5 ms·

It will be interesting to follow if they have enough money to fight the extradition in court. The international press loves to make Japanese criminal courts so

It will be interesting to follow if they have enough money to fight the extradition in court. The international press loves to make Japanese criminal courts sound like a 12th century madhouse at every opportunity.

colejohnson66 6y ago
I heard the reason for the high conviction rate is because they only pursue cases that they think they have a 100% of winning. <rant> Which I think is a really messed up thing. The police exist to serve the public, not to “win” cases. The fact that the public thinks “losing” a case is a bad thing is crazy. While you could argue that “losing” cases means they need to be replaced with someone who’ll get better evidence, this always leads to putting someone who’ll be “tough on crime” as the DA. And those DAs end up putting a lot of innocent people in prison. </rant>
- catalogia 6y ago
  Almost as bad as prosecutors winning cases against innocent people is prosecutors losing cases against innocent people. Losing cases against innocent people is a bad thing insofar as the process itself is punishment. If prosecutors avoid cases they think they might lose, they're doubtlessly avoiding the scenario where they lose cases against innocent people, not just the scenario where they lose cases against guilty people. The question of which should be prioritized doesn't seem so clear cut to me. Surely there's a balance to strike, but where?
- pnw_hazor 6y ago
  Not sure about Japan, but the tendency of US prosecutors to dismiss/drop cases they think they might lose is a critical part of the US justice system. The US prosecutor has a dual role that includes protecting people from unwarranted prosecution as well as prosecuting people charged by police . Though [too] often, they confuse their important duty to protect people from unwarranted prosecution with their personal interest in promoting their career. edit: toned it down a bit - added [too]
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    Oh, I agree that it’s essential to a functioning justice system. I’m just upset about corrupt prosecutors. For example, sometimes, even with all the evidence pointing to Person A, the police will still railroad (an unrelated) Person B because they, for some reason, can’t admit they’re wrong.
    - pnw_hazor 6y ago
      Corrupt prosecutors are evil and way too common. Prosecutors are supposed to be the gatekeeper -- they should be a bulwark against injustice. I wish there was some plea offer reform to stop prosecutors from making coercive plea offers. I think that is one of the worse offenses against justice. E.g., offering plea deals with a choice of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor with no jail or you get multiple felonies thrown at you and the potential for years of prison. The Feds are even worse with their false statements or mail/wire fraud charges. No wonder they get their convictions. Plea guilty to one count of making a false statement or you get 100 counts of mail fraud -- take your pick.
      - colejohnson66 6y ago
        Plea bargains are evil. It’s my belief that if your case is not rock solid enough that you need to resort to a plea bargain, you shouldn’t be prosecuting that person. Also, how are plea bargains not perjury? You’re saying, “I did it” even if you didn’t.
        pnw_hazor 6y ago
        I feel the policy behind plea bargains is sound. Some of the problems the Japan criminal justice has is because plea bargains are not generally allowed except for recent limited reforms that in some ways make things worse. Many US-style plea bargains are reasonable and do not require defendants to lie because they are pleading guilty to lesser included crimes rather than lying about what they did. The problem is when plea bargaining is used as a weapon that encourages false confessions or false guilty pleas. Or, more generally, when the choice to plead guilty or go to trial is unbalanced such that defendants will not even try to force the government to prove their case. This is bad for justice. The Feds are big into this. They wield/abuse 18 U.S. Code § 1001 (making false statements a felony) with abandon. A defendant can be faced with $100,000s in legal fees with the potential of decades in federal prison or they can plead guilty to one count of 18 USC 1001, it happens everyday (probably several times a day).
smcl 6y ago
I haven't read a great deal about them in the papers, but what I have read is that they have a frighteningly high conviction rate - meaning that either - the police are really good at finding the perpetrators of crimes - the state are really careful about only taking cases to trial they are extremely confident they can win - ... or that simply being tried in court sufficient for convince everyone judges and/or juries that you're guilty and that it's basically a formality after that point I've no idea which of these is true, I really hope it's just either of the first two.
- _jal 6y ago
  The US Federal conviction rate is only a few percentage points lower. And as a US citizen, I can assure you it is not the first in our case.
  - ciarannolan 6y ago
    No, it's actually not even close. [1] >In the United States federal court system, the conviction rate rose from approximately 75 percent to approximately 85% between 1972 and 1992.[13] For 2012, the US Department of Justice reported a 93% conviction rate.[14] In 2000, the conviction rate was also high in U.S. state courts. Coughlan, writing in 2000, stated, "In recent years, the conviction rate has averaged approximately 84% in Texas, 82% in California, 72% in New York, 67% in North Carolina, and 59% in Florida."[15] >In 2018, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that among defendants charged with a felony, 68% were convicted (59% of a felony and the remainder of a misdemeanor) with felony conviction rates highest for defendants originally charged with motor vehicle theft (74%), driving-related offenses (73%), murder (70%), burglary (69%), and drug trafficking (67%); and lowest for defendants originally charged with assault (45%).[16] Compare this to: > The criminal justice system of Japan has been referred to as a form of "hostage justice" (hitojichi-shiho), including in an appeal by 1010 Japanese professors, lawyers, and other legal professionals.[8] Collin Jones, a professor at Doshisha Law School in Kyoto, notes that the system has a conviction rate commonly described as 99.9%, but that the rate is, in fact, closer to 99.4%.[9][10][verification needed] Jones agrees with the group of legal professionals petitioning for change that practices such as interrogating suspects without counsel or charge for up to 23 days, not requiring the disclosure of exculpatory evidence, or of relationships between prosecutors and the courts increases the likelihood of convictions;[9][8] these professionals are unequivocal in their belief in the issue continues despite reforms, and that the system contributes to wrongful conviction: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate
pnw_hazor 6y ago
More scrutiny the better. Several features of the Japanese criminal justice system, such as, absence of due process, no right to counsel during police interrogations, coercive interrogation techniques (sleep deprivation, stress/pain positions, meal withholding, isolation, etc.), absence of a bail system, absence of an independent judiciary, and so on, deserve as much scrutiny as possible.
- jcampbell1 6y ago
  I blame Douglas MacArthur, though in his defense Miranda v Arizona wasn’t until 1966. You forgot to mention that police interrogations can legally go for 3 weeks.
  - pnw_hazor 6y ago
    "the simple tactic of bekken taiho – arrest, or re-arrest, for a different crime. The police arrest the person on a different or trumped up charge. At the end of the 23 days, the police rearrest him on another charge, keeping him in detention, and so the cycle goes on. Though evidence gathered through this method is prohibited in theory, and is at times struck down by the courts, law enforcement has been known to keep suspects in daiyou kangoku for months before indictment." https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/02/japans-authoritarian-criminal-justice-system/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/02/japans-authoritarian... I recognize there are reform efforts going on, in law school there were some Japanese judges and prosecutors observing some criminal procedure classes I was in. For example, recently a limited form a plea bargaining has been introduced before this plea bargaining was not available. However, plea bargaining is limited to a few crimes (mostly white collar crimes) and only if a defendant offers evidence that implicates others -- this encourages false testimony against others.
NotSammyHagar 6y ago
But they can hold you as long as they want in apparently uncomfortable conditions until you sign a confession, right?

colejohnson66 6y ago

I heard the reason for the high conviction rate is because they only pursue cases that they think they have a 100% of winning. <rant> Which I think is a really messed up thing. The police exist to serve the public, not to “win” cases. The fact that the public thinks “losing” a case is a bad thing is crazy. While you could argue that “losing” cases means they need to be replaced with someone who’ll get better evidence, this always leads to putting someone who’ll be “tough on crime” as the DA. And those DAs end up putting a lot of innocent people in prison. </rant>

catalogia 6y ago
Almost as bad as prosecutors winning cases against innocent people is prosecutors losing cases against innocent people. Losing cases against innocent people is a bad thing insofar as the process itself is punishment. If prosecutors avoid cases they think they might lose, they're doubtlessly avoiding the scenario where they lose cases against innocent people, not just the scenario where they lose cases against guilty people. The question of which should be prioritized doesn't seem so clear cut to me. Surely there's a balance to strike, but where?
pnw_hazor 6y ago
Not sure about Japan, but the tendency of US prosecutors to dismiss/drop cases they think they might lose is a critical part of the US justice system. The US prosecutor has a dual role that includes protecting people from unwarranted prosecution as well as prosecuting people charged by police . Though [too] often, they confuse their important duty to protect people from unwarranted prosecution with their personal interest in promoting their career. edit: toned it down a bit - added [too]
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  Oh, I agree that it’s essential to a functioning justice system. I’m just upset about corrupt prosecutors. For example, sometimes, even with all the evidence pointing to Person A, the police will still railroad (an unrelated) Person B because they, for some reason, can’t admit they’re wrong.
  - pnw_hazor 6y ago
    Corrupt prosecutors are evil and way too common. Prosecutors are supposed to be the gatekeeper -- they should be a bulwark against injustice. I wish there was some plea offer reform to stop prosecutors from making coercive plea offers. I think that is one of the worse offenses against justice. E.g., offering plea deals with a choice of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor with no jail or you get multiple felonies thrown at you and the potential for years of prison. The Feds are even worse with their false statements or mail/wire fraud charges. No wonder they get their convictions. Plea guilty to one count of making a false statement or you get 100 counts of mail fraud -- take your pick.
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      Plea bargains are evil. It’s my belief that if your case is not rock solid enough that you need to resort to a plea bargain, you shouldn’t be prosecuting that person. Also, how are plea bargains not perjury? You’re saying, “I did it” even if you didn’t.
      - pnw_hazor 6y ago
        I feel the policy behind plea bargains is sound. Some of the problems the Japan criminal justice has is because plea bargains are not generally allowed except for recent limited reforms that in some ways make things worse. Many US-style plea bargains are reasonable and do not require defendants to lie because they are pleading guilty to lesser included crimes rather than lying about what they did. The problem is when plea bargaining is used as a weapon that encourages false confessions or false guilty pleas. Or, more generally, when the choice to plead guilty or go to trial is unbalanced such that defendants will not even try to force the government to prove their case. This is bad for justice. The Feds are big into this. They wield/abuse 18 U.S. Code § 1001 (making false statements a felony) with abandon. A defendant can be faced with $100,000s in legal fees with the potential of decades in federal prison or they can plead guilty to one count of 18 USC 1001, it happens everyday (probably several times a day).

smcl 6y ago

I haven't read a great deal about them in the papers, but what I have read is that they have a frighteningly high conviction rate - meaning that either - the police are really good at finding the perpetrators of crimes - the state are really careful about only taking cases to trial they are extremely confident they can win - ... or that simply being tried in court sufficient for convince everyone judges and/or juries that you're guilty and that it's basically a formality after that point I've no idea which of these is true, I really hope it's just either of the first two.

_jal 6y ago
The US Federal conviction rate is only a few percentage points lower. And as a US citizen, I can assure you it is not the first in our case.
- ciarannolan 6y ago
  No, it's actually not even close. [1] >In the United States federal court system, the conviction rate rose from approximately 75 percent to approximately 85% between 1972 and 1992.[13] For 2012, the US Department of Justice reported a 93% conviction rate.[14] In 2000, the conviction rate was also high in U.S. state courts. Coughlan, writing in 2000, stated, "In recent years, the conviction rate has averaged approximately 84% in Texas, 82% in California, 72% in New York, 67% in North Carolina, and 59% in Florida."[15] >In 2018, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that among defendants charged with a felony, 68% were convicted (59% of a felony and the remainder of a misdemeanor) with felony conviction rates highest for defendants originally charged with motor vehicle theft (74%), driving-related offenses (73%), murder (70%), burglary (69%), and drug trafficking (67%); and lowest for defendants originally charged with assault (45%).[16] Compare this to: > The criminal justice system of Japan has been referred to as a form of "hostage justice" (hitojichi-shiho), including in an appeal by 1010 Japanese professors, lawyers, and other legal professionals.[8] Collin Jones, a professor at Doshisha Law School in Kyoto, notes that the system has a conviction rate commonly described as 99.9%, but that the rate is, in fact, closer to 99.4%.[9][10][verification needed] Jones agrees with the group of legal professionals petitioning for change that practices such as interrogating suspects without counsel or charge for up to 23 days, not requiring the disclosure of exculpatory evidence, or of relationships between prosecutors and the courts increases the likelihood of convictions;[9][8] these professionals are unequivocal in their belief in the issue continues despite reforms, and that the system contributes to wrongful conviction: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate

pnw_hazor 6y ago

More scrutiny the better. Several features of the Japanese criminal justice system, such as, absence of due process, no right to counsel during police interrogations, coercive interrogation techniques (sleep deprivation, stress/pain positions, meal withholding, isolation, etc.), absence of a bail system, absence of an independent judiciary, and so on, deserve as much scrutiny as possible.

jcampbell1 6y ago
I blame Douglas MacArthur, though in his defense Miranda v Arizona wasn’t until 1966. You forgot to mention that police interrogations can legally go for 3 weeks.
- pnw_hazor 6y ago
  "the simple tactic of bekken taiho – arrest, or re-arrest, for a different crime. The police arrest the person on a different or trumped up charge. At the end of the 23 days, the police rearrest him on another charge, keeping him in detention, and so the cycle goes on. Though evidence gathered through this method is prohibited in theory, and is at times struck down by the courts, law enforcement has been known to keep suspects in daiyou kangoku for months before indictment." https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/02/japans-authoritarian-criminal-justice-system/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/02/japans-authoritarian... I recognize there are reform efforts going on, in law school there were some Japanese judges and prosecutors observing some criminal procedure classes I was in. For example, recently a limited form a plea bargaining has been introduced before this plea bargaining was not available. However, plea bargaining is limited to a few crimes (mostly white collar crimes) and only if a defendant offers evidence that implicates others -- this encourages false testimony against others.

NotSammyHagar 6y ago

But they can hold you as long as they want in apparently uncomfortable conditions until you sign a confession, right?