Doctor suspected of sexually molesting 4 women during health checks

Our company's annual health check consists of a chest x-ray, drug test, and a quick listen to our hearts. Breast massage has never been part of the examinations

HIs excuse: " I was stressed from work and in the videos I saw, the women always got aroused by a breast massage..." :-)

I wonder if there are other women, from outside this company, that have the same type of complaints against this doctor. I also wonder whether or not any of these, rather young women, have had breast exams performed before as well?

The doctor very well may be a creep, and may deserve to have his license revoked and prosecuted.

However I highly doubt there will ever been any follow up to this news, and one won't find it in the national press either, so, just another one of "those" stories here!

sensei258

Your annual health check consists of a drug test and a listen to your heart?

I think you need to do a more thorough checkup for your own good. And a drug test? Thats more like company regulations than annual health.

It might have happened, but going after doctors could be very detrimental to woman's health if exams aren't carried out as thoroughly as they otherwise would be where doctors are afraid of being accused and arrested. Unfortunately I think we probably just need to give doctors the widest possible benefit of the doubt in these cases unless there's overwhelming evidence of guilt. Maybe this doctor has his own preferred method of conducting the exams that are a bit more hands on than other doctors? It's going to be hard for the police or a non-doctor to form any opinion on this.

Try to find a female doctor next time.

Try to find a female doctor next time.

exactly. OR there should always be a nurse in the room. It surprises me that there isn't .

The doctor will check both of the breasts and lymph nodes in the armpit, feeling for any lumps or other abnormalities. The doctor is looking for signs of breast cancer. Breast cancer is a leading cause death of women.

As my wife always said, woman go to Female Doctors and men go to Male Doctors!

As my wife always said, woman go to Female Doctors and men go to Male Doctors!

Why? My personal physician in Japan for more than a decade is a woman. She's just as competent to deal with "male problems" as a male doctor. The doctors who delivered our two sons were male. My wife was happy with that.

I did have one creepy encounter with a Japanese doctor. He was male. I am male.

However I highly doubt there will ever been any follow up to this news, and one won't find it in the national press either, so, just another one of "those" stories here!

Revocation of medical licenses for malpractice including わいせつ行為 (gross sexual indecency) does get reported in the news. Legal associations and the JMA (Japan Medical Association) also report disciplinary actions against medical practitioners.

Don't take my word for this. Search for yourself starting with 免許取り消し 医師 (license cancellation physicians).

If the guy is a perv then that is that, but doesn't someone need to check if he was checking for breast cancer or something?....

Sounds similar to the guy that was questioned by police over using a AED device on a woman by cutting away her bra (which is what you are suppose to do ).

Try to find a female doctor next time.

Do you have any idea how difficult that is in this country? More so in inaka places? How about instead of putting the onus on women to find a female doctor, everyone expects male doctors to be professional and not grope women they examine?

Do you have any idea how difficult that is in this country?

Don't know about the boonies but it is quite easy to find female doctors in Tokyo. Dentists as well.

licensed attendants / nurses presence should always be required during examinations

If the first girl would have said something to her employer right after her exam then maybe the other three girls would not have visited that doctor. If they were groped why didn't they stop the examination and say something to the doctor our call the police ??  Hard to prove he did anything wrong, He just maybe a good doctor. They could have asked for a female nurse to be in the room during the exam.

In Japan, older male patients prefer Dr. Women and they get what they really want but female patients don't have choices.

BackpackingNepal

I have no idea what your trying to say about this issue.

licensed attendants / nurses presence should always be required during examinations

Because male doctors can't be trusted? What's the reasoning?

Don't know about the boonies but it is quite easy to find female doctors in Tokyo.

Not everyone lives in Tokyo. And it's not easy, even in large cities. More so if you are getting a medical provided onsite and don't have much say in who examines you.

If the first girl would have said something to her employer right after her exam then maybe the other three girls would not have visited that doctor. If they were groped why didn't they stop the examination and say something to the doctor our call the police ?? Hard to prove he did anything wrong, He just maybe a good doctor. They could have asked for a female nurse to be in the room during the exam.

Victim blaming at its finest. Its the fault of the women because their male doctor can't control himself?

In 2016, women accounted for just 21.1% of all doctors in Japan, the lowest level among all OECD nations.

https://www.nippon.com/en/features/h00261/too-few-female-doctors-japan-ranks-last-among-oecd-nations.html

I guess Guilty until proven Guilty.

One Japanese lady I know told me that when she visited one doctor for the first time, she had been told that he barely looked at the less attractive women but the prettier ones he always told to remove their blouses and bras. She went in and was sitting there wondering which it was going to be, and he told her to take it off. She was quite attractive and proud of her good looks so took off her blouse and bra with a deep sense of pride.

I had a question when I heard this news.

Why was he arrested now?

More than six months have passed since the problem occurred.

It’s a little too late.

tmarie

Victim blaming at its finest. Its the fault of the women because their male doctor can't control himself?

I believe the only one blaming the victims is you.... I'm not blaming anyone just expressing my OPINION...

In fact your jumping to conclusions and blaming the doctor, Doctor blaming at it's finest ... Hmmmmm   

>

Unfortunately I think we probably just need to give doctors the widest possible benefit of the doubt in these cases unless there's overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Like uh four women, all of them under 25 (coincidence I'm sure), raising the same complaint against the same doctor?

And why should we give the benefit of the doubt to something that there is no medical justification for? You don't need to grope someone's breasts when checking them with a stethoscope.

As my wife always said, woman go to Female Doctors and men go to Male Doctors!

As tmarie mentioned above, only about 20% of doctors in Japan are female. So in order to deal with women being victimized by doctors your solution is to prevent them from accessing 80% of the medical doctors in Japan (in most rural areas probably being the only doctors available)???

Because male doctors can't be trusted? What's the reasoning?

Because it is the standard of care. All medical institutions where a male doctor performs a physical examination of female patients insist on having a chaperone precisely to avoid this kind of problems, it protects patients from bad doctors but it also protects the doctors from false/mistaken accusations.

Here there are two possibilities, either the doctor groped the patients on purpose or the risk of being accused of bad behavior never crossed his mind even if its something very common and that every physician is well aware of. Any of those two cases require him to be investigated.

What would you think about a high-school teacher that meets in his hotel room with a female student? is the lack of blind trust on teachers the only reason why anybody would think this should be avoided?

@rainyday

And why should we give the benefit of the doubt to something that there is no medical justification for? You don't need to grope someone's breasts when checking them with a stethoscope.

On what basis do you say that there was no medical justification? Are you a doctor? Just from a quick google books search, Page 21 of 'Basic Clinical Lab Competencies for Respiratory Care: An Integrated Approach' By Gary C. White:

"The female patient with large breasts presents an additional challenge in the ausculation of breath sounds. If the patient is alert and cooperative, ask her to move her breast to one side to facilitate use of your stethoscope. If the patient is unable to do so, you may be required to move the breast yourself while preserving the patient's dignity."

So it seems clear there is a medical justification in many case. I'd be curious to see what the Japanese textbooks were advising when this guy was in med school. Without knowing more details and having a decent amount of medical knowledge, it's impossible for a layman to judge the situation.

Like uh four women, all of them under 25 (coincidence I'm sure), raising the same complaint against the same doctor?

How many medical exams have these women undergone in their relatively short lives? Why exactly do they think this particular exam was conducted inappropriately? Do they all have relatively large breasts? Did they all speak with eachother afterwards? We lack answers to all of these questions.

As gogogo points out with the AED case, the Japanese police have been known to be overzealous from time to time.

He'll pay some money, and get off, so to speak. He'll never see jail time, and likely be able to continue his practice.

M3M3M3Today 02:53 pm JST

On what basis do you say that there was no medical justification? Are you a doctor?

I am not a medical doctor, but I am a woman. General health checks do not include checking for breast cancer. This is a specialist field and for mammograms and breast cancer checkups women go to a gynecology clinic and do it at the same time they have their yearly PAP exams.

Do you understand? There is NO medical justification for a general practitioner to touch a woman's breasts - it is not done.

How many medical exams have these women undergone in their relatively short lives? Why exactly do they think this particular exam was conducted inappropriately? Do they all have relatively large breasts? Did they all speak with each other afterwards? We lack answers to all of these questions.

Women go to the doctor every year for gynecology exams that include checks for breast and ovarian cancer. Women know the difference between being groped sexually by a doctor and having their breasts examined for cancer. The size of the beast makes no difference - the exams are done in the same exact way.

As gogogo points out with the AED case, the Japanese police have been known to be overzealous from time to time.

Considering that less than 4% of sex crimes in Japan are reported or prosecuted (information from the government's White Paper on Crime, look it up) that means the police UNDER REACT.

I find this entire post to be utterly misogynistic and if the mods had any sense, this guy would be banned. I can't believe this kind of thing is even allowed to be posted. It is hate speech aimed at dismissing sex crimes and belittling women. This forum is full of this, and I am sick of it.

DO BETTER.

"The female patient with large breasts presents an additional challenge in the ausculation of breath sounds. If the patient is alert and cooperative, ask her to move her breast to one side to facilitate use of your stethoscope. If the patient is unable to do so, you may be required to move the breast yourself while preserving the patient's dignity."

So now the doctor asked the four women to move their breasts to facilitate use of his stethoscope, but none of them had functional arms which allowed them to do so, so he had to do it for them? I must have missed that part of the article.

So it seems clear there is a medical justification in many case.

No, there is a very narrow justification in a very exceptional case involving women with large breasts who are incapable of moving them (pretty rare). Nothing suggests that is what happened in all four cases here.

How many medical exams have these women undergone in their relatively short lives?

Irrelevant.

Why exactly do they think this particular exam was conducted inappropriately?

The fact that he groped their breasts. I'm not a woman, but I'm guessing they know when they are being groped because ....duh!

Do they all have relatively large breasts?

Wait, I thought you already established that they did, hence your use of the manual you quoted to justify the doctor's behavior. Are you saying they might not have? In that case, what is the medical justification for him fondling them while using a stethoscope?

Did they all speak with each other afterwards?

Gee, if so, what did they discuss? Their evil plan to frame this doctor even though none of them stand to gain anything from doing so?

@girl_in_tokyo

General health checks do not include checking for breast cancer.

I never claimed that he was giving a breast exam. Read the article, it clearly says it happened while he was using a stethoscope (so listening to either the heart or lungs). If you read the quote from by the medical text I provided below, it does mention that the breast can sometimes interfere with the ability to listen through a stethoscope.

Do you understand? There is NO medical justification for a general practitioner to touch a woman's breasts - it is not done.

Have a look at this forum post where medical school students are discussing how it's better to push the breast up using the outside of your hand rather than using your palm, to avoid patients getting the wrong impression. So whether you like it or not, touching the breast is a thing even when not conducting a breast exam.

https://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/how-to-perform-female-exam.497422/

women go to a gynecology clinic and do it at the same time they have their yearly PAP exams. There is NO medical justification for a general practitioner to touch a woman's breasts - it is not done.

Not necessarily. In many/most euro countries as well as in Oz plenty of GPs do offer pap smears, PV etc. They'll only refer you to a gyne if they're unsure about something (or there's something wrong).

Were these four the only women examined that day? If not, and if a breast exam - or touching of the breast was necessary for the physical exam, then the other women would have been similarly touched. This should be an easy determination for the police investigators.

@rainyday

I'm simply advising caution before jumping to conclusions or making too many layman's assumptions.

Nearly everything in this case seems to hinge on the doctor's subjective professional judgement. When does a necessary touch become an inappropriate grope? How big does the breast have to be before it might interfere with the stethoscope? When is it appropriate to move the breast yourself rather than asking the patient to do it given the time constraints of these mass medical checks at companies? None of us are equiped to answer these question, and neither are the police in all likelihood. This is probably something which should be investigated first in a disciplinary hearing by the medical association. The police can get involved later if actual misconduct is found.

Irrelevant.

I think it's very relevant. Different doctors will have slightly different ways of doing the same thing. If a doctor does something contrary to your expectations, you're more likely to feel like you've been violated.

Gee, if so, what did they discuss? Their evil plan to frame this doctor even though none of them stand to gain anything from doing so?

An evil conspiracy is not at all what I had in mind.

There's a well known phenomenon where eye-witnesses and victims who share their experiences will have their memories contaminated. Their account will tend to coalesce into 1 consistent narrative rather than 4 separate narratives which might contain all sorts of inconsistencies. The risk is that this single account is given far more credibility than it deserves. This is why police always separate victims/witnesses at the scene.

@Rainyday

So now the doctor asked the four women to move their breasts to facilitate use of his stethoscope, but none of them had functional arms which allowed them to do so, so he had to do it for them? I must have missed that part of the article.

I'm not saying this happened. I'd be very curious to know what Japanese medical textbooks say on the issue though. The one I quoted was obviously American.

No, there is a very narrow justification in a very exceptional case involving women with large breasts who are incapable of moving them (pretty rare). Nothing suggests that is what happened in all four cases here.

I don't think it's an exceptional case. I think it's common for the doctor to do this, as discussed in the forum I also linked to. I'm obviously not a woman or a doctor so my experience is admittedly very limited.

The fact that he groped their breasts. I'm not a woman, but I'm guessing they know when they are being groped because ....duh!

Sure, but what if the doctor and the woman have completely different opinions on what constitutes groping? That's the big problem here. Especially where the woman isn't a doctor. It seems like a grey area.

Wait, I thought you already established that they did, hence your use of the manual you quoted to justify the doctor's behavior. Are you saying they might not have? In that case, what is the medical justification for him fondling them while using a stethoscope?

Not justifying the doctors behaviour. The manual just shows that it is something that happens. I'm not qualified to justify it or not.

Gee, if so, what did they discuss? Their evil plan to frame this doctor even though none of them stand to gain anything from doing so?

It's easy to be convinced that you might have been groped too if a few other women at your company are saying the same thing. Stranger things have happened. I don't think they're trying to frame or extort him.

Anyway, my biggest worry is that male doctors could become ultra sensitive about being falsely accused and start compromising the care they give to women. It's a real risk.

I never claimed that he was giving a breast exam. Read the article, it clearly says it happened while he was using a stethoscope (so listening to either the heart or lungs). If you read the quote from by the medical text I provided below, it does mention that the breast can sometimes interfere with the ability to listen through a stethoscope.

Exactly. No breast exam = no reason to touch breasts. At all. No reason whatsoever.

Have a look at this forum post where medical school students are discussing how it's better to push the breast up using the outside of your hand rather than using your palm, to avoid patients getting the wrong impression. So whether you like it or not, touching the breast is a thing even when not conducting a breast exam.

https://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/how-to-perform-female-exam.497422/

This link is cardiologists discussing exams for people who have been diagnosed with a heart murmur, which is a specialist exam .

Doctors do not use more than a stethoscope during a yearly medical exam.

So no, doctors do not need to touch a woman's breast during a yearly medical exam. At all. No reason whatsoever.

And, as I said, women most definitely understand the difference between a doctor listening to her heart with a stethoscope, and a doctor groping her for a sexual thrill. I

The CaptainToday 04:58 pm JST

I'm simply advising caution before jumping to conclusions or making too many layman's assumptions.

Nearly everything in this case seems to hinge on the doctor's subjective professional judgement. When does a necessary touch become an inappropriate grope?

Listening to a heart with a stethoscope does not require the doctor to touch the patient's breasts, ever, so if he does, it is unnecessary by definiton, therefore inappropriate, and therefore groping.

How big does the breast have to be before it might interfere with the stethoscope?

The doctor still will not need to touch the woman's breast.

When is it appropriate to move the breast yourself rather than asking the patient to do it given the time constraints of these mass medical checks at companies? None of us are equiped to answer these question, and neither are the police in all likelihood.

During a yearly medical exam, it is never necessary for the doctor to touch the patient's chest. Since I am a woman and have been getting medical exams all my life, I am equipped to answer.

This is probably something which should be investigated first in a disciplinary hearing by the medical association. The police can get involved later if actual misconduct is found.

Sexual assault is a case for the police.

I think it's very relevant. Different doctors will have slightly different ways of doing the same thing. If a doctor does something contrary to your expectations, you're more likely to feel like you've been violated.

If the woman feels violated, it's because she was violated. Again: there is no need whatsoever for a doctor to touch a female patient's breast during a general physical exam. None, at all, zero. And women know the difference between a doctor using a stethoscope to listen to her heart, and a doctor purposefully groping her breast.

An evil conspiracy is not at all what I had in mind.

There's a well known phenomenon where eye-witnesses and victims who share their experiences will have their memories contaminated. Their account will tend to coalesce into 1 consistent narrative rather than 4 separate narratives which might contain all sorts of inconsistencies. The risk is that this single account is given far more credibility than it deserves. This is why police always separate victims/witnesses at the scene.

So while you don't think women are evil conspirators, you do think they can't be trusted to fully understand their experiences and need their credibility to be rigorously attacked. I mean, questioned. By men. Because only men can interpret woman's experiences correctly.

That's not self-serving at all.

M3M3M3Today 05:33 pm JST

I'm not saying this happened. I'd be very curious to know what Japanese medical textbooks say on the issue though. The one I quoted was obviously American.

Japanese womens' hearts are not in a different area, so Japanese doctors in Japan do not need to touch Japanese women's breasts in order to listen to their heart during a general medical exam.

I don't think it's an exceptional case. I think it's common for the doctor to do this, as discussed in the forum I also linked to. I'm obviously not a woman or a doctor so my experience is admittedly very limited.

No, it is not common. As I said, unless it is a specialist exam, e.g., a breast cancer exam or a cardiologist, it is never the case that the doctor touches the woman's breast. And as I am a woman, I have a lot of experience with this, as I have had many, meany general exams, and a doctor has never touched my breast when doing it. Never. Ever.

Sure, but what if the doctor and the woman have completely different opinions on what constitutes groping? That's the big problem here. Especially where the woman isn't a doctor. It seems like a grey area.

Then the woman's definition is the correct one, because the only reason these definitions would differ at all would be when the doctor has behaved inappropriately and is trying to cover it up.

Not justifying the doctors behaviour. The manual just shows that it is something that happens. I'm not qualified to justify it or not.

Yes, you are trying to justify that doctor's behavior, because you keep trying to find reasons for a doctor to touch a female patient's breast during a general medical exam, which is the definition of "justification".

It's easy to be convinced that you might have been groped too if a few other women at your company are saying the same thing. Stranger things have happened. I don't think they're trying to frame or extort him.

No, you just think women can't be trusted to interpret their own experiences, and thus must not be believed when they report that a doctor has groped them.

Anyway, my biggest worry is that male doctors could become ultra sensitive about being falsely accused and start compromising the care they give to women. It's a real risk.

No, it is not a "real risk" because doctors are specifically trained to be ultra sensitive about accidentally upsetting women, and there are procedures in place to ensure women's comfort during exams. This includes checking in, verbalizing each action, having a female nurse sit in, and asking for consent. I'm not surprised you did not know this, since as you yourself keep pointing out, you are not a woman and thus have no experience in this area. You are lucky I am here to explain it to you, so kindly and so patiently, over and over again, until you can fully comprehend it.

This is probably something which should be investigated first in a disciplinary hearing by the medical association. The police can get involved later if actual misconduct is found.

No, these are allegations of criminal conduct, these are exactly what the police should be investigating. Which they did, and obviously found evidence sufficiently credible to arrest the doctor.

There's a well known phenomenon where eye-witnesses and victims who share their experiences will have their memories contaminated. Their account will tend to coalesce into 1 consistent narrative rather than 4 separate narratives which might contain all sorts of inconsistencies. The risk is that this single account is given far more credibility than it deserves. This is why police always separate victims/witnesses at the scene.

That would be the case if 4 people witnessed the same incident. These four people witnessed four separate incidents which happened inches from their own eyes as close as it is humanly possible for someone to witness something.

goldorakToday 04:29 pm JST

Not necessarily. In many/most euro countries as well as in Oz plenty of GPs do offer pap smears, PV etc. They'll only refer you to a gyne if they're unsure about something (or there's something wrong).

This situation is Japan, where medical care is highly specialized. For gyno exams, women in Japan do not go to a GP. They go to what is literally referred to as a "ladies clinic" (レディースクリニック).

GPs in Japan do not do gyno exams or breast cancer exams, which means that during the general medical exams that are required by at Japanese companies, these types of exams are not done. They are considered a completely separate issue. Whether or not a woman has a yearly pap at her regular gyno depends on her personal situation.

Anyway, my biggest worry is that male doctors could become ultra sensitive about being falsely accused and start compromising the care they give to women. It's a real risk.

Yes, that is what I find so inane about this. Men tend to read articles like this and view it strictly from the point of view of the alleged perpetrator because that is the person in the story whose situation they identify with. Being falsely accused of groping? Yup, that is something men worry about. Because we never have to worry about being groped like women do.

So when you read an article about four women being groped and zero evidence to suggest that their allegations aren’t credible, your “biggest worry” is doctors being made “overly sensitive” rather than, say, maybe being worried about protecting women from a guy who is most likely a serial sexual abuser.

Why wasn't his medical license suspended? Oh the ol fake bow appology ceremony

Dr Who? Dr Dolittle? why wasn't his medical license suspended? Oh the ol fake bow appology show

@Rainyday

Men tend to read articles like this and view it strictly from the point of view of the alleged perpetrator because that is the person in the story whose situation they identify with.

These short articles are always a rorschach test. They contain so little information that readers will naturally fill in the missing details with their own imaginations and view them through an ideological lens. In my case the highest ideological value here is not that I'm a man, but that I believe strongly in the presumption of innocence. In your case, the highest value seems to be the 'listen and believe' ethos.

your “biggest worry” is doctors being made “overly sensitive” rather than, say, maybe being worried about protecting women from a guy who is most likely a serial sexual abuser.

Yes, I'm generally more concerned about the wider implications of any event on society than the actual resolution of a single event. Is this surprising or irrational? The thousands of doctors who read this story and change their behavior towards women could have a far greater impact on society (and my own family) than the fate of this one specific doctor and these four women. Needless to say that I want every guilty person to be brought to justice in every case.

zero evidence to suggest that their allegations aren’t credible

But also zero evidence to suggest that the women's allegations amount to proof that a crime has occurred... and he's entitled to the presumption of innocence...and the burden of proof rests entirely on the women (or the prosecutors now that he's been arrested).

I do have 2 questions for you. The first is, what specific evidence would satisfy you that this man is definitely guilty of a crime? Because in my opinion this is an impossible situation. The women say he touched them inappropriately, he says he didn't. I don't see any possible evidence that could ever resolve this with the degree of certainty needed to support a criminal conviction. The second question is, are you prepared to accept that he's not guilty if the prosecutor investigates and then decides to drop the charges? I suspect there is nothing that would ever satisfy you of his innocence.

Because we never have to worry about being groped like women do.

Well you can speak for yourself, but I was groped by an older woman when I was a young man.

We can all go Back & Forth on this subject BUT during a physical if the doctor is checking for breast cancer HE HAS TO TOUCH THE FEMALES BREAST !!!!! and it could be a simple misunderstanding between the doctor / patient so the girl thought they were getting groped.

Male patients prefer female doctors. Bet they are complaining about their prostate.

Yes, I'm generally more concerned about the wider implications of any event on society than the actual resolution of a single event. Is this surprising or irrational? The thousands of doctors who read this story and change their behavior towards women could have a far greater impact on society (and my own family) than the fate of this one specific doctor and these four women.

Again you are retrofitting your rationale to fit a bias in favor of the perpetrator. The wider implications to society of this case cut both ways, and I would venture to say that protecting women from sexual abuse should be a greater priority than worrying about doctors being over sensitive to accusations of misconduct thatthey could avoid by following the rules (such as those you cited earlier).

But also zero evidence to suggest that the women's allegations amount to proof that a crime has occurred... and he's entitled to the presumption of innocence...and the burden of proof rests entirely on the women (or the prosecutors now that he's been arrested).

Actually there is significant evidence the crimes occurred. You have four victims coming forward with the same alllegation. Four. Generally an accidental brushing or misunderstanding doesn’t happen four times to four seperate people. Also the police have made an arrest which suggests that they found this evidence to be credible after conducting an investigation. The police are well aware of all the possible things that might make a witness/victim statement unreliable which commenters have been trumpeting here, but they still found them credible enough to make an arrest.

Is he entitled to a presumption of innocence in the criminal law process? Absolutely yes. But that doesn’t mean that as an outside observer I have to believe his versionover theirs (and of course we don’t have all the story). But when it comes to a story about someone getting arrested for any other crime the comments on JT are nothing but denunciation of the accused before they have actually been found guilty. Except here.

I do have 2 questions for you. The first is, what specific evidence would satisfy you that this man is definitely guilty of a crime.

The standard is “beyond a reasonable doubt.” In a case like this it is going to really depend on whose story the judge believes, which is going to rely on a lot of factors. If the doctor can raise a defence that the touching was necessary for medical purposes and complied with whatever guidelines the JMA has, he will likely be found not guilty.

BUT, the fact that he has been arrestedsuggests that the prosecutor already explored that possibility and rejected it. The court itself has to decide of course, but in 99% of cases in Japan once a prosecution reaches trial the outcome is guilty. Its not a goid system and results in many wrongful convictions, but I am not sure that isthe cse here. Most sexual abuse wrongful convictions involve chikan on subways, a situation rife for innocent people to be accused. Sometimes inadvertent contact in a crowded train can be mistaken for groping, and sometimes an innocent bystander can be mistakenly accused ofgroping committed bu someone else. Neither of those really apply here, where the touching occurred right in front of them. The only defence is that it was necessary for medical purposes.

 The second question is, are you prepared to accept that he's not guilty if the prosecutor investigates and then decides to drop the charges? I suspect there is nothing that would ever satisfy you of his innocence.

Absolutely. They are in a way better position to weighthe evidence than I am.

My point is more that I find it inane that so many commenters are bending over backwards to come up with excuses for the guy in this case, while in every other article about an arrested criminal suspect they do the opposite. Crimes which only females are victims of don’t seem to register much with guys. That bothers me.

The nurses in my English class told me about one doctor who used the annual health check to do exactly this to them. They all knew about it, year after year, and they described it in some detail to me.

Then they got wise and learned how to record evidence, to avoid any such 'he said, she said' later on.