

A foreigner is defrauded in Turkey through a deepfake video or AI-generated identity. Learn how to file a criminal complaint, preserve digital evidence, trace payments and request urgent measures.
Artificial intelligence can now be used to create highly realistic fake videos, voices and identities. A foreigner in Turkey may receive a video call appearing to show a company executive, relative, investment adviser, lawyer or another trusted person and transfer money because of instructions given during that communication. When the video or voice is actually generated or manipulated using artificial intelligence, the incident may give rise to a serious criminal investigation involving fraud, identity misuse, digital evidence, bank transfers, cryptocurrency transactions and potentially organized cybercrime. The victim should act quickly because account balances can be transferred through several banks or converted into cryptocurrency within a short period.
Deepfake fraud involves manipulating or generating video, images or audio so that a person appears to say or do something that did not actually occur. Fraudsters may imitate a real person’s face and voice during recorded communications or even live interactions.
The objective is frequently to establish trust and convince the victim to transfer money or disclose sensitive financial information.
Depending on the facts, conduct involving deceptive AI-generated content may fall within existing criminal-law provisions rather than requiring the offense itself to be formally named “deepfake fraud.”
The legal characterization should be based on how the deception was carried out, how the money or property was obtained, which digital systems were used and whether additional offenses occurred.
Foreign nationality does not prevent a person from reporting an offense committed in Turkey or otherwise falling within Turkish criminal jurisdiction.
The victim should preserve identity, transaction and communication evidence and explain the incident chronologically.
Depending on the circumstances, a criminal complaint may be submitted to the competent public prosecutor’s office or reported through law-enforcement channels.
For substantial digital fraud, a structured written complaint supported by organized evidence can make it easier to identify the relevant accounts, communications and technical records.
Victims sometimes delete fraudulent material after discovering the deception. This can destroy valuable evidence.
Preserve the original video file, message, attachment or communication wherever possible.
A screenshot can prove what appeared on a screen, but the original digital file may contain substantially more information.
Preserve the original video, audio, photograph, attachment or downloaded file in its existing format.
Do not save only the fraudulent payment instruction.
Preserve the complete conversation showing how the relationship developed, what representations were made, how trust was established and how payment instructions were communicated.
Preserve messages, usernames, telephone numbers, profile information, dates, timestamps, attachments and call records.
Screen recordings may also help demonstrate the sequence of communications, but they should supplement rather than unnecessarily replace original data.
Even if the number appears foreign or temporary, preserve it exactly as displayed.
Investigators may later compare the number with other evidence or determine whether it was associated with additional fraud cases.
Where email was used, the full technical email information can be more valuable than a printed copy of the message.
Do not forward or modify the only available original email before preserving it properly.
If the fraud involved a website, investment platform or social-media profile, preserve the account name, page appearance, domain information available to you and relevant communications.
Fraudulent pages can disappear quickly after complaints begin.
A criminal case normally becomes stronger when the manipulated video is connected with other evidence showing deception and financial loss.
Bank records, messages, phone numbers, account details and transaction chronology can therefore be as important as the video itself.
Obtain transaction records showing the receiving bank, account holder where available, account number or IBAN, amount, currency, date, time and payment explanation.
If several transfers were made, create a separate transaction table.
The victim should inform the relevant bank immediately after discovering the fraud and ask what urgent fraud procedures are available.
Speed can be important where money remains within the banking system.
Depending on the investigation and available legal grounds, prosecutors and courts may consider measures affecting accounts or criminal proceeds.
The victim should therefore provide accurate banking information at the beginning of the complaint rather than waiting until later stages.
A rapid onward transfer does not necessarily end the investigation.
Investigators may examine the movement of funds through subsequent accounts where legally available records can be obtained.
If the fraudster requested cryptocurrency, preserve wallet addresses, transaction hashes, exchange information, screenshots and communications concerning the payment.
Blockchain transactions can create a technical transaction trail even where the ultimate identity of the recipient is initially unknown.
If the victim purchased or transferred cryptocurrency through an exchange, preserve account statements, transaction history and verification records available to the victim.
These may help connect the fiat payment with the subsequent blockchain transaction.
The victim does not necessarily need to prove technically, before filing the complaint, exactly how the deepfake was created.
Where authenticity is disputed, forensic examination may become relevant to determine whether the video or audio was manipulated or synthetically generated.
Original files may contain technical information concerning creation, encoding or modification.
For this reason, repeatedly editing, compressing or converting the only available copy should be avoided.
The telephone or computer used during the fraud may contain call records, cached files, application information and other evidence.
Do not unnecessarily reset the device after discovering the fraud.
If messages, photographs or files are backed up, preserve the relevant account information and avoid deleting backups.
Investigators may need to understand where the original communication records remain available.
The impersonated person may also possess important evidence.
For example, the real company executive can confirm that they did not make the video call or request the transfer.
If a corporate executive or employee was impersonated, contact the company using independently verified contact details rather than replying through the communication channel used by the fraudster.
This can also help identify whether other employees or customers were targeted.
Modern fraud schemes may combine compromised email accounts with AI-generated audio or video.
A fraudulent payment instruction may therefore appear to come from both a legitimate-looking email address and a convincing video call.
The investigation should examine the entire communication chain.
Not every apparently authentic communication is purely AI-generated.
Fraudsters may combine deepfakes with stolen messaging accounts, compromised social-media profiles or telephone-number attacks.
The complaint should avoid prematurely assuming only one technical method.
If the victim or impersonated person received unusual login alerts, password-reset notices or security warnings, preserve them.
They may help establish the chronology of account compromise.
A foreign victim who does not sufficiently understand Turkish should communicate the need for interpretation during criminal proceedings.
Accuracy is particularly important in technically complex fraud cases involving multiple transactions and digital communications.
Before signing a statement, the foreign victim should ensure that amounts, dates, account information, names and the method of deception have been recorded accurately.
Errors should be corrected before signature.
A useful complaint file should explain when the fraudster first contacted the victim, what identity was used, when the deepfake appeared, what representations were made, when payment was requested, when money was transferred and when the victim discovered the fraud.
A clear chronology can substantially simplify a complex digital investigation.
If the fraud involved several payments, list every receiving account separately.
Do not describe the loss merely as a total amount if individual transaction information is available.
List telephone numbers, email addresses, social-media accounts, messaging usernames, websites, cryptocurrency wallets and any other identifiers connected with the scheme.
Blocking may be appropriate to prevent further contact, but preserve the available evidence first.
The victim should not continue sending money merely to gather additional evidence.
Once the fraud is discovered, direct confrontation may cause accounts, profiles or websites to disappear.
Evidence preservation and formal reporting can be more important than attempting to obtain a confession through messages.
Victims of digital fraud are sometimes targeted again by persons claiming they can recover the stolen money for an advance payment.
Any recovery service should be independently verified before additional funds or sensitive information are provided.
Where money crosses borders, international evidence-gathering mechanisms may become relevant.
Cross-border cases can take longer, which makes early preservation of the information already available to the victim especially important.
The physical location of the suspected offender does not automatically mean that no Turkish criminal investigation can occur.
Jurisdiction and international cooperation depend on the facts of the particular case.
A foreign victim who has left Turkey should obtain advice concerning available procedures for submitting evidence, appointing counsel and following the investigation without unnecessary travel.
A lawyer can assist with preparing the complaint, organizing digital and banking evidence, submitting additional information and following procedural developments within the limits of applicable criminal procedure.
A criminal investigation may identify suspects and criminal proceeds, but recovery of the victim’s financial loss can involve additional procedural and civil-law questions.
The victim should therefore consider asset recovery from the beginning rather than only seeking punishment.
Keep bank statements, exchange records, invoices and other financial documents demonstrating the amount actually lost.
Where foreign currency was involved, preserve the original currency and transaction amount.
If investigators identify similar complaints involving the same bank accounts, telephone numbers, wallets or digital identities, the evidence may help establish a wider fraud structure.
Victims should provide all identifiers available to them.
Fraud schemes frequently use intermediary accounts.
The identity of the account holder should therefore be investigated rather than automatically assuming that the named account holder personally created the deepfake.
One account holder may knowingly participate, another may have allowed their account to be used, and another may themselves have been deceived.
Criminal responsibility requires an individualized assessment of the evidence.
Yes, digital material may be relevant evidence, but authenticity, integrity, source and the manner in which it was obtained can become important.
Preserving the original material and surrounding communications strengthens its evidentiary value.
In significant cases, an independent forensic examination may help preserve technical findings concerning manipulated media.
Whether this is necessary depends on the value of the case, available original files and likely evidentiary dispute.
Digital evidence can disappear quickly. Accounts can be deleted, websites removed and communication records become harder to obtain over time.
A prompt criminal complaint should therefore identify the evidence requiring preservation as specifically as possible.
A foreigner who discovers deepfake fraud in Turkey should preserve the original video or audio, save the entire communication history, record every digital identifier, obtain complete bank or cryptocurrency transaction records, notify the relevant financial institution promptly, preserve the device used during the fraud, prepare a chronological timeline, identify the impersonated person and submit a structured criminal complaint with the available evidence.
Yes. The legal assessment depends on the manner in which the artificial content was used and the surrounding fraudulent conduct.
No. Preserve the original file and surrounding communications as potential evidence.
Screenshots can be useful, but original files and complete communication records can contain significantly more evidentiary information.
Depending on the facts and legal requirements, investigative authorities may consider measures affecting accounts or criminal proceeds. Prompt reporting is therefore important.
Preserve the wallet address, transaction hash, exchange records and all communications relating to the transfer.
Yes. The same evidence-preservation principles can apply to manipulated or synthetically generated audio.
Preserve the communication and independently contact the real employer or executive so that the false identity can be documented.
Foreign victims can report offenses. Where necessary under the applicable procedure, interpretation issues should be addressed so that the victim’s statement is accurately recorded.
Recovery depends heavily on how quickly the fraud is reported, where the money moved, whether assets can be identified and what legal measures are available. Recovery is not automatic.
Preserve the original digital evidence and trace the money immediately. In deepfake fraud cases, the strongest complaint usually combines the manipulated media with complete communications, bank or cryptocurrency records, digital identifiers and a precise chronological account of how the deception caused the payment.
Deepfake fraud can involve AI-generated video or voice, impersonation, bank transfers, cryptocurrency payments, stolen accounts, international suspects and rapidly disappearing digital evidence. Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign individuals, executives, investors and companies affected by digital fraud and criminal investigations in Turkey. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in preparing criminal complaints, organizing electronic and financial evidence, following prosecutor investigations, seeking available measures concerning criminal proceeds and coordinating cross-border evidence issues.
Phone:
+90 312 434 22 22
Mobile:
+90 532 769 22 22
Email:
info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address:
Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148
06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey