Shoshi Maekawa: Japan: Iwao Hakamada: (Part Two): (Incentivised witness testimony and much more); The Mainichi calls upon Japan to quickly reform its trial system 'to expedite proceedings,' noting that in the Maekawa case: In the retrial decision, the court dismissed the credibility of testimony by an acquaintance of Maekawa that was used as the basis for his conviction. It concluded that the acquaintance, anticipating that his own sentencing in a separate drug case would be commuted, highly likely falsely stated that Maekawa was the perpetrator. The court also raised suspicions that the police, amid a lack of strong evidence, induced testimony by other parties to align with the acquaintance's lie after their investigation hit a snag. It is unbecoming of an investigative organization tasked with uncovering the truth to have pushed ahead with its own storyline. Public prosecutors also bear extremely grave responsibility. The retrial ruling referred to the possibility that prosecutors intentionally concealed evidence that could have formed the basis for Maekawa's acquittal, and criticized them as "dishonest and deeply culpable."

PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY: "False charges are a grave human rights violation by the state. Investigative authorities should take their responsibility to heart with serious inner reflection. His acquittal came 21 years after he filed his initial retrial request. This lengthy period stems from flaws in Japan's retrial system, which lacks rules on how to proceed with hearings as well as on evidence disclosure. It was only after Maekawa filed his second retrial request that prosecutors finally released 287 items including evidence that became the decisive factor in acquitting him in the retrial. Had they submitted the evidence promptly, the conclusion could have come much sooner."

———————————————————————————

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Another issue in Japan is that proceedings are prolonged due to prosecutors filing complaints against court decisions to reopen trials. Although the court once granted a retrial in Maekawa's case in 2011, the decision was overturned after prosecutors lodged a complaint. Discussions to review these and other problems have commenced, sparked by the acquittal in 2024 of Iwao Hakamada, 89, in a retrial that released him from death row after 44 years."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDITORIAL:  "Japan must  quickly reform retrial system to expedite proceedings," published by  Mainichi Japan, onJuly 19, 2025.

GIST: "Shoshi Maekawa, 60, has been acquitted in a retrial over the 1986 murder of a junior high school girl in the city of Fukui. He had consistently pleaded his innocence, including after serving out a seven-year prison sentence.

False charges are a grave human rights violation by the state. Investigative authorities should take their responsibility to heart with serious inner reflection.

His acquittal came 21 years after he filed his initial retrial request. This lengthy period stems from flaws in Japan's retrial system, which lacks rules on how to proceed with hearings as well as on evidence disclosure. It was only after Maekawa filed his second retrial request that prosecutors finally released 287 items including evidence that became the decisive factor in acquitting him in the retrial. Had they submitted the evidence promptly, the conclusion could have come much sooner.

Another issue in Japan is that proceedings are prolonged due to prosecutors filing complaints against court decisions to reopen trials. Although the court once granted a retrial in Maekawa's case in 2011, the decision was overturned after prosecutors lodged a complaint.

Discussions to review these and other problems have commenced, sparked by the acquittal in 2024 of Iwao Hakamada, 89, in a retrial that released him from death row after 44 years.

Full-scale debate is underway in a subcommittee of the Legislative Council of the Ministry of Justice, an advisory body to the justice minister. However, a government-sponsored bill will not be submitted to the Diet until next year at the earliest.

Six opposition parties have already submitted legislative proposals to the Diet. They include provisions requiring courts to order prosecutors to disclose evidence upon request in principle, and to ban prosecutors from filing complaints against court decisions to reopen cases. It is necessary to pass the bill at an early date.

If an environment that generates false charges is left unattended and relief to victims of such accusations is delayed, public trust in criminal justice will be undermined. Reforms must be implemented swiftly to prevent such mistakes from ever happening again."

The entire story can be read at: 

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20250719/p2a/00m/0op/005000c

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

---------------------------------------------------------------