In short
A second statement at the prosecutor's office is a further hearing, or an added account, in the same investigation. It does not erase the first record by itself. The two papers may be read together. A conflict may be the reason for the second session. No prison term is stated in this text, and none is added. The question of what a second statement means is read from the sentence on the record of why the person was summoned again. It is not assumed that an arbitrary repeat is found in every file.
When the person is summoned again
A new document, a witness, an expert, or a conflict that is sought to be cleared may be seen as the reason for the second summons. If the reason is written on the service or in the opening of the second record, it is read from there. If it is not written, a reason is not invented. What is called new evidence is the concrete document that entered the file. A paper that was named but not added is not treated as new evidence. If an expert report arrived, the date of the report and the date of the summons are set side by side. If there is no date, an order is not invented.
The second summons does not announce that the first statement is invalid. If the person is heard again, the first account stands. The second account may carry an intention to correct. The correction is not made by crossing out the first line. What changed, and why, should be written on the second record. If it was not written, the change remains a difference without an explanation. The result of the difference is not closed in this text as a conviction.
How a conflict is read
The first and second accounts are set side by side. If there are two answers to the same question, both stand. Deleting one and announcing the other as the only truth is not the work of the record. The material point on which the conflict sits is written separately. If an hour, a place, or a person's name changed, the changed word is marked. A small difference of a word is not inflated as a conflict in every file. If the meaning changed, the difference of meaning is stated. A prison term is not added as the penalty for the conflict. A period is not written.
Preparation is reading a copy of the first record. If there is no copy, it remains unclear with which text the person entered the second session. Reviewing it with counsel stands in place of a blind sentence "I will change all of it." Such a sentence is risky. The first record is not erased. Every line that is changed, if it is without a reason, stands as a conflict. Silence may also be spoken of in the second session. Silence does not destroy the first record. It is looked for whether the silence was entered on the second record.
If the service of the second summons is attached to the annex of the first record, the dates of the two are compared. If the service date is before the record date, the order is written separately. If the order is broken, the break does not by itself make the second statement invalid. Invalidity is not announced in this text. If the person did not come, the failure to come stands separately on the record. A failure to come is not the same sentence as silence. Silence is the person who came not speaking. A failure to come is not complying with the summons. If the two are mixed, the result is mixed too. A result is not written. A prison term is not added as the counterpart of not coming. If a conflict was sought to be cleared, the point that was cleared should be written expressly on the second record.
If the words "I corrected it" do not show which word changed, the correction remains half done. A half correction does not erase the first text. The name, the place, and the hour in the first text are compared one by one with the second text. If all three are the same, there is no conflict at those three points. If there is a difference at another point, only that point is written. The whole statement is not inflated as conflicting. If an additional explanation was given to the prosecutor's office by petition, the petition stands apart from the oral record. If the two conflict, both are read. A prison term is again not written.
How the second record is read
The first record, the second record, and the service of the summons stand together. The three are not taken as a single session. An Ankara lawyer does not write the address of the Çankaya office in place of the prosecutor's office. The competent authority is read from the unit in the investigation file. The first record is not erased so that it will pass by itself. The district of the office does not change the prosecutor's office where the statement will be taken. A prison term is not written under this heading either. If the period is not in the file, it is not added. If service is incomplete, the gap is stated separately and is not put in place of the second statement.
Neighbouring sessions
The frame of the first statement at the prosecutor's office is under statement at the prosecutor's office, reading the record is under the statement record, what follows the statement is under after the statement, and preparation before the statement is under before the statement. These four do not repeat whether the second account erased the first. Each looks at its own document.
Conclusion
The answer to what a second statement at the prosecutor's office means is an added layer. The first account is not disregarded. A prison term is not invented. The frame is on the criminal law page, and the basis is in the text of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271. A result of the conflict is not spoken before the two records, the service, and any petition are seen.