Signature debate in media rages on
Güncelleme Tarihi:
Hurriyet Daily News
OluÅŸturulma Tarihi: Haziran 23, 2009 00:00
ISTANBUL - The media debate over the authenticity of a signature on an alleged document that seeks to topple the government continues with pro-government media sticking to their guns that the signature is authentic.
Pro-government media organizations agreed in their Monday editions that the signature on a document that allegedly included a plan to finish off the ruling party is authentic, citing reports prepared by police and gendarmerie investigators.
Â
The coverage comes a couple of days after the same newspapers split over the authenticity of the signature and reached differing conclusions, again based on the same investigation reports. Some interpreted the investigation reports as saying the signatures are alike, while the rest said they are the same.
The headline of Sabah daily, whose CEO is the son-in-law of Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, read, "Double Evidence to Double Signature," on Monday. The daily published images of the four signatures belonging to Col. Dursun Çiçek written on various documents, including a credit card contract and his passport.
Earlier this month, pro-government Taraf daily published a document of an alleged military plan to finish off the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, and a religious sect lead by Fethullah Gülen. The military launched an investigation into the claim and concluded the document was not prepared in any of its units.
According to Sabah, gendarmerie investigators said in a report sent to military prosecutors that the signature on the document "generally looked like those Çiçek used in his private life." The report by police investigators said, "It has become apparent that the signature on the document was produced by Dursun Cicek," Sabah wrote.
On Friday the same media organizations published the Gendarmerie Criminal Laboratory's report after the examination said the signatures had similarities, but reached different conclusions. Some of them, including Sabah, said it is likely the signature does not belong to the Çiçek, while the rest concluded it does.
Taraf daily, who published the initial claims and is best known for its anti-military publications, ran the headline, "The Forgery of the Colonel."
The office of the Istanbul prosecutor collected 21 different sample signatures belonging to the colonel on the grounds that he might have changed his signature in the examples taken during his interrogation, Taraf said. The signature he used in the interrogation and the one on the document are clearly different, it said.
Daily Bugun, whose owner admits his ties with the Gülen movement, said, "Here is the report that finished Col. Çiçek." It quoted the gendarmerie report as saying Çiçek's signature and the one on the fourth page of the document "have general similarities."
Questions remain
The plan, allegedly drafted by the General Staff’s operations division, is said to have contained efforts to fight fundamentalism and end the activities of religious movements Ğ particularly the AKP and Gülen’s group Ğ that are accused of trying to undermine Turkey’s secular order and establish an Islamic state. The document was recovered during a search conducted at an office of a suspect detained in the controversial Ergenekon probe, the reports suggested. Some experts say it is almost impossible to determine the authenticity of a signature from a copy.
Â
The coverage comes a couple of days after the same newspapers split over the authenticity of the signature and reached differing conclusions, again based on the same investigation reports. Some interpreted the investigation reports as saying the signatures are alike, while the rest said they are the same.
The headline of Sabah daily, whose CEO is the son-in-law of Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, read, "Double Evidence to Double Signature," on Monday. The daily published images of the four signatures belonging to Col. Dursun Çiçek written on various documents, including a credit card contract and his passport.
Earlier this month, pro-government Taraf daily published a document of an alleged military plan to finish off the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, and a religious sect lead by Fethullah Gülen. The military launched an investigation into the claim and concluded the document was not prepared in any of its units.
According to Sabah, gendarmerie investigators said in a report sent to military prosecutors that the signature on the document "generally looked like those Çiçek used in his private life." The report by police investigators said, "It has become apparent that the signature on the document was produced by Dursun Cicek," Sabah wrote.
On Friday the same media organizations published the Gendarmerie Criminal Laboratory's report after the examination said the signatures had similarities, but reached different conclusions. Some of them, including Sabah, said it is likely the signature does not belong to the Çiçek, while the rest concluded it does.
Taraf daily, who published the initial claims and is best known for its anti-military publications, ran the headline, "The Forgery of the Colonel."
The office of the Istanbul prosecutor collected 21 different sample signatures belonging to the colonel on the grounds that he might have changed his signature in the examples taken during his interrogation, Taraf said. The signature he used in the interrogation and the one on the document are clearly different, it said.
Daily Bugun, whose owner admits his ties with the Gülen movement, said, "Here is the report that finished Col. Çiçek." It quoted the gendarmerie report as saying Çiçek's signature and the one on the fourth page of the document "have general similarities."
Questions remain
The plan, allegedly drafted by the General Staff’s operations division, is said to have contained efforts to fight fundamentalism and end the activities of religious movements Ğ particularly the AKP and Gülen’s group Ğ that are accused of trying to undermine Turkey’s secular order and establish an Islamic state. The document was recovered during a search conducted at an office of a suspect detained in the controversial Ergenekon probe, the reports suggested. Some experts say it is almost impossible to determine the authenticity of a signature from a copy.