Experts cannot determine how the codes were cracked

Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor Tekin Küçük wrote the indictment on the wiretapping of crypto phones. The indictment reviews the results of the analyses of the experts from the Telecommunications Communication Directorate (T?M). According to the indictment, some of the second generation encrypted phones (Milcep K2) allocated for use by top statesmen and top civil servants were wiretapped in T?M as a target; voice records proving this were found. In other words, it was certain that the phones were intercepted. Well, then, how could these encrypted phones, moreover the ones that had the highest encoding standards in the world, be tapped?  

To find the answer to this question, there was another experts? examination at the institution where these phones were produced, at TÜB?TAK, the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey. 

The experts committee, on their way to TÜB?TAK, had two assumptions on how these encrypted phones could have been intercepted. As written on the indictment, one was that the encryption key was carried outside the phone in real time to enable tapping simultaneously with the conversation. 

The second option was that, in order to decode the records after the conversations were recorded, the encryption key would be recorded inside the phone and then the recorded encryption key and the recorded data would be matched up with T?B records (it can also be called off-line) to complete the decoding process.    
For the first scenario to happen here, the third person intercepting the phone should be able to know the encryption keys the first two speakers on the phone send to each other. How can this be possible?  

The experts again assumed two options. One is that the encryption keys to be sent were already...