64-year-old man arrested for molesting 1-year-old girl in Kyoto park

The man said to the girl, “You’re wet. Are you alright?” and touched her lower body before the girl’s mother could push him away.

Was considering he might want to help, because he was thinking she might drowning until reading particular part of body he finally touched.

Oh man. Japan's moronic self defense laws be damned. If someone did that (or tried to) to my daughter I would beat him to within an inch of his life.

Was considering he might want to help, because he was thinking she might drowning until reading particular part of body he finally touched.

Maybe he thought she wet her pants, thus explaining the "lower body" bit?

The fact he didn't seem to have run is a point in his favor - he didn't even realize he's about to be arrested. If he had indecent thoughts, he would conclude he's in danger of being arrested and ran away as fast as he could trying to break contact.

Lets not judge this guy yet. None of us know the full story. The girl was only 1 so it id very possible a very young Mother and the guy may have thought he is helping pointing out to the Mother she needs a daiper change. Or he could in fact be the other. But none of us know. JT should not even be reporting these stories until THEY know the facts. It only encourages bitter violence. JT please take note! Don't report things until you know what you are talking about

Yeah, I spoke too soon. I immediately jumped to 'guilty!' but other, cooler headed posters have reminded me that, as I wasn't there and have no idea what actually happened, he's innocent until proven otherwise.

JT should not even be reporting these stories until THEY know the facts. It only encourages bitter violence. JT please take note! Don't report things until you know what you are talking about

Sure. Lets not report ANY arrests/charges until all the facts have been revealed in the court report and the alleged perpetrator is found guilty.

Back in the real world. Whether this old man thought he was "helping" or not - no reasonable and sane person EVER touches a child they do not know in their private area. EVER.

Either he is seriously mentally disabled, or a child molester. Possibly both.

Poorly written article that leads to a wide range of speculation. What exactly does “lower body” mean? If we are talking about the pubic area then use that phrase or something similar. Either use clear language or don’t report it.

AlongfortherideToday  07:02 pm JST

Lets not judge this guy yet. None of us know the full story. The girl was only 1 so it id very possible a very young Mother and the guy may have thought he is helping pointing out to the Mother she needs a daiper change. Or he could in fact be the other. But none of us know. JT should not even be reporting these stories until THEY know the facts. It only encourages bitter violence. JT please take note! Don't report things until you know what you are talking about

There is absolutely no reason or justification to touch anyone's, let alone a baby's, lower body which refers to her pubic area. Do you think the mother would've called the police if he just touched her leg. You shouldn't even be touching her leg.

No one should touch a baby without the consent of the mother.

One year old in a park should have all of the attention of the mother, and I can't really think of a reason the opportunity for this to happen arises.

ushosh123Today  10:03 pm JST

One year old in a park should have all of the attention of the mother, and I can't really think of a reason the opportunity for this to happen arises.

Why are you blaming the mother? Did you read the article? She was right there but obviously never expected the man to touch a baby in that area.

'The man said to the girl, “You’re wet. Are you alright?” and touched her lower body before the girl’s mother could push him away.'

Do Japanese have sex offender registery,they make offender register for beastiality in Texas

As some have said, there is no reason for a stranger to be touching anyone's child's body. His story would have to be extremely convincing and I still would probably not be convinced. This is child molestation, plain and simple.

It would help if these stories were followed up and we knew the outcome of the court case.

No one should touch a baby without the consent of the mother.

THIS

MilesTegApr. 15  09:37 pm JST

There is absolutely no reason or justification to touch anyone's, let alone a baby's, lower body which refers to her pubic area. Do you think the mother would've called the police if he just touched her leg. You shouldn't even be touching her leg.

Since when does "lower body" refer to the pubic area? I would call my knees and calfs and ankles lower body.

Again, you are making judgement on things you don't know.

@Alongfortheride, it seems somewhat unlikely that the mother would have called the police and he would have been arrested if he had patted her on the ankles.

For a long time the crime section in the English speaking news refused to write the words buttocks, ass, or more intimate areas when reporting train groping. I think we all knew that when the report said "the school teacher was arrested for touching the girl's waist" that we was touching her somewhere else.

I had my baby in Japan. old people always came up and touched my kid even when it was sleeping in the stroller.

That act itself seems to be common here in Japan.

He might not have had any evil intentions.

It's hard to know from this article.

For all the tough guys out there saying they would give him a beat down. Go ahead. Beat on a 64 year old. It's quite possible he could have a heart attack, be seriously injured or even die. So then you get charged with a felony a do seven years in jail.

masterblaster,

Good post.

I had my baby in Japan. old people always came up and touched my kid even when it was sleeping in the stroller.

Right. The local geriatrics in our local park would come for a closer look and make comments. None of them ever tried to touch my baby though. I wouldn't have let them anyway, if purely for reasons of hygiene.

He might not have had any evil intentions.

It's hard to know from this article.

Very true.

For all the tough guys out there saying they would give him a beat down. Go ahead. Beat on a 64 year old. It's quite possible he could have a heart attack, be seriously injured or even die. So then you get charged with a felony a do seven years in jail.

Guilty as charged. To be fair though, I didn't single out a 64-year-old, I said 'someone.' And if the action had been lewd and nefarious, I'm not sure how level-headed and calm a father's response is supposed to be. I would find it hard to limit myself to 'push him away' - which in itself could be considered an assault not protected by self-defence laws, such as they are.

Finally, I don't consider myself a tough guy. I would protect my daughter, though. The real 'tough guys' are the ones who say things like "No one would ever do that to my kid because I'm 190 cms, 110 kgs and covered in tats!" Generally, that means 150cms, 60 kgs and a tattooed ankle bracelet.

AlongfortherideToday  07:46 am JST

MilesTegApr. 15  09:37 pm JST

There is absolutely no reason or justification to touch anyone's, let alone a baby's, lower body which refers to her pubic area. Do you think the mother would've called the police if he just touched her leg. You shouldn't even be touching her leg.

Since when does "lower body" refer to the pubic area? I would call my knees and calfs and ankles lower body.

Again, you are making judgement on things you don't know.

He shouldn't be touching the baby at all. So you're saying he was arrested for touching the baby's knees???

Do you seriously think what you said makes any sense. LOL!

The real 'tough guys' are the ones who say things like "No one would ever do that to my kid because I'm 190 cms, 110 kgs and covered in tats!" Generally, that means 150cms, 60 kgs and a tattooed ankle bracelet.

Exactly.

MilesTegToday  03:34 pm JST

He shouldn't be touching the baby at all. So you're saying he was arrested for touching the baby's knees???

Yet again someone makes judgment before knowing the facts. Have a read of all the comments before you make any comments. It just makes you look foolish.

AlongfortherideToday  04:27 pm JST

MilesTegToday  03:34 pm JST

He shouldn't be touching the baby at all. So you're saying he was arrested for touching the baby's knees???

Yet again someone makes judgment before knowing the facts. Have a read of all the comments before you make any comments. It just makes you look foolish.

People get arrested for touching a baby's leg, knee, or foot? He was arrested. You look foolish for saying he got arrested for touching her leg, knee, or foot. And the man said it was wet. More likely the diaper was wet not the leg, knee, or foot and where do babies wear diapers? On the knee? LOL!

This story is weird, I can't make head nor tail of it. More info would be nice really.

I actually don't know why people rush into conclusion. let's wait for more info. some old people are very caring as well, he might be one of them.

I actually don't know why people rush into conclusion.

When there are no actual details, people try to fill in the blanks.

The Japanese websites don't have any other info either.

People get arrested for touching a baby's leg, knee, or foot? He was arrested.

You obviously don't live in Japan. If someone "says" you did something you can be arrested and held for up to 20 days without being charged.