It is inevitable that police and prosecutors are criticized for turning their backs on the search for the truth.
The Otsu District Court has acquitted Mika Nishiyama, a former nurse aide at a hospital in Higashiomi, Shiga Prefecture, at a retrial. Her sentence of 12 years in prison had been finalized over the alleged killing of a patient by removing his artificial respirator, and she had finished serving the prison term.
The latest ruling recognized the possibility of natural death, in light of factors such as an expert's written opinion that provided new evidence. The ruling pointed out, "It has not even been proven that the patient was killed by someone in the first place." This point is extremely serious.
The ruling rejected the voluntariness of her confession, which had been the decisive factor in her conviction in the initial trial. Nishiyama has a mild degree of intellectual disability and had romantic feelings toward a police officer who interrogated her. The ruling concluded that "she could have confessed to a murder she did not commit."
It is necessary to exercise extreme caution when interrogating suspects who are prone to agreeing too easily. The police investigation, which apparently induced a false confession by taking advantage of Nishiyama's nature and condition, deserves strong criticism.
What is more problematic is that the police did not give a considerable amount of evidence to prosecutors until the retrial began.
The evidence included documents that recorded Nishiyama's statements in which she denied the allegation that she intentionally removed the patient's respiratory apparatus, as well as an investigative report saying the autopsy doctor had mentioned, before Nishiyama's arrest, the possibility of the patient having died a natural death.
If the prosecutors had known about such evidence early and examined it thoroughly, it is highly likely that Nishiyama would not have been arrested or indicted.
If the police concealed evidence that was disadvantageous to proving the defendant's guilt, it is a heinous act that could constitute a crime.
The prosecutors' stance in the retrial also cannot be overlooked. They initially stated their intention to claim the defendant was guilty, but later gave up on proving it without any explanation. When the additional evidence, which the prosecutors were not aware of, was at last sent by the police, they are likely to have considered it difficult to maintain her conviction.
The prosecutors essentially should have reconsidered the case based on the evidence obtained for the retrial. If they cannot prove her guilt after such reconsideration, it is reasonable for them to clarify the reasons for being unable to prove it and make their closing arguments for her acquittal.
The prosecutors who did not do so are extremely dishonest and do not deserve the name "representatives of the public interest."
After handing down the ruling, the presiding judge of the district court said at the trial, "All parties involved in criminal justice should recognize this problem as their own and lead it to improvement."
Not only the police and prosecutors who caused the false accusation, but also the courts that made repeated misjudgments, should reflect seriously on this case.
-- The original Japanese article appeared in The Yomiuri Shimbun on April 1, 2020.
Read more from The Japan News at https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/
