1st criminal court case with participation of victim's relatives held

Saturday 24th January, 05:47 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

11 Comments

kwatt at 11:07 AM JST - 24th January

Death panelty likely trends to increase as victim's sympathy may affect judges.
browny1 at 12:59 PM JST - 24th January

After watching a re-enactment of these procedings on tv last night, I'd say the jury sway could be significant in many cases.

When the defendant was asked by the victims family if he had prayed at the site he said "...no". And when asked if he had some final thing to say he said "nothing really". Such a seemingly offhandish manner would certainly influence a jury, but it doesn't necessarily bear any relationship to the facts & guilty or not guilty.

I got the feeling that this older guy was just speaking as he always does - a 66yr old jiji.

The courts had better tread carefully with this one as emotion, while real, can over shadow the truth.
scoobydoo at 01:10 PM JST - 24th January

Relatives asking a witness with irrelevant questions is a hardly a useful or helpful thing in the process of justice in most cases I think. However I wonder about the whole process of justice in any country including the so called free world countries.
mindovermatter at 01:27 PM JST - 24th January

relatives sat next to prosecutors and asked the defendant if he had prayed for the victim at the accident site.

What kind of mickey mouse court is this...?

Did I accidentally mistype "NigeriaToday...?"

This sound like something you'd read about in some tribal village in Zimbabwe...

I'm wondering what the actual purpose of their participation is...? During the Trial portion of the proceedings....? It's unbelievable...

I could understand during the sentencing phase, where the guy has already been convicted, but they have yet to establish guilt, and the "Relatives" are asking if he prayed for the victims.....?

You just have to laugh out loud.... Just when I thought, I couldn't possibly be surprised by anything connected with Japan's justice system, another unbelievable revelation takes place....

Laughing out loud! Ha Ha Ha...!
cleo at 01:49 PM JST - 24th January

Bereaved relatives are the last people to be allowed any say in court proceedings; they're too full of emotion (understandably so). Leaving apart the fact that they're questioning a defendant, not a convicted criminal, they're asking him if he prayed? So non-religious people get a heavier sentence than those who wear their beliefs on their sleeve? What kind of nonsense is this?
smartacus at 01:59 PM JST - 24th January

Asking the defendant if he prayed for the victim is perfectly understandable to me. In my work, I have spoken to many relatives of people who died violently and they all say they want the defendant to show contrition and beg foregiveness from their victims.

Even more important to victims' relatives is that they want an apology. Even if the killer is sentenced to death, the family will not feel that justice has been done and will not be able to move on with their lives unless they get an apology from the killer.

Another thing I have noticed is every day during a trial, the relatives will report to a photo of their murdered loved one at their home altar on the proceedings. Being able to talk to defendants gives them something to "report," so to speak.
openyoureyes at 03:08 PM JST - 24th January

Even more important to victims' relatives is that they want an apology. Even if the killer is sentenced to death, the family will not feel that justice has been done and will not be able to move on with their lives unless they get an apology from the killer.

The problem with that is this guy isn't "the killer" until he is convicted of being so. The family shouldn't have any interaction with him during the process of determining guilt, unless they were present at the scene of the crime and are participating as eye-witnesses. Otherwise it's just a circus ploy.
paisley at 03:40 PM JST - 24th January

How can there be an unbiased case with relatives contributing to the judicial system? Also, I 100% believe in God but even I think asking someone from a nonreligious country if he prayed for the victim AT the accident site is absurd. Even a religious person may not pray. They may be in too much shock to think straight since they were in the accident too or they may be thinking of getting help for the injured parties. Or they may just be feeling fear. I just wouldnt expect a nonreligious person to even think of praying. Moreover, whether a person prays or not doesnt answer the real question of whether this was intentional, drug/alcohol induced, negligent, or just a very tragic accident. Asking ridiculous questions like this wastes tax payer time and money and contributes nothing to the court.
BBLeo at 06:03 PM JST - 24th January

Certainly that is not very good system and will slow down proceedings all the way. Jurors system I agree to it. Such system is like 'TANGO FOR TWO.'
donkusai at 01:46 AM JST - 25th January

Asking the defendant if he prayed for the victim is perfectly understandable to me. In my work, I have spoken to many relatives of people who died violently and they all say they want the defendant to show contrition and beg foregiveness from their victims.

Except, of course, that the defendant might in fact be innocent. Would you beg for forgiveness from the family of the victim if you didn't do the crime? Of course not. This step should clearly be move out of the trial stage and into the sentencing, when guilt has been proven.
Molenir at 08:33 AM JST - 25th January

Seriously, as others mentioned, this just seems weird. It certainly doesn't seem helpful. I could see the family of the victims being involved in the penalty phase of a trial, asking for a harsher or reduced sentence, but being allowed to interrogate witnesses? This just seems wrong.