Prosecutors had their palms full within the trial for the homicide of Tatsunari Ito, who was lynched by a bunch of seven inside a bar in Nishi Kawaguchi, Saitama Prefecture in 2016.
First, one of many key suspects, Junya Motohashi, had dedicated suicide, having hanged himself inside his detention cell a number of weeks following his arrest in 2021.
Second, the physique of Ito was by no means discovered because the perpetrators dismembered and minced it in a machine following his killing.
The latter downside brought about years to go between the killing and its discovery, rendering lapses within the statute of limitations on destruction and abandoning a corpse. The one cost left was homicide.
By the point the case went to trial, in late 2022, Kazuharu Shimada, a one-time member of the Yamaguchi-gumi felony syndicate, was the lone goal for the prosecution. Whereas he admitted to assaulting the sufferer, he didn’t confess to homicide.
This view was supported by a suicide be aware written by Motohashi, which stated that it was the third member of Motohashi’s three unnamed henchmen that carried out the ending blow upon Ito. Nevertheless, the opposite two henchmen went together with the prosecution and fingered Shimada because the wrongdoer.
To get so far, The Tokyo Reporter profiled varied individuals concerned and key facets of the case, together with Shimada, Ito, witness testimony and what could or could not have gone on within the bar that night.
As beforehand reported, the court docket convicted Shimada. For a take a look at the way it ended, the editorial crew brings its readership the fifth and last installment on this collection.
“There aren’t any circumstances that forged doubt on their credibility”
On December 20, 2022, presiding decide Keiichi Nakagiri convicted Shimada of homicide, handing him a 20-year jail time period.
From the opening of the trial, Shimada denied the cost of homicide. “I admit to extreme assault, however I didn’t commit homicide,” he instructed the court docket. The protection additionally argued that “the testimony of different accomplices on the scene of the homicide is inconsistent, making it tough and inadequate to show the act.”
The court docket felt in any other case.
Though the testimony of the witnesses was completely different, the decision acknowledged the testimony of Motohashi’s first and second henchmen, each of whom fingered Shimada because the wrongdoer, as studies Shukan Bunshun (Dec. 2022).
The rationale for the popularity was the statements of the 2 males matched. “There aren’t any circumstances that forged doubt on their credibility, and contemplating that the statements match, their credibility is acknowledged as excessive,” Nakagiri stated.
Relating to the likelihood that the 2 witnesses had wrongly pushed the blame onto Shimada, the court docket disputed that as a result of they may have conveniently blamed a useless man, Motohashi. “Though there isn’t a want to fret about retaliation from Motohashi, who has already handed away, [the two men] said that it’s not Motohashi however the defendant who’s an energetic member of a yakuza gang who’s a trigger for concern about retaliation,” Nakagiri stated.
The court docket additionally identified that it was unnatural for Shimada to have dismembered the physique if he had not been concerned within the homicide.
“They selected to kill him”
With Ito’s physique by no means having been discovered, the proof of the act of homicide itself turned a degree of competition. Ultimately, the court docket stated, the crime was confirmed based mostly on eyewitness testimony and different proof, in response to Fuji Information Community (Dec. 29, 2022).
Presiding decide Nakagiri stated, “The testimony of witnesses who had been current on the scene of the crime, together with the small print of the assault and the circumstances main as much as the homicide, are constant and particular, and the defendant was discovered to have dedicated the homicide.”
He continued, “After the assault, there was an opportunity to speak issues over, and [the perpetrators] might have determined to not kill [Ito], however they selected to kill [him] to silence him. This anti-social decision-making, which disregards the worth of human life, deserves extreme criticism.”
Afterward, Shimada exercised his proper to attraction.
Enchantment
At 1:30 p.m. on June 22, 2023, sixteen individuals lined up in entrance of the Tokyo Excessive Courtroom. Later contained in the courtroom, there have been few empty seats, as documented on the positioning Notice.com.
Showing barely chubby, Shimada was seated within the seat of the defendant with a shaved head and darkish pores and skin. A white masks lined most of his face. He was sporting a black long-sleeved shirt with an English emblem and camouflage shorts.
Simply earlier than 2:00 p.m., presiding decide Katsunori Ono and different judges entered the courtroom. “All proper,” Ono stated. “Courtroom will now start. The defendant, please stand in entrance of the witness stand.”
Shimada stands in entrance of the witness stand. “You’re the defendant, Kazuharu Shimada, proper?” Defendant then stated, “Sure.”
After that, Ono learn the ruling, which was a denial of the attraction. Shimada then barely hung his head.
“Simply sit and hear,” Ono stated.
“There was no motive for an unrelated defendant to retailer or dismember the physique”
In lodging the attraction, Shimada claimed that the primary trial contained a “misrepresentation of the information” as to who carried out the homicide. Ono disagreed.
“[The first henchman] testified that the defendant stomped on the sufferer’s throat together with his foot, crushing it. Motohashi held the physique and chanted prayers,” Ono stated.
He went on, “[The second henchman] testified that the defendant strangled the sufferer. He stomped on the sufferer’s neck, crushing it. He wrapped the rope across the sufferer’s neck and strangled him, turning his face purple.”
The decide stated that the sequencing of occasions and the choice to strangle the sufferer with the rope and palms are largely constant. “Contemplating the passage of time, slight variations in reminiscence are pure,” he stated.
Ono added that the defendant used tools from his personal firm and that of his brother-in-law’s firm to mutilate the physique.
“There was no motive for an unrelated defendant to retailer or dismember the physique,” Ono stated, “and, as the primary and third henchmen testified, it may be stated that he used [the equipment] as a result of he was the perpetrator.”
Ono didn’t acknowledge the testimony of the second henchman, who stated somebody apart from Shimada had achieved it. He additionally confirmed hypothesis that the third henchman was spreading rumors in a hostess membership that he in reality had administered the ending blow of Ito.
“It’s clear that [the second henchman] is attempting to keep away from making statements which can be detrimental to the defendant,” Ono stated.
Ultimately, Ono stated, “The declare of misinterpretation of the information is unfounded.”
Shimada additionally claimed that the 20-year sentence was inappropriate. In his protection, he claimed that he apologized to the sufferer’s household and offered them with 300,000 yen. He additionally said that it was Motohashi who referred to as him to the scene that day and that the sufferer had upset his daughter.
“The defendant killed the sufferer who had begged for forgiveness with out resisting,” Ono stated. “He killed him with out resistance [by the victim] to silence him. The defendant dedicated the homicide, which was brutal and cruel, and the sorrow is immeasurable. The bereaved household can not pray for the repose of their liked one in entrance of the physique, not to mention a single piece of bone. The results are severe. It’s acknowledged that the homicide of the sufferer, an acquaintance, is severe.”
At that, the decide dismissed the court docket. The proceedings lasted about 17 minutes.
The defendant remained immobile all through the sentence, trying barely downward. After the courtroom was adjourned, he frowned and shortly left the courtroom.
The gamers > The sufferer > The smartphones > The witnesses > The decision