crime

Man turns himself in over fatal assault in Tokyo's Shimbashi

15 Comments

A 31-year-old man has turned himself in to police over the fatal assault of a 54-year-old man in Tokyo's Shimbashi area on Sunday night.

According to police, the suspect is a company employee who lives in Koto Ward. Fuji TV reported that he and another man kicked a garbage can outside a pub in the underground arcade near Shimbashi Station. The victim chased the two men. The suspect told police he just grabbed the victim by the lapels on his coat, shook him and then pushed him away.

The man collapsed. He was taken to hospital where he died. Police said the victim had a heart ailment.

The suspect turned himself in at a police station on Monday afternoon. He was quoted as saying, "I just grabbed him but I never meant to harm him." Police are also questioning the suspect's companion about the circumstances of the altercation.

© Japan Today

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

15 Comments
Login to comment

What kind of fool chases two young guys knowing they have heart problems? This joker was just trying to lay down some 'oyaji ijime' and died because of it. Of course, it is not a good thing he is dead, but the young guy who grabbed him should not be on a man slaughter charge.

1 ( +11 / -10 )

Perhaps the "suspect" should have kept his hands to himself, but, c'mon.... if the facts are as reported, there is no way he could anticipate his actions would result in physical harm to the victim.

I mean, if two people are in a screaming match and one suddenly dies of a heart attack because of the stress, is the other guilt of manslaughter??

However. this is Japan, so....

0 ( +6 / -6 )

This joker was just trying to lay down some 'oyaji ijime' I saw this just last week, an old guy was tearing strips off a younger driver he pulled over on the side of the road. I could hear somebody screaming and he was over 100m away down the road. It lasted about 1 minute until the young guy had enough of the abuse and took hold of the guys shirt and basically said F you what you going to do about it. LOL I had a similar run in about 6 months ago with another old timer, thought he give me his opinion on something he didnt agree with what I was doing, I told him I didnt give two fudges what he thought, end of discussion. Seriously too many old timers think that respect is a given, when it needs to be earned and is certainly mutual. If you want to get into someones face expect a similar reaction in return, if you don't like that the STFU

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I think that they are guilty. because they shook and pushed the victim, which was definitely harmful for him. Imagine if you push a child softly but he falls from something and die. No one say you are not guilty.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

What kind of fool chases two young guys knowing they have heart problems?

Did the victim know he had heart problems?

4 ( +7 / -3 )

@tonyy

So you are ok with being charged with manslaughter or worse because you shook someone's coat lapels and shoved them? If the old man chased them then he was the aggressor. He isn't a cop, so the only excuse he would have for that would be because it was his garbage can they kicked.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

If he had a known heart condition, and he chased after and confronted two younger guys, that's what we call "assumption of risk". If they get a good lawyer, they'll get a suspended sentence if any

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Garbage can kicking is a capital crime in Tokyo's 23 wards.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

So you are ok with being charged with manslaughter or worse

Manslaughter is the norm, is it not, for an accidental killing?

because you shook someone's coat lapels

He was shaken by the lapels. Menacing if it's two against one.

and shoved them?

Unless they're inside a bouncy castle, this alone can be deadly.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

This is why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggshell_skull

The eggshell skull rule (or thin skull rule or you take your victim as you find him rule of the common law) is a well-established legal doctrine used in some tort law systems, with a similar doctrine applicable to criminal law. It means that frailty of the injured person is not a defense in a tort case.

This rule holds that a tortfeasor is liable for all consequences resulting from his or her tortious (usually negligent) activities leading to an injury to another person, even if the victim suffers an unusually high level of damage (e.g. due to a pre-existing vulnerability or medical condition). The term implies that if a person had a skull as delicate as that of the shell of an egg, and a tortfeasor who was unaware of the condition injured that person's head, causing the skull unexpectedly to break, the defendant would be held liable for all damages resulting from the wrongful contact, even if the tortfeasor did not intend to cause such a severe injury.

In criminal law, the general maxim is that the defendant must "take their victims as they find them", as echoed in the judgment of Lord Justice Lawton in R v. Blaue (1975), in which the defendant was held responsible for killing his victim, despite his contention that her refusal of a blood transfusion constituted novus actus interveniens.

There's no equivalent Japanese page on wikipedia (Korean does have one), but apparently the eggshell-skull rule applies in Japan as well:

http://arizonajournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Osaka.pdf

Reevaluating the Role of the Tort Liability System in Japan

... In addition, the victim’s mental vulnerability or pre-existing disease can be considered as contributing factors to his/her damage; however, the eggshell-skull rule applies to his/her pre-existing physical condition. ...

The point being, even if the victim's skull were as thin as an eggshell, the defendant would still be held responsible for breaking it through his actions, whether he intended to or not.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

There is a possibility that the heart failure was a result of the chase alone. The suspect's physical contact may have not played any part in his death, just saying.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Well, the guy seems to have caused the death although without the intent to kill, which would be the definition of manslaughter. How harsh the conviction he gets is is up to the court system

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I'm not the least bit willing to say that two guys can get away with kicking a garbage for any reason. But the suspect has been unluckily driven into an awkward position when the victim died presumably from chronic cardiac disease. So, for the suspect, it was better off having turned himself in at the very least. Let's leave it up to judicial judgment. RIP, the victim.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If he had a known heart condition

Has there been anything to suggest he had a known condition?

Moderator: There is no point in your asking a reader this. It's another example of continuing to harass readers. More than 95% of your posts are comments on other people's posts. Please try posting your own opinion for a change.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@thepersoniamnow

I think that it totally depends on the position you stand. If you were to be a guy who shook and pushed the victim, you would say that you are not guilty and your attorney would do the same. However if you were his family, they will not think that way. The point is if you keep focusing on the "Feeling", the argument never end.That's why we need the low to judge people. In terms of the low, as the others have also mentioned, the guy should be punished.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites