davood_keshavarz_david_keshavarz_criminal_conviction_prison_sentence

Davood Keshavarz, aka David Keshavarz was convicted by a criminal court for blackmail and extortion of an international client.www.facebook.com/dvidfrmr
accuse TURKISH Penal Code PARTICIPANT complain CRIME DEFENSE
Davood Keshavarz, aka David Keshavarz was convicted by a criminal court for blackmail and extortion of an international client.www.facebook.com/dvidfrmr
accuse TURKISH Penal Code PARTICIPANT complain CRIME DEFENSE
You can access this document on UYAP Information System at http://vatandas.uyap.gov.tr with mwICVM/ - yzfcR6V - MFVg1xO - MWvAOc=. 
1/5 
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=. 
2/5 
 
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 
“davood.keshavarz@outlook.com”. 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=. 
3/5 
 
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=. 
4/5 
 
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=. 
5/5 
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