Once the trial began, Matsumoto’s side repeatedly demanded that the identity of the woman making the accusation be revealed. In a written statement submitted in March, they demanded the woman’s “name,” “address,” “date of birth,” as well as her “mobile phone number,” “LINE account,” and even a “photo showing her appearance.” Bunshun resisted this and the trial came to a standstill. Matsumoto’s side then presented some startling evidence. The evidence submitted as “Exhibit 6” was “an online post made by an expose streamer containing the woman’s real name.” Matsumoto’s side claims that “exposers have identified ‘Ms. A’ and ‘Ms. B’ on social media.” They presented an online post containing the name of the woman alleged to be the accuser as evidence in court. It is unlikely that a judge will trust the online posts of an “exposeur broadcaster.” Still, what was the purpose of Matsumoto’s side in submitting this as “evidence in court”? In civil trials, the “principle of open trials” dictates that evidence and documents submitted are open to the public and can usually be seen by anyone who goes to court. Therefore, if an “online post” containing the woman’s real name was submitted to court, it would be “exposed” to the public, which could put pressure on the woman. In the end, this “evidence” was banned by court order, but it is possible that Matsumoto’s strategy ended up being “psychological pressure on the woman.” Subsequently, further actions by Matsumoto were reported, including attempts to prevent the female accuser from appearing in court. The July 11 issue of Shukan Bunshun reported that Matsumoto’s lawyers used a detective to tail the women who were suing him for sexual assault. It was also reported that he demanded that the woman’s lawyer not allow the woman to appear in court, and when he refused, he made a threatening statement, saying, “I can stop the articles about your affair with the woman.” Matsumoto’s lawyer also denied any “manipulation,” but admitted to hiring a detective and contacting the woman’s lawyer, drawing criticism from the public. Then, the month after this “obstruction of court appearance” was reported, the trial was suddenly halted. The trial date scheduled for August 14 was canceled the day before, leaving all future plans blank, an unusual development. Looking back, it seems that from this point on Matsumoto’s side decided to move toward ending the trial. This is what led to the current “withdrawal of the lawsuit.” Check the source for the full story.
>>1 I couldn’t understand why Bunshun accepted Matsumoto’s apology, which is hardly an apology, but after reading this article I finally understand. What Matsumoto is doing is just like the Yakuza. It has become a trial where the purpose is not to win, but to attack the other party. I guess Bunshun was forced to drop the lawsuit in order to protect the woman.
>>1 This is tough. What has Matsumoto been left with after this trial, which lasted for about nine and a half months since it was filed on January 22? Looking back, what comes to mind is the image of Matsumoto as a “fiercely aggressive” man. They even forced the woman to reveal her address and phone number, and applied pressure on her outside of court as well. This type of behavior is not seen in regular court cases. Now that our efforts have not borne fruit in court, these are the only thoughts I am left with. “So this is what Matsumoto Hitoshi was like.”
>>3 Nishiwaki is a female lawyer? I thought that was odd, but it makes sense if she’s on Matsumoto’s side. In Japanese culture, if you want to gain an advantage in a negotiation, it’s best to choose someone older than the other party. I thought it was strange that he hired people like minions who couldn’t stand up to him.
I’m sure a lot of people have found out about Matsumoto’s past behavior and words because of this incident. People who aren’t interested won’t even look into it, so this is what hurts the most lol.
Matsu-chan I’m sad So it was a lie that it was unfounded You have to keep going until you win the lawsuit You admitted the facts and apologized I’m disappointed in you
Matsumoto should have just admitted the facts and apologized from the start like Tamaki did. It was stupid to say “I’ll fight because it’s baseless.” Saying it’s baseless was a blatant lie.
If he wants to come back he should at least hold a press conference. He’s a real scumbag and a coward who doesn’t even have the courage to protect his juniors.
Well, now I understand that they can make a manual, create a team of celebrities to frame them, and create as many fabrications as they want with testimony alone after the facts are established, making the magazines rich.
Matsumoto can’t come up with a strategy for the trial. It’s a matter of whether or not they give the go-ahead to his lawyer’s ideas, and I don’t think it’s right to deny Matsumoto’s character. That’s how it was a trial that they couldn’t win no matter what they did.
>>47 If it’s a case that can be won no matter what, Bunshun has no incentive to take action when both sides call it “unresolved” or “half-baked.” If A-ko’s appearance in court is worth 100 million yen, then they should have gone that far. No matter how much Matsumoto Hitoshi and his lawyers struggle, it’s impossible to prevent them from appearing in court. “Matsumoto Hitoshi might hire a sniper. Are they saying that “we agreed to end the trial in order to protect A-ko”?
He’s a good lawyer in the eyes of society, doing anything for Matsumoto. As a result, we lost the case. Is he holding a grudge, shifting the blame to his lawyer, and trying to get back on TV?
Comments