Man gets suspended sentence for killing brother who asked for help in committing suicide

Yep - the current laws (and their interpretation in this particular case) scream for the need of legally-assisted suicide in this country...

I think the law says this was murder.

And so he was sentenced...bt received a suspended. I think the judgement in this case is pretty clever because he didn't necessarily get away with murder and yet the sentence is suitable for the circumstances. This is appropriate human judgement.

Well, for me I am vote yes for euthanasia

Yes, I'm not sure if this is a precedent, but such judgements can lead to some very ugly slimy paths very very quickly... (as in someone faking the whole business and hoping to get away with murder)... I of course see the humane side of it.

If you know anything about the legal system it is that past cases are often quoted as "proof" of the law. hence my comment "Setting a very dangerous precedent. imo" regards all the future cases of people saying "well he got off why cant i" hence Setting a very dangerous precedent. imo

Setting a very dangerous precedent. imo

he current laws (and their interpretation in this particular case) scream for the need of legally-assisted suicide in this country...

A agree. We're just starting to get this option in the U.S. and it's definitely needed in Japan.

IF u want to end your life... donate a kidney to another person. Have a living will with explicit instructions. Don't be a coward and make your brother do it for you. Also, save another life... or two, of those who do want to live!

Not enough details to know the circumstances.

I'm in favor of assisted suicide for terminal patients. Where I live, a badly injured animal can be put down, but I wasn't allowed to stop my fathers suffering for months from cancer. In the end, he chose to starve himself as the final solution. It is a terrible way to die.

geeze are you guys unknowledgeable:

In the civil law system of Japan, judicial precedent provides non-binding guidance on how laws should be interpreted in practice. Judges seriously consider precedent, especially any pertinent Supreme Court decisions, thus making understanding of precedent essential to practice.

In the civil law system of Japan, judicial precedent provides non-binding guidance on how laws should be interpreted in practice. Judges seriously consider precedent, especially any pertinent Supreme Court decisions, thus making understanding of precedent essential to practice.

Thank you! Precedents are meant to serve as a guidline and not "proof" of the law. Not only that, from time to time, precedents have been overturned before.

I think that the judgement was the best the tribunal could give. In the end, even if it's at his brother's request (and it probably will be) , he will have to live on with the burden of killing his brother.

nigelboy: "Smith again with his usual puzzling comment."

Only puzzling to deniers, my friend.

"How about looking it up if you're so curious instead of relying on others to do this simple task for you?"

I asked based on the article and information given on this thread. I don't honestly care, so it was not a question seeking information so much as it was a question of whether it was morals in helping his brother. I wasn't specifically asking anyone to 'look it up for me', and if I had any interest I would myself. I don't see you asking other posters to look up the details when they say there is not enough information to comment on (and posit an opinion).

Here IS a specific question for YOU, though: do you actually have anything to say about this THREAD? or as usual is it just you nit-picking or making yourself look bad while trying to undermine other posters? (again, not actually curious, as they are rhetorical questions).

I believe in the near future that assisted suicide is going to become a big business. Japan is going to experience massive poverty in the next 20 years and the social structure won't be able to handle it. Once the government runs the numbers and finds out it can get taxes from people but won't have to pay out (in Social Security/Nenkin) if they are dead, look for euthanasia to become a legitimate part of the medical community and an opportunity for economic growth, as ghoulish as it may seem.

wait... guy wanted to commit suicide, then couldn't, asks brother to help him by stabbing him in the chest with a kitchen knife, brother stabs him, goes to jail for murder... this doesn't sound right

Strangerland: "As far as I understand it, Japanese law doesn't follow the rule of precedent like other countries."

I know... it just likes to make laws up as it goes, or at least choose when to follow it or not if not turning a blind eye.

Daniel Neagari: The problem is it does not say it was euthanasia. It doesn't say at all why the brother wanted to die. If he had a terminal disease and was suffering then I can understand and even support the sentence, but otherwise I don't think it flies -- especially with just a note (which the man who killed him could have written himself, though I won't jump into conspiracies).

So, that brings me to what I wanted to ask... why did the man want to die? Was he sick (in body)?

I asked based on the article and information given on this thread. I don't honestly care, so it was not a question seeking information so much as it was a question of whether it was morals in helping his brother. I wasn't specifically asking anyone to 'look it up for me', and if I had any interest I would myself. I don't see you asking other posters to look up the details when they say there is not enough information to comment on (and posit an opinion).

Smith.

I was simply offering you an advice for it would save your from embarrassment as with most of your posts. It's simple concept of where you try to find as much information on it, then comment on it, rather than speculating and going off tangent.

But specifically, the man in question was charged with penal code article 202,

"..A person who induces or aids another to commit suicide, or kills another at the other's request or with other's consent, shall be punished by imprisonment with or without work for not less than 6 months but not more than 7 years..."

So, there goes your puzzling "I know... it just likes to make laws up as it goes, or at least choose when to follow it or not if not turning a blind eye." comment.

To answer your second question, (even though you state that you don't care)

So, that brings me to what I wanted to ask... why did the man want to die? Was he sick (in body)?

The brother was paralyzed from the waste down. The suspect was taking care of him with his rehabilitation.

Hmmmm, ambivalent about this one... I think the law says this was murder...

I know... it just likes to make laws up as it goes, or at least choose when to follow it or not if not turning a blind eye.

Smith again with his usual puzzling comment.

So, that brings me to what I wanted to ask... why did the man want to die? Was he sick (in body)?

How about looking it up if you're so curious instead of relying on others to do this simple task for you?

As far as I understand it, Japanese law doesn't follow the rule of precedent like other countries.

"He asked me to do it" What a good excuse, especially when there nobody to dispute it.. Better do a hand writing analysis.