The Yomiuri ShimbunThis court ruling followed the principle of “doubt should favor the accused.”

A retrial has been granted for Mika Nishiyama, a former assistant nurse at Koto Memorial Hospital in Higashiomi, Shiga Prefecture. Nishiyama’s 12-year prison sentence for murder — she allegedly killed a patient at the hospital by intentionally removing his artificial respirator — was finalized, and she served her term behind bars.

The Supreme Court has supported an Osaka High Court ruling that approved the start of a retrial for Nishiyama on the grounds that it was possible the patient died from natural causes. There is a strong probability that Nishiyama will be declared not guilty at the upcoming retrial.

The major requirement for commencing a retrial is that the evidence presented must be new and clear. In this case, the main points of contention were over the veracity of evidence pertaining to the patient’s cause of death and the reliability of Nishiyama’s confession during the investigation.

With regard to the cause of death, the Osaka High Court recognized new evidence submitted by the defense lawyers, including detailed written opinions by doctors. The court concluded, based on blood data taken when the autopsy was performed, that it was possible the patient died naturally due to an irregular heartbeat.

Given that the judges held a strong belief that this was not a case of murder, granting a retrial was a natural step to take.

Nishiyama confessed during the investigation. During the trial, she changed her position and insisted she was innocent. However, the finalized ruling accepted the trustworthiness of her confession as “detailed and concrete.”

By contrast, the Osaka High Court raised doubts about the reliability of Nishiyama’s confession, saying there were bewildering changes on many points. It even went as far as saying it was possible Nishiyama made false statements at the inducement of investigators.

Exercise extreme care

These implications could sound a warning against investigations that rely on getting a confession.

Even if a suspect is not coerced or intimidated into confessing, there are concerns that questioning could lead to a false confession. Nishiyama reportedly had feelings of affection for a police officer handling the investigation.

Investigative authorities must tread especially carefully when dealing with a suspect who has a tendency to be compliant. Courts must exercise extreme care when determining the reliability of a confession.

The growing range of appraisal methods has resulted in retrials being granted one after another.

In connection with the so-called Osaki incident in Kagoshima Prefecture, the Kagoshima District Court deemed that a “psychological appraisal of testimony,” which psychologically analyzed the confession, had high value as evidence. The Fukuoka High Court’s Miyazaki branch said that was unreasonable and did not recognize the appraisal. The high court branch supported a retrial based on new evidence in the form of a separate forensic appraisal.

That new evidence was not decisive proof such as DNA test results that showed the crime was committed by another person, but it opened the door to a retrial.

There are no precise standards for determining how the novelty and clarity of evidence should be assessed. The Osaka High Court can be said to have widened the range of what can be accepted as new evidence for granting a retrial. The Supreme Court’s support for this move likely will have a significant influence on the ruling in that retrial.

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, March 22, 2019)Speech

Speech