launched after the incident, Fahri Kaya and level crossing officer Erhan Kılıç were arrested.

According to the expert report in the indictment prepared at the end of the investigation, it was stated that the barrier officer Erhan Kılıç, aged 28, was at fault 60 percent, TCDD 30 percent, and the service driver Fahri Kaya 10 percent; A lawsuit was filed against Kılıç and Kaya with the demand of up to 15 years of imprisonment for negligent death and injury.

'THE SERVICE VEHICLE WAS VERY FAST'

The arrested defendants barrier officer Erhan Kılıç, service driver Fahri Kaya, relatives of those killed in the accident and lawyers attended the hearing at Mersin 1st High Criminal Court. Erhan Kılıç gave the first statement in the court. Kılıç stated that after he saw the train, he started to lower the barrier and said:

“The friend in charge of the pass before the train arrived warned me by calling my cell phone 8 minutes ago. Then I waited for the train to arrive. I saw the train from about 350 meters. However, the service vehicle entered the level crossing very quickly. At that time I was on duty in the tower. I pressed two separate buttons that ring the bell and lower the barrier. While the barrier was descending, the vehicle tried to pass quickly. Meanwhile, I asked him to stop, yelling and throwing the lighter in my hand at him. As the driver continued to pass, the train crashed into the rear. The vehicle entered the rails while the barrier was descending. If the level crossing hadn't slowed down when it came to the middle of the crossing, it might have saved. I received training on this job, I work 12 hours and work in a subcontractor. "

'THEY CURTAIN WHEN THE EARLY CLOSED'

In the meantime, the lawyer of one of those who died in the accident reminded that the barrier should go down at least 3 minutes before the train arrives at the level crossing and that the person performing this duty should be trained, and asked the defendant Erhan Kılıç to be asked about this situation. Kılıç, who was promised again, said, “When we close the barrier early, there is no cursing that we do not hear from the waiting vehicle drivers. When we shut it down 3 minutes ago, it is not clear whether the train will come or not during this time. For this reason, when it approaches, I press both buttons to ring and turn off the bell. Also, I studied for 15 days before I started this job. I have a certificate, ”he said.

'BARRIER IS OPEN'

The arrested service driver Fahri Kaya accused Erhan Kılıç in his testimony. In 2009, Fahri Kaya, who was determined to receive a 9-month prison sentence for involvement in a fatal traffic accident, was turned into a fine, and in his statement he gave with difficulty because he was emotional while expressing his condolences to the relatives of the deceased:

“2-3 vehicles passed in front of me. I passed because the barrier was open. Since there were wagons and containers near the rails in the head area on the left where the train came, the visibility was reduced. When I entered the level crossing I slowed down, I noticed the train when I got on the rails. I tried to rescue it by pressing the gas, but it shot from the back of the vehicle. I was injured in this incident, even human beings will throw themselves to death? It is not right for the barrier officer to shout at me and throw a lighter. I did not hear any chimes either. I did not receive any warnings during the incident, the barrier was open. I am not guilty, I want my release. "

POLICY SPEAKS FROM THE EXPRESSION

Servet Çelik and Uğur Ateş, who survived the accident by chance, rested. Çelik and Ateş stated that the barrier was open and that they did not hear any bells. The court told Uğur Ateş to the police on the day of the incident, “The driver passed under the rails that were closing with a sudden movement. Upon reminding that the service vehicle passed while the barrier was just descending, Ateş emphasized that he made such a statement because he was shocked by the incident at that time, and that the truth was his statement at the court.

He was saying 'what have I done'

The incident that marked the first hearing was a surprise witness. Tolga Çolak, who stated that the scene was right after the accident, told what he saw after the incident with the following words:

“While I was waiting at the red light about 50 meters from the passage, when I heard a big noise, I saw the accident and ran there. Meanwhile, the officer in the tower was in a state of panic, shouting 'What have I done, immersed'. I did not see the crash, but I was there right after the crash. I saw the barrier come down after the train hit the service. I called 112 and asked for help due to the accident. "

On the left side of the passageway, the witness Çolak, who complained that the container and wagons in the direction of Mersin from the direction of the train, had been constantly reducing their visibility, could not identify the two persons who were in the tower in the court.

WHAT IS CRITICAL

The lawyers of the relatives who died in the train accident at the hearing stated that, according to the expert reports in the file, it was fixed that a private company container placed on the left side of the level crossing and the wagons belonging to TCDD reduced the visibility range. Underlining that this situation also invited the accident, the lawyers demanded that the responsible private company, TCDD and the relevant municipality officials who did not carry out the necessary audits be identified and included in the case.

The court, after listening to the defendants, witnesses and lawyers participating in the trial, the continuation of the detention of the defendants, the request of the telephone conversation records of both defendants from the TİB, the on-site investigation to determine whether the wagons and containers kept near the level crossing will affect the visibility, the lawyers' company and municipal officials It was postponed to make the requests regarding the Public Prosecutor's Office and to remedy all the deficiencies.