We wonder, however. Our father does not gain any benefits by pretending to be completely blind, while those who assumed that he has vision might have gained some benefits by assuming it.
After his arrest, the mass media continued sensational reports with our father as the key plotter of a violent crime, and the Court was exposed to the pressure of public opinion calling for "quick conclusion of trial" and "quick execution". Whether or not our father was disabled or ill, the Court had to finish this trial drama by all means. Trials in Japan in those days took long because of the system. It took more time for serious cases with more points in dispute, and it was not rare to take 10 years or longer until judgment was made for the first court. Since our father was prosecuted for total 13 cases, it would take 20 years or 30 years if the trial progressed normally.
Our father is blind; therefore he cannot execute a crime. Therefore, he was positioned as a key plotter who secretly gave instructions behind the scenes for all cases. There was almost no material evidence that indicated our father's instruction on these cases, and all that was available was confession of people who were believed to be his accomplices. As our father is pleading his innocence, it was expected to take many years.
In addition, our father is blind and not able to read the documents that describe investigation details on accomplices by prosecutors and police officers. Therefore, the defense attorneys would read them to him at the time of visitation. However, documents relating to our father's case were in massive volume with the size of ○ meters x ○ meters and the height of ○ meters, and it was impossible to read everything during visitation in a limited time. * Need to add.
Nevertheless, the Court boldly said,
"This is a high-profile case in the world. We hope to conclude the trial as quickly as possible. The Court is aiming to issue a ruling within five years",
even before the procedure at the first court began, without considering the situation that our father is blind. It is a rule in Japan that judges may not be exposed to information or news on the case at places other than the courtroom, for the purpose of the trial to be on fair grounds. Though judges were supposed to eliminate preconception because of their position, conclusions had already been made so that the fixed time had to be determined prior to trial. If our father was really the key plotter as reported by the mass media, there must be ample evidence and they could have found him guilty without difficulty just by taking a straightforward procedure.
As a result, my father's trial progressed in his absence as the defendant. When he collapsed mentally and made so-called "irregular speech", he was made responsible as dishonoring the courtroom and ordered to leave many times. His behavior was reported by the mass media as a "sneaky person who tries to escape death sentence by malingering", contributing to the audience rate and sales increases. Actions by the Court were approved by the mass media.
Let us consider what if our father was completely blind. If he were completely blind, it would take time for fact-finding including our father's role in the case. If it takes time, the Court is criticized by the mass media. If they are attentive to provide the care necessary for disabled people to our father who is completely blind, we won't know how the mass media would criticize the Court.
As We see how our father was handled after his arrest, We feel that he had to have vision.
It might also be because defense attorneys selected by the government did more than expected and tried to bring in a verdict of not guilty. The chief defense attorney (when two or more defense attorneys are appointed, one chief defense attorney needs to be appointed as a representative) ended up getting arrested during trial for this fabricated case.
No comments:
Post a Comment