U.S. Marine sentenced to 12 months in prison for assaulting Japanese woman

Thursday 26th June, 07:00 AM JST

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

Latest 15 of 24 Total Comments Show All

japanyesterday at 12:58 PM JST - 26th June

there is a slight different between running a train or gang bang on a female and gang rape. the guy did not get charged for rape, he even got charged for being out late of all things but certainly not rape, does that not tell you something? if there was solid proof that this guy had raped the female then he would have been awarded a longer sentence.

thundercat, you sound like loosechange on 9/11. maybe no one here has the inside track but at the same time you cannot prove that the crime was actually committed either. youre just going off what you heard or read. maybe youre typing from another planet but on earth, females sometimes really do call rape even after they willingly give it up.
rjd_jr at 01:33 PM JST - 26th June

And, apparently, in these types of cases the benefit of the doubt is always with the U.S. military member (or American). Again, very sad and quite disturbing to see in these cases doubts are always raised about the Japanese female's side.
thundercat at 01:39 PM JST - 26th June

USN

Oh and by the way, this incident occured long AFTER the local election and the finalizaion of the Atsugi-Iwakuni move.

Right, you may have an 'inside track' (which I still doubt) but you certainly have trouble using a calender.

March 2006 - Local referendum voted against Iwakuni base.

April 2006 - Anti Iwakuni base mayor Ihara is elected.

October 2007 - 4 marines accussed of rape

October - December 2007 - pressure mounts on Ihara to resign after the municipal assembly members supportive of Iwakuni base continually vote down his budget.

December 28, 2007 - Ihara resigns and an election is called.

February 2008 - Fukuda Yoshihiko, pro-Iwakuni base is elected mayor.

" Fukuda, 37-year-old former House of Representatives member from the Liberal Democratic Party, was assisted by the ruling coalition parties, and his inauguration as a new mayor of Iwakuni is expected to benefit the central government's implementation plans on the realignment of the U.S. military presence in Japan under an agreement with the United States. "

"Since the relocation plan is a key item of a 2006 bilateral accord on the realignment of U.S. forces in Japan, the central government has been paying attention to the outcome of the election which may influence other local governments' reactions to the realignment plans, including the most symbolic relocation of U.S. Marines' Futemma Air Station within Okinawa." Japan Times.

So you would have us believe that incident occured after the election and that there was no political motivation to have this crime swept under the rug. Check your facts. The crime and the investigation occured right in the middle of all this political manoeuvring to have the base relocated.

Japanyesterday, as I said earlier, you can attack me all you like. Think I'm a conspiracy nut? It would take a total idiot to deny that this crime didn't occured at a politically sensitive time for the LDP.
telecasterplayer at 03:24 PM JST - 26th June

Matada, what a native Japanese criminal "would" have gotten is irrelevent, as is the Japanese prosecutors inability to prosecute (incompetence? politics?). The punishment ought to fit the crime. 12 months seems a little scant for attacking a woman and disgracing the Uniform.

Did the Hiroshima prosecutors ever announce 'why' they did not pursue the case?
Molenir at 03:53 PM JST - 26th June

And, apparently, in these types of cases the benefit of the doubt is >always with the U.S. military member (or American). Again, very sad and >quite disturbing to see in these cases doubts are always raised about the >Japanese female's side.

Actually, kinda goes the other way. Benefit of the doubt is always on the females side. Actually, male of female, the side of the Japanese person. Only way you could have missed this is if you've had your head in the ground for the past few months. Hell, at this point, if a serviceman spits on the ground these days, its national news. They crucified these guys publicly, then the prosecutors realized they didn't have a case. The marines though hold their guys to a little higher standard, and therein lies the difference.
USNinJapan2 at 05:35 PM JST - 26th June

Thundercat

My apologies. You are correct that the incident occured before the most recent mayoral election instead of after as I mistakenly claimed. This provides a possible motive for the Japanese authorities to want to dismiss this incident. However, the plan to move Carrier Air Wing Five from Atsugi to Iwakuni was finalized and approved back in late 2005/early 2006 long long before this incident. There is still no reason whatsoever for the Marine Corps to wish to spare these four for any political reasons. Since you haven't yet, care to comment on this:

IF the victim had actually been raped and the Japanese authorities had indeed refrained from prosecuting the case due to political reasons, then why would the Marine Corps (who conducts its own investigation remember) not charge the accused Marines with rape and prosecute them to the full extent possible when doing so would be in their best interest in many ways? Is it that old standby excuse that the Marines are just taking care of their own people?

I still can't fathom why you think you can state matter-of-factly as you did earlier that the woman was raped for certain. Unless you were there yourself and witnessed the incident you can't state this as fact. The benefit of the doubt must clearly be given to the Marines in this case that they did not actually rape the woman. This is especially so in light of the fact that, politically charged or not, one justice system chose not to prosecute the case at all and a second independent justice system did prosecute them to the extent possible but not for rape. I guess you're not a big fan of the legal requirement to prove an accused person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt for serious charges such as murder and rape? God forbid you ever serve on a jury...
rjd_jr at 05:48 PM JST - 26th June

Wrong molenir, go back and re-read my posts. My stating that in cases like these the benefit of the doubt is with the U.S. military refers solely to the many JT posters here who seem to switch their tune depending on the situation. Not with anyone or anything else. Because this is a U.S. military member, these JT posters will automatically side with him and question the account of the female, the judicial system, and everything else except for the act of rape itself.

I don't mind people quoting me but it would be nice if at least you could not falsify my viewpoints, thanks.
sailwind at 09:54 PM JST - 26th June

Rdj

12 months? What a disgrace, he should have spent years rotting in prison for disgracing the uniform and the U.S.

Could you clarify what sentence would be acceptable to you. Seems you have a problem with Military justice system.
Obakemono at 05:11 AM JST - 27th June

Well he won"t be lonesome because all of running buddies will be waiting for him at The United States Military Disciplinary Barracks. Not too many people would want any of these Losers near their Teenage Daughters when all 4 get together on a nite out on the town. Hope the their lives will be very difficult when they get released from prison like a place to live and finding enployment because what the did is UNFORGIVABLE! Here"s hoping thay all flunk all background checks in an effort to keep these 4 losers away from Society.
thundercat at 09:28 AM JST - 27th June

All of the circumstances of this case have led me to believe that this woman was raped. Her case was dismissed because of 'inconsistancies in her story' not because of physical evidence. By all accounts, the police dropped the case without having thoroughly investigated her claims. This is also the reason I believe these marines were not tried for rape by the US military. Some of these guys WERE charged with rape but copped pleas for lesser crimes. Had their trails gone ahead I think they would have been found guilty.

"Lance Cpl. Larry Dean was, however, found guilty during his court-martial of sexual misconduct for having sex with the woman without getting her consent." Stars and Stripes 05/10/08

WITHOUT HER CONSENT!!! What is the definition of rape again?

"After his first contact, Dean noticed she wasn’t enjoying sex with the men anymore but had sex with her a second time anyway, making him negligent and guilty of sexual misconduct, Hale said.

The alleged victim said she was raped by the men and pretended to enjoy it at first because she feared for her life." S and S 05/10/08

Feared for her life... disgusting. Violence is not always needed when intimidation can be used.

"The woman’s symptoms are consistent with symptoms of severe trauma, according to a military psychiatrist who testified last week.

Dean had sex with the woman twice in the parking lot and was the last man to copulate with her, according to court-martial evidence.

He told investigators the woman seemed to “give up” but that he had sex with her again anyway." S and S 05/11/08

She "gave up"! Sounds like she wasn't a willing participate. Also clearly rape!

I tend to believe her story that she agreed to sleep with one of the men and that the others joined in without her consent. No matter how you argue that one, it's rape.

Also, everyone is ignoring the fact that these guys ARE criminals! They are CONVICTED criminals. They lose all benefit of the doubt and their "word" is worthless. If you would rather believe the word of criminals than the word of someone who has commited no crimes and stands nothing to gain from making her accusation that is your choice.

So USN2, you question my understanding of the assumption of innocence until proven guilty?! If any jury had heard the same testimony I'm sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, these guys would have been convicted of rape.

BTW, getting pretty sick of the personal attacks. I'm proving my stance. Can you do the same? What evidence do you have that supports their stories?
Zen_Builder at 09:37 AM JST - 27th June

One problem with the legal definition of rape is that it states:

"She has to resist and fight all the way", so giving in "in legal" term cancels the rape charge and it becomes consentual.

Myself don't agree with that part and think it should be changed.

But I would also say that rape happened.
Zen_Builder at 09:43 AM JST - 27th June

******The common law definition of rape is "sexual intercourse achieved by force or threat of force without consent of the victim". By requiring force or the threat of force, the legal system perpetuates the myth that a rapist is a strange man who jumps from behind the bushes at night. In addition, when there is a force or threat of force requirement, non-physical or non-imminent threats are not enough to prove a rape. As if this does not make proving rape difficult enough, many states also require the proof of "reasonable resistance" on the part of the rape victim.

http://womenmatter.org/fairco_whatstheproblem.htm
VOR at 07:34 AM JST - 29th June

The court martial found Sgt Lanaeus J Braswell, 25, guilty of conspiracy to engage in indecent acts, sodomy, violating liberty and alcohol orders and fraternization, according to a statement by the Marine Corps Air Station in Iwakuni in southern Japan.

The other 3 were court martialed using the same or similiar charges. None of them stood accused of rape as the evidence and the lack of a credible witness only allowed the USMC to pursue lesser charges.

The girl willfully went out to the parking lot to have sex with at least one of them. When his friends joined in, this little hip hop wannabe jgirl got a little more than she bargained for and cried rape.

I would imagine rape convictions would have been impossible without the four marines confessing. To them this naive girl was a willing participant and simply got played.

The USMC with another public relations nightmare on their hands and had to do something. Since these guys were in violation of the UCMJ on many levels, the USMC had every right to slam the crap out them and serve them up as examples to restore order and discipline as well as show the Japanese public they are doing everything they can to eliminate this type of thuggery from happening in the future.
thundercat at 10:38 AM JST - 29th June

VOR,

I read in the Stars and Stripes that some of the marines WERE charged with rape and even kidnapping at the start of their court martials. Was that information incorrect?
VOR at 02:19 PM JST - 29th June

T-Cat

Not sure. Chances are they may have looked into it but came to the same conclusion as the J-prosecutors did not being able to build a strong enough case with the evidence at hand. If they were not able to get at least one of these goons to admit rape and the J-gal is not a reliable witness or viewed in an unfavorable way, it would boil down to a jury or a judge taking the word of one questionable individual over the word of four. Rape convictions under these circumstances are very hard to prove.

J-gals who buy into the appeal of hip hop culture seem to be treated unfairly at both ends. They are treated like sluts by Americans who project the hip hop image here in Japan only to be treated the same way by local law enforcement and prosecutors after being violated.

At least the USMC is able to go after these guys on other code violations and slap them down pretty hard to at least dole out some kind of justice and try to prevent this from happening in the future.