Going by the article the authorities in Japan decided that she didn't need an official punishment, so in this case they don't seem to think it matters what her charge was since there wasn't enough evidence to make a case against her. And if someone has done something so terrible they can't be allowed to eat well or get a good nights sleep then the case shouldn't be dropped lightly.
The charges were dropped. Regardless of your opinions on how an orderly government or justice system should run or how criminals should be treated, in this situation what happened was an innocent person was tortured by the state.
Even if you actually rape someone, if you settle with the victim jb cash, the charges are dropped. Something that really needs to change but seems to not be going so well.
Not saying that's what happened in this case by any ways, just that dropped charges = innocent isn't true. And I agree with the OP that knowing the context would help sympathize, especially given usually someone innocent would share that more proactively. Instead, many are even assuming this is something about foreigners, with absolutely no basis to assume that...
Charges were dropped does not mean innocent. It means the investigation determined that the case wasn't worth pursuing. Japan has strict rules about importing drugs. The lack of drug abuse in Japan is one of the reasons it's not a shithole like nearly everywhere else. Obviously foreigners are in the crosshairs for that particular category of transgressions, since they come from places with different attitudes toward certain drugs, and since they get sent stuff in the mail. You can be pretty sure that she got the message that the Japanese authorities wanted to send her.
If the only way that Japan can be clean and orderly is by abusing people for months at a time only to drop charges, you have to ask if maybe that's a problem. The conviction rate and reliance on often questionably obtained confessions is also a problem that's hardly only noticed by outsiders.
The short version of the Japanese justice system is "Guilty until proved innocent", instead of (as in most modern countries) "Innocent until proved guilty". In addition to that, focus is much more on confessions instead of investigation - the latter exists of course, and is used for finding the culprit (as happened when we had a burglary at our house. They got the guy one year later). When someone is in custody though.. then it's about getting a confession.
This can definitely be problematic, particularly when considering the conditions during custody. No lawyer.. or much of anything, except massive psychological pressure.
And today I read an article in a Japanese newspaper about an innocent woman who was detained for two years, because an interpreter translated a word incorrectly. And, apparently, deliberately. It finally went to court after two years (one must wonder how this is possible..) and was aquitted (with a comment that translation is supposed to be accurate and faithful).
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.
Have you visited literally any city outside Japan or Singapore lately? Law and order works, whether you like it or not. They're allowed to do it their way. Results speak for themselves.
You clearly have a different view of “innocent until proven guilty” than most US citizens, which is fine, maybe you aren’t one, but that line of rhetoric is going to be anathema to most people on this website.
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.
According to her video it appears she was deemed a flight risk because she didn't respond to an email requesting information on the matter being investigated while she was overseas. She didn't have the information on hand or at the time or at all and instead of saying that she didn't respond to the email. When she returned from her trip they deemed her a flight risk.
In the US if you're a flight risk you wouldn't get bail either.
You wouldn’t be deemed a flight risk in the US on that basis. Returning to the country after receiving email notifying you about the investigation is obviously evidence against flight risk.
> You clearly have a different view of “innocent until proven guilty”
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.
Primarily the US’s approach is: “we know our system will never be perfect [and the system we have is actually a hell of its own making], so we will ensure an escape hatch for BOTH innocent/guilty from the shortcomings of the system until a definitive verdict has been reached”
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.
We're not talking about the US. We're talking about Japan, where the authorities are extremely conservative and cautious. Most Japanese people know how to stay completely clear of trouble. Ask yourself why this person did not.
That's not how it works. Especially for foreigners, where it's often easier to just make them someone else's problem, assuming the charges are relatively minor.
