The Osaka District Court criticized the interrogation conducted by the prosecutors of the Osaka District Public Prosecutors' Special Investigation Division on those involved in the case investigated, saying that it was "malicious to unilaterally blame and scream," and found that it constituted an atrocity by a public official. However, since the prosecutor did not allow the trial to be held, the man who was acquitted in this case appealed to the Osaka High Court, asking for criminal responsibility from the prosecutor.
Shinobu Yamagishi, 60, the former president of an Osaka real estate company who was arrested and charged with involvement in an embezzlement case by the Osaka District Public Prosecutors' Special Investigation Division and acquitted at trial, filed a criminal complaint on suspicion of assaulting a special public servant for illegal interrogation by a 50-year-old prosecutor, but the Osaka District Prosecutor decided not to prosecute, so he filed a "request for trial attached" to ask the court to hold a criminal trial in the case of the public servant.
At the end of last month, the Osaka District Court said that the prosecutor had interrogated Yamagishi's subordinates, saying, "He knocked on his desk and accused him almost one-sidedly for a long period of about 50 minutes, 15 of which he shouted. It is vicious beyond the scope of the interrogation."
However, he refused to allow the prosecutor to hold a trial on the grounds that "these words and actions are part of the investigation."
For this reason, Mr. Yamagishi appealed against the court's decision to the Osaka High Court on the 7th.
Man acquitted: "If you don't allow non-prosecution, false charges will happen again"
At a press conference after filing the appeal, Yamagishi said, "If you look at the audio recordings, it is clear that the problematic interrogation is not part of it. I hope the Osaka High Court will make a fair decision."
Kazuhiro Nakamura, a member of the defense team, said, "It is extremely unusual that the prosecutor's interrogation was severely criticized, and I hope that the Osaka High Court will recognize that it bears the trust of the judiciary and make a clear decision."
Osaka District Prosecutor: "I will refrain from commenting"
Katsuya Kitaoka, deputy prosecutor of the Osaka District Public Prosecutors' Office, said, "I am aware of the court's decision on the appeal request and that the petitioner appealed this decision, but I would like to refrain from commenting."
Why did you admit to the atrocities but not the criminal trials?
Why did the Osaka District Court recognize that some of the prosecutors' interrogations constituted atrocities, but did not allow criminal trials to be held?
【What is a request for trial by public officials? Check whether the decision not to prosecute a public servant is a poor decision】
The "Request for Appeal" is a system that asks the court to decide whether the disposition of the prosecutor's decision not to prosecute a public servant case is appropriate.
If you admit that you should prosecute, a trial will be held.
It is set up to check whether the prosecutor has made a poor judgment against the same public official, and the target cases are limited, such as interrogations and prison assaults and atrocities.
【Prosecutor's Interrogation: Request for Trial on Suspicion of Assault of Special Public Servant】
In June last year, Mr. Yamagishi filed a request for trial on suspicion of assaulting a special public servant, alleging that a 50-year-old prosecutor who was in charge of interrogating his subordinates at the time conducted illegal interrogation such as swearing.
Osaka District Court Finds
Atrocities in Osaka District Court on March 6 that "interrogation by a prosecutor" means "taking a certain amount of time to confirm the statements of the suspects, compare them with the evidence, and seek explanations such as discrepancies. It has the nature and function of revealing whether the statement is true or false," and whether or not it constitutes an atrocity "should be judged in accordance with socially accepted norms, taking into account the necessity and appropriateness of prosecutors to say and act in such a way."
"The prosecutor banged on his desk and blamed the former president's subordinates almost unilaterally for a long period of about 31 minutes, and for about 50 minutes of this, he was shouting. It is vicious beyond the scope of the interrogation and must be strongly condemned."
He also pointed out that the prosecutor's remark to his subordinates during an interrogation on another day that he was a "mortal criminal who tarnished the company's reputation" was "exaggerated and insulting."
The decision also condemned "the fact that such an interrogation was conducted in the context of the recorded recording itself is a remarkable and disturbing situation."
【Osaka District Court rejects appeal request】
However, as a criminal punishment, "I knocked on the desk once, and these words and actions are part of the interrogation. We judged that the disposition of non-prosecution was appropriate and dismissed the request for appeal.