Abstract:

In our criminal procedure law, free evidence and free evaluation systems have been adopted. For this reason, it is possible that any evidence obtained in accordance with the law can be regarded as proof and affect the judge's conscientious conviction. In this context, one of the most used tools for criminal proceedings is the victim testimony. However, chance that the victim may tell the truth and be neutral is too slight for he reasons such as his being part of the conflict, having the responsibility to swear, his hatred and grudge against the suspect. Especially in criminal proceedings for offenses where the only evidence is the testimony of the victim, the court must demonstrate by what means that the victim's statement is reliable and that the hypothesis is superior to the statement, allowing for concrete and convincing justification. In the criminal procedure law, victim testimony does not have any advantage over the defendant's testimony. For these reasons, the victim testimony alone is the basis for conviction that will be clearly contrary to the principle of defendant benefit from doubt. In this study, it was tried to be determined some standard rules not only for protecting the rights of the victim implicitly but also for protecting the presumption of innocence of the suspect while the effect of the suspect’s statement on evidence and probative force was put emphasis on and material fact was tried to be reached.

Keywords: