The Feb. 12 issue of the Shukan Shincho, which hit newsstands Thursday, carries an article on a student who allegedly killed an elderly woman. The Japan Times blotted out the minor's name and blurred her face in this photo. | YOSHIAKI MIURA

/

Magazine IDs student suspect in Nagoya slaying, breaking legal taboo

by

Staff Writer

A news magazine has defied a ban on identifying minors in criminal cases by naming a 19-year-old student who allegedly bludgeoned an elderly woman to death.

Tokyo-based weekly Shukan Shincho on Thursday ran an in-depth article about the Nagoya University student, urging a national debate on the reporting of juvenile crime.

Headlined “Evil nurtured within the heart of the Nagoya University female student; the resume of a 19-year-old killer of an elderly woman,” the four-page article named the suspect, printed two photographs of her and quoted people who had known her in childhood.

Article 61 of the juvenile law bans the reporting of information or images that enable the identification of alleged or convicted criminals who are still in their teens or younger, including name, occupation and appearance.

In a statement on Thursday, Shukan Shincho said it had decided to provide the details “in consideration of various factors, including the severity of this incident and its impact, as well as the age of the assailant.” The restriction ceases to apply once juveniles reach 20, the age of adulthood.

The magazine cited a judgment by the Osaka High Court in February 2000 that ruled that running a minor’s name is “not illegal” in serious cases that draw substantial public attention.

However, some analysts say the magazine clearly broke the law. Naming the alleged culprit and printing her image is an “obvious violation of Article 61,” said lawyer Takehisa Hamada, who specializes in juvenile law.

He said the magazine was trying to justify its actions on the implied assertion that a girl of 19 will not change her ways, whereas a younger child may. This, Hamada said, is “unacceptable.”

The magazine chose to run two images of the girl, one in a high school uniform and one showing her in a jacket typically worn by male cheerleaders at sports events. Both clearly showed her face from the front.

It reported that in childhood she had shown “outrageous” psychotic tendencies, quoting the father of a childhood friend as saying the girl used to carry around a pair of scissors while in junior high school to “stab someone if attacked.” It also quoted a resident as saying the bodies of dead cats were regularly found around her house.

The student was arrested on Jan. 27 on suspicion of killing 77-year-old Tomoko Mori, a member of a religious group who had tried to recruit her.

Photos

search iconClick to enlarge

The Feb. 12 issue of the Shukan Shincho, which hit newsstands Thursday, carries an article on a student who allegedly killed an elderly woman. The Japan Times blotted out the minor's name and blurred her face in this photo. | YOSHIAKI MIURA

, , , , ,

  • shanchan

    How tasteless. This can only be described as profiteering. I hope the get fined out the wazoo. It’s enough of a tragedy, and here they are reducing it down to a cheap tabloid story with total disregard for the law.

    • Shiki Byakko

      Except this was all about the law. They are criticizing the law by breaking it. It’s called civil disobedience.

      To an extent I’m sick of the Japanese news that harass suspects, and painting them as culprits even before the trial. But I seriously think this law is kind of misguided.

      The point of the law is not ruining the future of a child who committed a crime. Almost all countries already have lesser sentences for children, and the law do not apply the same… except in cases of things like 1st degree murder. The reason being that the protection given to a child do not apply for something like a premeditated murder, simply because the crime is way too serious and that cannot be justified by the culprit being just a child.

      The problem is that the law basically protects the identity of children committed of even mass murder, even after they have been found guilty.

      And because of the law, you know they are going to get out of prison, and nobody is going to know who the hell they are, even as an adult.

      The system protect people just based on age, even when the crime is not in any way related to the age of the criminal. The current system is inconsistent.

      • KenjiAd

        The point of the law is not ruining the future of a child who committed a crime.

        Right. And that’s precisely because the law is meaningless for a serious crime reported by all the media everyday like this case.

        I’m absolutely sure that people who know this girl, in school or her town, almost certainly already know she is the one the media are talking about. Word of mouth.

        It really doesn’t matter whether the media call her “A”; these people know who Ms “A” is, where she grew up, and how she was doing in school.

        Did we hear the stories about her in which former teachers and friends are describing how Ms “A” was doing in the school? She was already identified to these people, the very kind of people the law is intended to keep her secret from.

        For the rest of us who has no relation to her and thus doesn’t matter to her, her real names identifies nothing. After a couple of years, most of us will forget about her name and appearance. If there’s a slight concern that some of us might remember her, she can change her name and appearance.

      • Shiki Byakko

        And also the media somehow always know. Just by not saying the name aloud and blurring the scenery is really not doing anything. They are already asking questions to people close to the child, so they are in fact the ones spreading it even more.
        On the flip side, since we don’t have an idea who the suspect is, in other kind of cases were the child may even be innocent, and the media is already portraying it as guilty, there is really NO WAY to defend that child.

  • GBR48

    They aren’t ‘breaking a legal taboo’, they are breaking the law. Article 61 says you can’t do this, with good reason, and they went ahead and did it. If they aren’t arrested, charged and prosecuted, then you might as well throw the Japanese statute book out of the window and send everyone home early.

    In all civilised countries, anyone deemed a juvenile in law receives additional protection from the press, particularly before conviction. This is because the press cannot be trusted to act in a responsible manner (as these guys have just proved).

    This is now a trial by media and their actions have prejudiced the case. It is a serious offence, not a contribution to a debate on press freedom.

    • Nixon Blake

      I haven’t read Article 61 but I’m sure in extreme cases it might be allowed. In Canada and the US you could be 15 years old but if they prove you knew what you’re doing you will be prosecuted as an adult and your name will be released. It happened just about a month ago to a 15 and 16 year old that killed a 21 year old woman. That being said, I think it’s important that the names be released only after a judge decides to prosecute them as adults and after they’re found guilty.

    • Shiki Byakko

      If we go just by the legal terms, it really is open to the court’s interpretation, and if parts of the law or the whole law is found to be unconstitutional, it really doesn’t matter what the law itself says.