Prosecutors had their fingers full within the trial for the homicide of Tatsunari Ito, who was lynched by a gaggle 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 the Ito was by no means discovered because the perpetrators dismembered and minced it in a machine following his killing.
The latter downside brought on years to move between the killing and its discovery, rendering lapses within the statute of limitations on destruction and abandoning a corpse. The solely cost left was homicide.
By the time 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. While he admitted to assaulting the sufferer, he didn’t confess to homicide.
This view was supported by a suicide notice 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. However, the opposite two henchmen went together with the prosecution and fingered Shimada because the offender.
To get thus far, The Tokyo Reporter did profiled varied individuals concerned and key features 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 courtroom convicted Shimada. For a have a look at the way it ended, the editorial workforce brings its readership the fifth and closing installment on this collection.
“There are no circumstances that cast doubt on their credibility”
On December 20, 2022, presiding choose 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 excessive assault, but I did not commit murder,” he instructed the courtroom. The protection additionally argued that “the testimony of other accomplices at the scene of the murder is inconsistent, making it difficult and insufficient to prove the act.”
The courtroom felt in any other case.
Although 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 offender, as stories Shukan Bunshun (Dec. 2022).
The purpose for the popularity was the statements of the 2 males matched. “There are no circumstances that cast doubt on their credibility, and considering that the statements match, their credibility is recognized as high,” Nakagiri stated.
Regarding the likelihood that the 2 witnesses had wrongly pushed the blame onto Shimada, the courtroom disputed that as a result of they might have conveniently blamed a useless man, Motohashi. “Although there is no need to worry about retaliation from Motohashi, who has already passed away, [the two men] stated that it is not Motohashi but the defendant who is an active member of a yakuza gang who is a cause for concern about retaliation,” Nakagiri stated.
The courtroom additionally identified that it was unnatural for Shimada to have dismembered the physique if he had not been concerned within the homicide.
“They chose to kill him”
With Ito’s physique by no means having been discovered, the proof of the act of homicide itself grew to become some extent of competition. In the top, the courtroom stated, the crime was confirmed primarily based on eyewitness testimony and different proof, in keeping with Fuji News Network (Dec. 29, 2022).
Presiding choose Nakagiri stated, “The testimony of witnesses who were present at the scene of the crime, including the details of the assault and the circumstances leading up to the murder, are consistent and specific, and the defendant was found to have committed the murder.”
He continued, “After the assault, there was a chance to talk things over, and [the perpetrators] could have decided not to kill [Ito], but they chose to kill [him] to silence him. This anti-social decision-making, which disregards the value of human life, deserves severe criticism.”
Afterward, Shimada exercised his proper to enchantment.
Appeal
At 1:30 p.m. on June 22, 2023, sixteen individuals lined up in entrance of the Tokyo High Court. Later contained in the courtroom, there have been few empty seats, as documented on the location Note.com.
Appearing barely obese, 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 brand and camouflage shorts.
Just earlier than 2:00 p.m., presiding choose Katsunori Ono and different judges entered the courtroom. “All right,” Ono stated. “Court will now begin. The defendant, please stand in front of the witness stand.”
Shimada stands in entrance of the witness stand. “You are the defendant, Kazuharu Shimada, right?” Defendant then stated, “Yes.”
After that, Ono learn the ruling, which was a denial of the enchantment. Shimada then barely hung his head.
“Just sit and listen,” Ono stated.
“There was no reason for an unrelated defendant to store or dismember the body”
In lodging the enchantment, Shimada claimed that the primary trial contained a “misrepresentation of the facts” as to who carried out the homicide. Ono disagreed.
“[The first henchman] testified that the defendant stomped on the victim’s throat with his foot, crushing it. Motohashi held the body and chanted prayers,” Ono stated.
He went on, “[The second henchman] testified that the defendant strangled the victim. He stomped on the victim’s neck, crushing his feet. He wrapped the rope around the victim’s neck and strangled him, turning his face red.”
The choose stated that the sequencing of occasions and the choice to strangle the sufferer with the rope and fingers are largely constant. “Considering the passage of time, slight differences in memory are natural,” he stated.
Ono added that the defendant used gear from his personal firm and that of his brother-in-law’s firm to mutilate the physique.
“There was no reason for an unrelated defendant to store or dismember the body,” Ono stated, “and, as the first and third henchmen testified, it can be said that he used [the equipment] because he was the perpetrator.”
Ono didn’t acknowledge the testimony of the second henchman, who stated somebody apart from Shimada had accomplished it. He additionally confirmed hypothesis that the third henchman was spreading rumors in a hostess membership that he the truth is had administered the ending blow of Ito.
“It is clear that [the second henchman] is trying to avoid making statements that are detrimental to the defendant,” Ono stated.
In the top, Ono stated, “The claim of misinterpretation of the facts 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 known as him to the scene that day and that the sufferer had upset his daughter.
“The defendant killed the victim who had begged for forgiveness without resisting,” Ono stated. “He killed him without resistance [by the victim] to silence him. The defendant committed the murder, which was brutal and merciless, and the sorrow is immeasurable. The bereaved family cannot pray for the repose of their loved one in front of the body, let alone a single piece of bone. The consequences are serious. It is acknowledged that the murder of the victim, an acquaintance, is serious.”
At that, the choose dismissed the courtroom. 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 rapidly left the courtroom.
The gamers > The sufferer > The smartphones > The witnesses > The verdict