ELCI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY JUDGMENT 52 26. Batuhan Özer 365. Mr Özer was born in 1971 and at the material time he was working at the Diyarbakır Detention Centre. His principal task was to take the completed criminal files of detainees to the State Security Court. He had had nothing to do with the applicants' detention or interrogation. He had just taken their files to court. 366. He knew of the 16 lawyers but had only met Mr and Mrs Şahin at the time, neither of whom had been blindfolded. 367. If a colleague forgot to sign a document, he would sign it for him. He had signed one such document in the case of İmam Şahin, although he had not formulated its contents. He thought that the person who typed the statement had been Hüseyin Gazi Ates; Murat Kirikçi had been the interrogator. As far as he could remember, the witness had had Mr Kirikçi's notes and he had put the latter's questions to Mr Şahin and had the replies typed up. Mr Özer was present when Mr Şahin signed his statement. He had chatted at length with Mr and Mrs Şahin many times and Mr Şahin had lamented the fact that he and his wife had been used by “them” and duped. 368. Mr Özer then said that he had not been present when Mr Şahin signed his statement. He had no opinion on whether it was desirable or not to keep a suspect unaware of the identity of the interrogator. The suspect was not, however, blindfolded. 369. Mr Özer acknowledged that a signature seemingly like his was on a statement purportedly made by Arzu Şahin but not signed by her, but he did not remember exactly. 27. Murat Kiricki 370. Mr Kiricki was born in 1971 and was an NCO for interrogation and investigation in the Diyarbakır gendarmerie. He had had a month's training for that job. 371. He had interrogated the 16 lawyers. He thought that the detention of so many lawyers was normal although he could not recall a similar incident. He had been guided during the interrogations via the closed circuit television system by his superior officer, Mr Yedekçi. 372. First the lawyers asked why they had been detained, even though they must have been given the reasons earlier. They were informed that they were there to answer Abdülhakim Güven's allegations, and the interrogation started with the allegation that they had acted as couriers between prisons. Mr Kiricki did not recall what had been the applicants' initial reaction to the allegations. 373. The interrogation was then interrupted and resumed later (lapse of time unspecified), when they confessed to the courier charges. The change