If he stabbed someone and got this treatment, it would be very different than if he had a loud but normal argument you might see in any big box store in the US.
That he doesn't go on to protest why he got locked up makes me think it was something more serious.
Some time ago (can't easily find it anymore) there was a expose on UK prisons, which was interesting without even knowing what crime the prisoner was convicted of, but turns out it was abuse of a relative.
And also remember this treatment is at the point where they haven't been charged with anything, haven't been tried in court, and haven't been convicted.
The US's justice system is certainly lacking in many, many ways, but wow, this is barbaric. And it's designed for one thing: high conviction rates, regardless of guilt or innocence.
I am lucky enough to have a lot of middle aged middle class white male privilege.
I wonder how many minority people in the US have much worse opinions and life experience of the justice system than you're implying?
I wonder how many people consider typical ICE arrests and detention to be at least as "barbaric" and "psychological torture" as what's described in the article?
I wonder how many young African American males (and their families) look at the private for-profit prison system and conclude the US justice system and policing are designed for "high conviction rates, regardless of guilt or innocence.
92% of the prison system is government-run, no need to exaggerate.
>conclude the US justice system and policing are designed for "high conviction rates, regardless of guilt or innocence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate
You can see that's not a particularly useful metric to evaluate a legal system (and in the US, states, tribal, federal differ).
Americans ostensibly have the bill of rights in their favor, while Japan doesn't. Sure, you can't be indigent if you expect a vigorous defense from the state, but your odds are good if your case isn't hopeless, and many are - the incidence of plea deals typically reflects this.
Add that to highest incarceration rate in the world - around 600 people per 100k residents (japan for example is 40 per 100k).
You get what people call for-profit prison system. It's not some secret or controversial claim.
Still not as bad as what we've seen ICE do, for (allegedly) overstaying your visa, no less: no due process, children being separated from their parents and whereabouts unknown, horrible warehouse-like conditions, denial of medical care, people dying in custody, etc. Have any Japanese citizens been shot dead by police? [0]
And that's before we even get to talking about the injustices of the "war on drugs"; are Japanese police shooting and killing young black males in the back?
Yeah, the article is horrific, but I think Japan still has a ways to go to fall as low as the US these days unless you're white with money.
I will say though that _in principle_ the US' justice system is much better because it's based on presumption of innocence, due process, rights, etc. Japan uses a so-called "inquisitorial" system, based on the French legal system, where the judge is also the investigator, with detention while the investigation moves forward.
It's just that the reality in the US is different, depending on your visa status, color of your skin, and income level.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_annual_...
Guantanamo, "secret" CIA "prisons" around the world.
Yes it does. You need to go out of your way to attract the attention of the authorities in Japan. I can already guess what she did--received illegal drugs in the mail or brought them into the country. And based on all the references to mental health, etc. in the article, I'm sure it's claimed to be for some condition that Japanese people consider to be bullshit. The reason Japan is clean and orderly is because they apply a very sharp edge to anything rule breaking. You don't get to tell them how to run their society. It's not your place. And if you come to Japan, you play by their rules. If you don't like it, stay home.
Not that the US criminal system isn’t its own complete mess, but thank God for the concept of bail (going about your life outside of jail until trial or dismissal, within certain parameters) and right to see a judge within 24 hours, to avoid any kafkaesque nightmares like this.
In the US if you're a flight risk you wouldn't get bail either.
Most people don't really understand it, and even the ones who do often have personal exceptions driven by emotion. The idea that you need to defend the guilty to protect the innocent is alien to a lot of people. Japan takes the lack of that assumption a step further though, since it's a society based on strict compliance to cultural norms... for better and for worse.
Having said all of that, most of these systems do a credible job of distinguishing the innocent from the guilty, although there's always more to do on that front. If you've ever worked anywhere near the court system you start to notice that people who make it through the system all of the way to a trial are frequently guilty and even more frequently recidivist.
Most people aren't criminals and never commit a serious offense, but speaking for myself I don't think the "sorting" the system does has to be anywhere close to as brutal and impersonal as it often is in many countries including Japan.
While Japan’s/many other countries approach is: “We intend our court system to be a perfect representation of our culture, history, and policy objectives. Therefore it should apply in every case, regardless of individual circumstance, so there is no escape hatch, because why deviate from a perfect process.”
The former is how you get the wildly inconsistent US approach to the criminal system, while the latter is how you get a kafkaesque nightmare (or worse, a system weaponized to intentionally target innocent undesirables, like El Salvador’s CECOT)
Both are simplified, none are perfect, of course. But I know which system I’d rather be accused under.
This can definitely be problematic, particularly when considering the conditions during custody. No lawyer.. or much of anything, except massive psychological pressure.
In the same article it was described how interpreters would believe that their job was to extract a confession. Recently an organization is trying to educate interpreters in ethics and what an interpreter's job actually is - to translate, and only translate.
But essentially, somebody else sent her a package with something illegal in it that she didn't ask for. The police took her passport for a few months and searched her house. After a few months, she got her passport returned to her, she left Japan temporarily, but when she came back, they arrested her "to ensure [she] wouldn't flee while they finished the investigation".
She also mentioned it was "the most normal type of thing you can think of"; it might have been something like pseudoephedrine/Sudafed. That's a common over-the-counter drug in other countries but it's very illegal here in Japan (unless it's under 10%, or you buy it from Japan)!
Edit: Importing pseudoephedrine above 10% concentrations is illegal, but you can legally buy some higher concentrations over-the-counter while in Japan.
> She also mentioned it was "the most normal type of thing you can think of";
This doesn't really answer the question, though. It's frustrating to try to interpret these stories with a lot of writing and video describing everything except the crucial detail about what the charges were for.
I don't think she's trying to withhold information to avoid contaminating the case because she's spilling other details all over the place that could be used to influence the case. Yet the key piece of information that is supposedly "the most normal" isn't revealed
Is it really a crucial detail though? As someone having lived in Japan for a long time, I see no reason why we can not discuss the fact that civil rights and detention treatment in Japan are lacking without resorting to "Do they deserve it in light of what they were suspected for?". I personally see no reason why suspects can not deserve decent sleep, meal, bedding, etc. even if they may be Shoko Asahara himself.
For the record, I have not watched any video or read anything else about this individual. Nor do I intend to.
The main difference I see are that police can hold you for a much longer period before bringing you in front of a judge and the bail conditions. Regarding the specific detention conditions, they do not strike me as worse than American jails.
Literally the central trigger point of the story.
> For the record, I have not watched any video or read anything else about this individual. Nor do I intend to.
Then I can see why you're not interested in the details
The fact that you and other insist on this really gets at the crux of this whole problem. There are two notable positions on criminality and punishment: yours, which is broadly that the justice system exists, at least in part, to deliver righteous punishment on the deserving, and the position of those appalled by the treatment here, which is that the purpose of the justice system is primarily to protect people, and then to deliver predictable, proportionate punishment of those found guilty to disincentivize criminal behavior. If you think that torture of someone detained but not found guilty might be justifiable if they're accused of a sufficiently heinous crime then you have an illiberal position that can and will be used to enable abuse of the criminal justice system to inflict extralegal punishment on anyone for any reason.
I said this is an important detail to the story because it’s literally the central trigger point. For as many details as she’s willing to share, include admissions that could theoretically impact legal proceedings, excluding the core charge from the story raises suspicions about the trustworthiness of the narrator.
To be clear I do not support the treatment as reported. However the omission of this one key detail is a calculated omission by the author, where we’re supposed to both believe it’s entirely normal and benign but at the same time it’s also something that must be withheld from this story?
What she did beforehand would only be relevant if it could somehow suspend those rights.
The argument for that being the case is that she doesn't say, therefore we can assume she did... something... that is sufficient to suspend her rights; without being able to name even an example.
So rationalizations of why it’s appropriate because the person was suspected of XYZ isn’t going to land with them and is largely irrelevant.
But I don’t mind playing devils advocate.
Should the justice system force confessions out of murderers? No, because they are only potential murderers and we have historically been able to get innocent parties to confess. People with vulnerability such as mental health problems are even more likely to give false confessions. The goal of requesting testimony should be honesty not compliance.
This logic applies as well the drug dealer, drug users, and jay walkers. It’s a moral principle disconnected from any specific geography so even if we are not Japanese and have no intention to interact with Japan, we can say they have not lived up to that principle.
the administive pretrial detention is also pretty common, especially nowadays with the ICE craze.
nobody should be treated like this, agreed, but that doesn't mean that the process has no correlation to the level of guilt established and the certainty of it.
(the real problem is that it's way too many bullshit laws.)
Japan has a very harsh system, this serves as both a deterrent and also incentivizes people to make their equivalent of plea deals.
There's nothing magical about a criminal trial, especially in Japan, since there's not even a jury. And in general there's no magical threshold for proving guilt.
Nobody should be treated like this. We agree.
I'm trying to point out that unfortunately is a trade off, it works, and unfortunately a lot of people are getting treated like this all over the world for things that are administratively easy to prove and are illegal by the letter of the law, so technically easy to "prove guilt".
I watched a little bit. She went overseas and the police asked for some information and she didn't respond. When she returned they deemed her a flight risk because she hadn't responded to the things they were asking.
All this story does it makes me want to avoid traveling to Japan. I don't fancy getting picked up for jay walking and tortured.
What an awful system..
Sure if you naively believe the hyperbole then don't go. Been 3 times, you'll know when you're in trouble, and you will have a chance to correct it before it goes further.
Infact according to her video she did have a chance, and she didn't bother.
If I had the police over, was an ass, had them come back, was an ass again. Then at some point they’re going to just think I’m the person that’d run away while they conduct their investigation.
I’m sure bad policemen exist in Japan, but all the ones I’ve met have been very friendly and reasonable.
Makes me think of TNG (Season 1, Episode 8). Death for walking on the grass.
What is Justice anyway?
Compared to what? European and other western countries with significantly higher crime rates?
Safety comes at a cost.
Torturing someone for a month for maybe stealing an apple, keep in mind you haven't even been charged with a crime yet, is a morally bankrupt system.
23 days of her life gone over dropped charges.
Due to their history, laws regarding stimulants are harsher in Japan than in many other places in the world [1] and this frequently takes people by surprise. Not that Japanese laws related to illegal drugs are lenient to begin with.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_drug_trade_in_Japan
I can believe that (and your sudafed guess is likely correct), but then why be obscure about it, when you could say 'turns out xyz is illegal in Japan, do not let your well meaning friends/family mail you medicine of any kind'? However, I don't watch the whole video. I know this hyper-edited style is popular nowadays but to me it feels like advertising/bait and I don't want to invest the energy to parse it.
E.g. Contac 600 Plus can be found in basically all drug stores and it has 120mg of Pseudoephedrine, 100mg Caffeine, 8mg Chlorpheniramine, and 0.4mg of Belladonna Extract. It sounds like it'll actually be illegal to import into Japan, since 120/(120 + 100 + 8 + 0.4) is over 10%, but I've previously just walked into a drug store and bought a packet.
But, it's not unheard of to get randomly stopped by the police and searched, especially in touristy areas like train stations. Unless you're a Japanese citizen, you have to show ID, and although the searches are optional, most people agree to them.
For customs, usually a few people from each plane are searched.
Anecdotally, if you're a tourist, they're usually looking for medicine that was legal outside of Japan, but illegal within Japan, with small amounts leading to being detained for 23 days (like in this blog post). And if they decide to prosecute you, you'd probably get a suspended sentence (so no prison time), but you'd get deported and a temporary ban from coming back to Japan.
This seems ultimately like a very bad sales pitch for the tourism industry in Japan. I had thought I wanted to go to Japan but if I can accidentally, without malice, be thrown in a prison for 20 days that seems like a bad system.
I can't imagine the international relations of the ruling classes of various countries to the UAE would be trending in a positive direction if they arrested and punished people for walking off a plane with airplane bottles of alcohol.
For what it is worth different countries have vastly different recommendations for HBP and these drugs. I recommend discussing with the pharmacists in your country.
In the US I have been told it's a strict "never", in Ireland I was told that it wouldn't have a measurable effect on blood pressure. I've also measured my personal blood pressure (pre-hypertension to stage 1) and have not been able to measure a difference in blood pressure.
>Both cases were ultimately dropped and the second arrest was essentially tied to the first and shouldn’t have even been possible. But because of how the system works weather it’s a viable reason or not, they can still trap you in there for a time while the case is being reviewed. I met others who where there for shorter and much longer periods of time. The worst part was knowing i was innocent. After it’s all said and done you walk out and they act as if nothing happened. Not only was this was all extremely traumatizing but it cost me a HUGE of money that I really did not have and caused irreversible damage to my life.
The literal majority of people in US jails are there not because they have been convicted of anything but because they were given a bail amount they couldn’t afford to pay, which is a deliberate strategy by the courts when there is no justification to refuse bail. This can look like a $500 cash bail set on a homeless guy charged with resisting arrest (aka being arrested). Many of them are innocent and are trapped and have their lives ruined in exactly the way this guy describes. (We assume that many of them are innocent because when someone pays their bail, more than 50% of cases are simply dismissed as soon as they leave jail. The expectation is that they will just plead guilty because otherwise they are stuck in jail for months waiting for a trial).
This sounds like a very dubious assumption.
Even for smaller examples it happens all the time. Half the time you can completely get out of traffic tickets by showing up to court to plead not guilty. They dismiss the case because it's not worth the time.
I don't know what this means in the context of the US justice system. They're not paid on commission. They're being paid to be there no matter what happens.
They dismiss the case because the cop didn't bother to show up, or they didn't have any evidence against your defense. The reason you (as the person who got ticketed) don't show up to court is because you know you have nothing to say, or because it's not worth it to you when getting out of the ticket isn't enough pay for 3-4 hours of your time. The only reason you do show up is because you think you have a defense.
If you can't make bail, you're showing up no matter how stupid the charge is.
edit: I have personal experience (from a few decades ago) of being forced to face stupid charges. It was a game. They inflated the potential sentence to 3-5 years through silly charges designed for just that, and offered me a plea bargain of no time, no fine, and expungement from my record in 6 months. I pled guilty. If I hadn't been bailed out, I would have had to wait two weeks in jail for that moronic, depressing event. I pled guilty because it was easy to do, even if I hadn't done anything. If I had sat in jail for two weeks, I might have pled guilty even if it involved a week of jail time and a fine, just to get out.
Kalief Browder spent almost 3 years in Riker's Island awaiting trial just to have the charges dropped. People on here told me that showed that the justice system worked. I said that his life was destroyed by this, and he would probably end up dead soon. I got downvoted furiously. He'd killed himself 2 years later.
I always assumed this kind of behaviour was cherry picked on social media. How “normal” is it actually?!
In particularly bad neighborhoods in the US -- it happens sometimes.
Depending on what kind of life you live in the US, it could be completely foreign to you, or it could be normal.
Except at Waffle House.
Bacically, it is not rare at all. Especially among certain American demographic.
Another lens is to look at is state violence rates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/09/frontier-air...
Anyone who says this stuff isn't normal in America doesn't get out much apparently. Living in the US is nuts.
>Meanwhile, on 3 May, a United Airlines plane arriving in Newark, New Jersey, from Venice, Italy, clipped a delivery truck and a light pole, which in turn struck a Jeep. Only the delivery truck driver was injured, but the plane was damaged extensively and the NTSB classified the case as an accident while also opening an investigation.
From the article. "Rare" occurrences... three times a week. In the meantime, Japan runs an airport for 30 years and never even loses one piece of luggage. The US is not on the same level as Japan. Any insistence otherwise is just cope.
https://www.npr.org/2024/05/24/nx-s1-4951240/this-japanese-a...
I dont think so. I think innocent until proven guilty is the right way to go. Because all the police know is that he is accused of stabbing someone. Whether he actually did it or not, a court of law will decide that while he is present to be tried. Until then You cant punish someone like this over an accusation. You can deny bail if the person might be dangerous, but you cant punish them
This is bullshit and the japanese should be ashamed of having such a system while being considered a part of the civilized world. If this was china people would be rightfully losing their mind
There are many examples of police letting suspects go due to lack of evidence and then later discovering they let the wrong person go. These stories generate a lot of outrage in cases where there's public interest or a news story, but this is the reality of crime: You don't always have enough evidence to justify detaining someone, but the police's job is to quickly try to find enough evidence to find the right perpetrator
I know what bail is and that is should denied in certain cases. Even if bail should be denied for an accused stabbing, there are alot of other things innocent until proven guilty implies that japan doesnt meet the mark on, like feeding people proprrly and not mentally torturing them
Most of the post explains how she wasn’t allowed to do the things you’re suggesting she do, and at the end it explains how her charges were dropped.
> You can not bring or keep anything including a bra or even your own underwear.
presuming the author is male.
Perhaps this is a regional thing, but in my experience, they absolutely do.
Japan is probably worse than Northern Europe, but it's still pretty high on "if I had to be arrested, I'd rather it was here" list.
But is it OK to risk punishing a few innocent people if it greatly reduces the amount of suffering caused by crime?
Nah, it's a principle that was brought in from English common law. E.g Blackstone's Ratio[0] was published at roughly the same time as the American revolution was playing out, and cited plenty of earlier formulations of the same principle. Habeas Corpus was codified in the Magna Carta, but predated it as a concept.
You're right than I'm oversimplifying it, and being very US centric.
That's a rather rose-tinted view of criminal justice here... I do hear that sentiment a lot here, but it's just words, and as you sort of hint at, the reality doesn't match the words.
> But is it OK to risk punishing a few innocent people if it greatly reduces the amount of suffering caused by crime?
That's a big philosophical question. I argue that no, that's not ok, and I'd rather guilty people go free (and possibly hurt others) than put an innocent person behind bars.
My wife was traveling in Central America last year, and befriended another traveler from a nearby country. This woman told my wife that her country used to be fairly dangerous (both for locals and tourists) due to the proliferation of criminal gangs, but that the current president had mobilized the police/military and aggressively cleaned things up. She mentioned that a large number of innocent people got caught in the crossfire and and were now rotting in jail, but if that was the price of safety for everyone else, she was ok with it.
I had a very visceral negative reaction to this story, and found it disappointing that someone would hold that opinion. But I suppose it's a lot easier to take that stance when it's not you or someone you care about being falsely accused and sent to prison.
So I think that's another way to look at your question: would you be ok going to prison as an innocent person, as a known, understood, and societally-accepted side-effect of a safer society? If the answer is no, then you can't expect anyone else to do it. And even if the answer is yes, that's still a personal decision/opinion, and still can't expect anyone else to do it.
(For the record: hell no, I would not be ok with that.)
I have to imagine that from her point of view, it's a lot easier to take the stance that you'd rather see guilty people go free than put an innocent person behind bars when it's not your neighborhood with the dangerous criminal gangs....
In the US, just as in Japan, as soon as you are arrested they begin punishing you. If there were a real assumption of innocence, jail would be pleasant and comfortable, and if you were WFH you wouldn't miss a day. There is a material presumption of guilt, even if there's some sort of ethereal theoretical presumption of innocence.
Instead, you're in a horrible cell, eating horrible food, dressed in a humiliating way, treated in a humiliating way, and exposed to dangerous people. Unless you can pay a bond which you will never get back (because you are too poor to pay bail.) You haven't been convicted of anything. The fine you're facing might be lower than your bond, and the time you're facing might be shorter than the time you'd have to wait in jail to go to court.
At some point, you have to hold the person and figure out if they're a danger or not. Not everything is an unpaid ticket, and jail is probably unpleasant because everyone involved is unpleasant. Has it ever been otherwise?
>pay a bond which you will never get back (because you are too poor to pay bail.)
Why would you not get your bond back if you went to court as required? It would be forfeit if someone stops showing up to hearings, which is a requirement of their bond. It's to get them to return to court instead of just fleeing.
I’m not familiar with this term. Is that an old thing?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_justice_system_of_Jap...
It also makes the act of accusing incredibly powerful, and you have to wonder what threshold there is and whose accusations matter, because this severe punishment for dropped charges feels extremely powerful.
In Japan you can be arrested while an investigation is in process, only afterwards you will be indicted. Additionally, Japan does not permit defendants to post bail prior to an indictment.
Yes Japan has a really high conviction rate, but that is because they indict only cases were a conviction is likely.
Arrests don't need to lead to the person being indicted.
If they confess, it counts as a win. If they don’t, you release them but it’s not a loss (as they were not charged).
By comparison, you might consider https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/06/14/fewer-tha... :
> In fiscal year 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted
So does the US.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/06/11/only-2-of...
"I spent a total of 35 days here. The first arrest was 3 days of processing, the initial 10 days followed by the 10 days extension for a total of 23 days before my case was dropped. But the same time my case was dropped my accusers found a another reason to issue a second arrest keeping me there for an additional 12 days!
Both cases were ultimately dropped and the second arrest was essentially tied to the first and shouldn’t have even been possible."
Mailer also successfully advocated for Abbott's parole. Six weeks later, Abbott stabbed to death the manager of a restaurant he was eating at after an argument.
The charges could be very serious but I’m not sure what that has to do with anything, because being charged (or even just arrested) is not the same as being convicted. The author of this post claims both of their charges were dropped.
So, what, let’s torture anyone that _might_ have done something “serious?” No judge, no jury, just if a cop thinks you might have done something, straight into a psychological torture cell for weeks and months while they think about your case? wtf
Also, your description of their experience as “not pleasant” just kind of blows my mind. Like it was a long line at the DMV or something.
A lot of us live with this background feeling that "if you get arrested here, you're done" even if you didn't do anything. Part of it is the system. But part of it is also a cultural thing where being suspected at all is somehow seen as your fault. The people around you start treating you differently before any verdict.
Whatever the underlying charge actually was, none of this should follow from an arrest before any conviction. You were innocent and they still put you through 35 days. As a Japanese person reading this, I'm just sorry. That shouldn't have happened.
I’m guessing either she didn’t understand the warnings, or she didn’t follow their guidance.
Simple example, they may have asked her to follow a procedure before leaving the country, and she didn’t because she “thought it was over”.
The law enforcement machine in Japan doesn’t like to arrest people. 99% of the time or so, it only arrests when they have an open-and-shut case and/or the person had been warned multiple times.
Maybe this has changed in the age of social media influencers, maybe this is different for black people, but Japanese cops have always taken the discrete approach with me and the folks I’ve known (both Japanese and non-Japanese).
However, fortunately (or perhaps unfortunately), you can't bribe officials. Japan is a society where it's difficult to get special treatment by giving money, not just to officials. If you try to use bribes, you'll only be looked down upon and put in a worse position.
It happened in a Round1 (near Umeda in Osaka), we knew exactly when since we sat down to play Mario Kart and after one race it was gone. First the police tried to convince us that we just forgot it somewhere. Eventually we convinced them to check cameras, and they said it was a blind spot. They refused to check entrance and exit cameras.
She had her airpods in there, and we could track the location, they refused to look at any cameras in the area (we tried searching the area ourselves but couldn't locate them, we figure the thief chucked it somewhere hard to find). We had the serial numbers of USD that was in the bag, they wouldn't even write it down.
Currently still waiting for an official report so that we can try and deal with their immigration to move her visa to another passport.
Having spoken to her embassy, it's the second time they've heard the story (same exact Round1, same Mario kart section). And if it's happened twice to citizens from her country, it probably happens more.
The whole thing made me completely disillusioned with Japan. Yes, statistically it's extremely safe, but if something does happen, don't expect any help. Reading this story just makes me think I should avoid any interactions with police if at all possible, and I've stopped carrying my passport with me. I rather get fined than having it stolen.
[0] https://www.amnesty.org/fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/asa220...
I can't logically think of any other lawfully worse punishment than what was described in the article. I don't know what they'd do for breaking rules in these situations, to be honest.
* Paolo fromTOKYO - "Why Japan Arrests Foreigners" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1ZLGqL1FMo (14m23s) [2019-08-16]
The Stasi had beds, some sense of privacy through proper doors, and an hour a day one might spend outside in a small courtyard to get some sunlight.
However the level of psychological torture (sleep deprivation, hours of standing/sitting in a prescribed posture, hourly checks, ...) appears to be milder in Japan. The Stasi could take that pretty far once they weren't allowed to use physical torture anymore.
Not only relevant to Japanese prosecutors, but the system there makes it very easy for people to just confess (legitimate or false) and pay a fine.