Talk:Criminal justice system of Japan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Merge from The Japanese Justice System and its 99.97% Conviction rate
I do not think that this information belongs as a separate article. The title alone rings POV-biased to me, though it is interesting material and, if valid, would be valuable in another article. Where shall we put this? Judicial system of Japan? Criminal justice system of Japan? Juries in Japan? I am eager to hear others' suggestions. LordAmeth 11:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not too sure about this content, but Criminal justice system of Japan would probably be the best place if it is to be anywhere. The second paragraph in particular appears to be POV. Morwen - Talk 11:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. This would make a good section in the Criminal justice system of Japan article. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- I also agree. This should be merged and unreferenced POV cleaned up. --ElectricEye (talk) 00:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Merge, congratulations to ElectricEye on recognising this little gem. SmithBlue 07:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- Another reason to merge is the enencyclopedic POV title. imho of course. --ElectricEye (talk) 07:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've got a bias that makes the title look negative POV to me but for others it would be very positive POV - one Indonesian judge , to show his fairness, stated that he had never found an accused drug dealer not guiltly. 3 mistakes by the public prosecutor in every 10,000 cases - very impressive but still not good enough for the Toyota assembly line. (humour?) SmithBlue 08:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Merged. --ElectricEye (talk) 22:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Confessions obtained from 95% of all people arrested
In The Economist from Feb 10th-16th 2007 page 57 it says: "Japan is unique among democratic countires in that confessions are obtained from 95% of all people arrested, and that its courts convict 99.9% of all the suspects brought before them." The conviction rate is already mentioned in this Wikipedia article, the confession rate ist not - but I'm somewhat doubtful if this really is true. --Schandi 06:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- The 95% number sounds correct. But, I think that the means of gathering the 95% confession is somewhat controversial. Does The Economist mention any of the interrogation techniques which are used by the police in gathering the confession? Human rights in Japan#Torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment makes allusions to this too, but, it would be nice if there was a citation from a well-respected publication. Neier 12:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I have checked the original reference which is the source of "conviction based on confession alone" allegation. I highly doubt that Bar association of Japan would make such simplified allegation. Anyway, why is it that some outrageous allegation about Japan (or non Western countries) are readily accepted without any critical thinking. I remember while back about hoax news about 1000s of Japanese people being fooled into buying baby sheep thinking that it was dog. Is it some sort of built in prejudice about savagery of non white? A common sense would tell you that no civilized society would survive under such corrupt judicial system.
Oh, the reason most conviction accompany confession is that it speed up the sentencing process. Even if prosecutors think they have enough evidences to convict, they prefer to avoid arguing over evidence in the court which is time consuming. So first thing they do is to present the evidence to the defense and wait for confession before pressing charge.
Due to the wikipedia rule, I'm not going to dispute the validity of article written by Western media. Still, I highly doubt that majority of English language newspaper article are written by someone who can read Japanese even at elementary school level. I met some in Japan who make living writing about Japan and none can read let alone write Japanese. I hear that the situation is pretty much the same in any reporting involving non English speaking countries. Vapour (talk) 14:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- If any editor can find sources showing that Western media is inaccurately portraying the conviction rate and methods used in Japan then pls bring them here. At present the article reflects the sources available. (These sources are seen as reliable in other matters.) SmithBlue (talk) 09:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I says, I'm not going to bend verifiability rule. Anyway, due to extensive use of Chinese characters, it is impossible to be functionally literate in Japanese without at least 5 years of formal instruction at University level institute. The fact that only handful of Japan correspondence journalists list any formal education in Japanese in their profile says a lot. It is far more astonishing considering that there are ten of thousands of Japanese nationals who get university bachelor degree in English speaking countries. On the other hand, someone like Karel van Wolferen made million writing about Japan and he can't even speak Japanese at functional level after living over a decade in Japan. Vapour (talk)
- While what you present does mean we should be cautious, I suggest that "The International Bar Association", ("which encompasses the Japanese Federation Of Bar Associations cited problems in its "Interrogation of Criminal Suspects in Japan"), is a well respected body which would not make spurious claims that conflicted with the position of its Japanese members. I also question your belief that "no civilized society would survive under such corrupt judicial system" pointing to the unacceptably high rates of false convictions as revealed by DNA testing of old evidence. These false convictions have been found in many civilized societies and point to a widespread mispractice by police. In all I think presenting the sources we have at the moment is something that we can do with an acceptable degree of confidence in their portraying accurately the situation. SmithBlue (talk) 01:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- As I says, I'm not going to bend verifiability rule. Anyway, due to extensive use of Chinese characters, it is impossible to be functionally literate in Japanese without at least 5 years of formal instruction at University level institute. The fact that only handful of Japan correspondence journalists list any formal education in Japanese in their profile says a lot. It is far more astonishing considering that there are ten of thousands of Japanese nationals who get university bachelor degree in English speaking countries. On the other hand, someone like Karel van Wolferen made million writing about Japan and he can't even speak Japanese at functional level after living over a decade in Japan. Vapour (talk)
[edit] Verifiable and reliable sources
The recent edits claiming corruption in Japanese police need to have WP:VER verifiable and WP:RS reliable sources quoted with the material. Otherwise no reader or editor can tell if the material is accurate or not. Please discuss here before re-adding material without references. SmithBlue (talk) 01:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] History: Ln. 7
I noticed a problem within in the information about flogging given on
line seven. It says that a whole village could be flogged or put to death, but then does not go on to specify if they even did; or if so to what extent and how common it was. I find this to be an important bit of information because without it, the article could lead to a misconception rather than solid fact. If you are reading this thank you for your consideration, and I hope to see this remedied.
-Searchman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.215.29.214 (talk) 06:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
