• Tokyo


Reading the Oct. 30 article “Classic case of selective evidence, double jeopardy,” I am petrified by the flagrant and insolent manners of Japanese prosecutors.

It is evident that their prosecution was conducted by preconception, which has brought about the investigation with the selective evidence that is beneficial for them. Besides they also submitted what they called “new evidence” grudgingly and bit by bit, which has prolonged Govinda Prasad Mainali’s false imprisonment. Finally, they neither apologized to Mainali for their sloppy work, nor have stomach to review openly why they made such a mistake. It seems that they are still trying to save face, until the criticism against them would wear off.

Unable to view this article?

This could be due to a conflict with your ad-blocking or security software.

Please add japantimes.co.jp and piano.io to your list of allowed sites.

If this does not resolve the issue or you are unable to add the domains to your allowlist, please see out this support page.

We humbly apologize for the inconvenience.

In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever.
By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.