Monthly 'Zaikai NIPPON' (February edition)
Monthly 'Zaikai NIPPON' (February edition) published an article sharply critical of the abnormal proceedings in the Stalker Trial
Monthly 'Zaikai NIPPON' (February edition) published, in its series on Japan's human rights, an article entitled 'Stalker Trial would not expose its motivation'.
The article begins this way: "A Unification Church member was arrested while looking for his missing fiancee (syncopated)... I don't think the deliberation at the Tokyo District Court was thorough (sync.)... The prosecutors, in order to go along with their own scenario that 'the accused ambushed her to satisfy his romantic desires by all means', did everything not to expose the issue of religious kidnapping and confinement; a possible lead to the real motivation of the accused.
It went on to introducing the final statement by the accused Mr. Takashi Usami in the closing argument session.
"I never uttered a pressing word to demand Miss K to come back and marry me. How on earth that could satisfy my romantic want? My whole behavior in this case was urged solely to hear directly from Miss K and to ascertain her true mind. My action was not meant to fulfill my selfish affection at all."
"The more I learned about the history of religious kidnapping and confinement, the stronger my indignation became, as a secondary victim myself, towards the anti-Unification Church group. So, I decided to find the truth of the plight falling upon us."
"Can you tell those families who had their family members abducted by the North Korean agents to give them up passively? Isn't it anyone's heart to look for one's loved one by any means possible if he/she went missing?"
As Mr. Usami stated, the article analyzed as follows: "In this trial, there were two issues; whether the accused was to satisfy his romantic desires or to verify Miss K's intent and whether Usami's behavior was tantamount to an ambush or not." The article pointed out: "Unless the issue of religious kidnapping and confinement, which was directly connected to his motivation, was not examined, the case's whole picture would not be clarified. It is like we don't see the wood for the trees."
As a proof, the article pointed out a fact: "About one month after Miss K went missing, Mr. Usami visited the Sugamo Police Station near his home and submitted a search request.....If Usami really committed a stalking act to fulfill his desire, his search request was not consistent."
On the other hand, "In the court proceedings, even if the defense team testified that he looked for his fiancee whom he believed had been kidnapped and confined, the judge rejected it and sustained the prosecutors' counterclaims like 'it has no relevance to the direct examination' or 'it has nothing to do with this case.'" The article quoted the cross-examination with Witness Miyamura at the fourth session on June 24th 2011 as follows:
Lawyer: The witness knew that Miss K will visit her parents' home on January 1st 2008, didn't you?
Miyamura: Yes, I did.
Lawyer: From whom did you hear that?
Miyamura: From her parents.
Lawyer: What did they ask you?
Prosecutor: That's clearly beyond the direct examination.
Lawyer: You, the witness, have been involved in many cases of exit counseling with the Unification Church followers, haven't you?
Lawyer: Among them, were there followers who wrote notes of renunciation without their real intention to do so?
Prosecutor: Objection! It is irrelevant to the direct examination.
Judge: Change your question, will you?
Lawyer: Then, do you know a word 'faked renunciation'?
Judge: Likewise. If you continue asking the similar questions, I may suspend your cross-examination.
The article continued: "Each time such words as 'kidnapping and confinement' or 'faked renunciation' were uttered in the trial, the prosecutors raised objection. The prosecutors attempted to bypass the backdrop issue of kidnapping and confinement so as to limit the case for a stalker incident. And the judge did follow almost blindly the prosecution's scenario. In fact, the words of kidnapping and confinement were not mentioned in the prosecutors' final argument at all. They were lost completely even though the issue was essential to the causes of the case. Mr. Usami took his actions mainly because of his suspicion that his fiancee must have been kidnapped and confined, therefore, it is obviously not natural, or rather absurd, that the kidnapping and confinement were never referred to. In order to incriminate him on a prejudiced account of 'wanting to satisfy his romantic desires', the court deliberately concealed the true cause. This is a typical case now under harsh criticism that the prosecution attempts to mold trials according to its scenario." The article thus criticized the apparent bias in the court.
Also the article threw doubts on Usami's suspected aim of 'satisfying romantic desires' or his alleged intention of 'ambush', charging their claims' inconsistencies with Usami's actual behaviors.
The four-page article concludes as follows: "Judging from all these points, anyone can see clearly that Mr. Usami's actions did not correspond to the act of ambush as defined in the Anti-Stalking Act. (End of this document)