Yoshiro?

by **Infected Mushroom** » Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:06 pm

First let me explain the scenario:

A murderer who goes by the alias "Yoshiro" has been going around Tokyo killing people (there are 12 victims). He has perfected the art of murder and leaves behind absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

Detective Takada has been charged with investigating the Yoshiro case. Takada has zoomed in on a single Suspect. He has absolutely no proof but the Suspect has the right psychological profile and he was around two of the places around the time two of the murders occurred. Takada invites the Suspect in for some tea where he proceeds to interrogate him.

The Suspect insists that he knows nothing about the Yoshiro murders. When pressed on his whereabouts during the times of the murders, the Suspect insists that he doesn't remember. After about 30 mins of this back and forth, Takada says:

"Alright. You may go. It seems I was mistaken."

Before the Suspect leaves, Takada adds: "By the way, I think its only fair that you are compensated for the time you spent in this unfair interrogation. Come back tomorrow at 3 PM to this place, I shall have a sum of compensation for you."

The Suspect is pleased. Then the following exchange happens:

Takada: ...Yoshiro?

Suspect: Yes?

Takada: Do you think 11,000 Yen, in cheque will do?

Suspect: I think its fair.

Takada: Yoshiro?

Suspect: Yes?

Takada: Thank you for your time.

...

Shortly after leaving the building, Takada's officers surround the Suspect and arrest him for the Yoshiro murders.

In a court of law, the ONLY EVIDENCE against the Suspect are as follows:

1. The Suspect is established to have been very close to the place where two of the 12 murders occurred (no one knows where he was during the time of the other murders, the Suspect has no alibis, they insist "they don't remember where they were"

2. The Suspect answered Takada's calling of him by the name "Yoshiro" twice during the informal interrogation

(There is absolutely no other evidence)

...

Discussion:

1. If you were on the jury, and you were asked to convict only if is "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the Suspect is the murderer... would you convict? Is there enough evidence?

2. What is the weight that should be afforded to the fact that in an informal investigation, while distracted, the Suspect responded twice without objection/comment while being called Yoshiro?

3. (this is a slightly different take from 1); do you PERSONALLY think (irrespective of jury duty) that the Suspect, based on the facts, was Yoshiro?

Please discuss and explain your answers.

by **Bombadil** » Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:29 pm

It comes from the meaning 'happy individual' or 'happy person', and of course he's happy to just receive $1000..

Case dismissed, Takada fined for frivolous use of courts time.

by **Infected Mushroom** » Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:38 pm

Bombadil wrote:It comes from the meaning 'happy individual' or 'happy person', and of course he's happy to just receive $1000..

Case dismissed, Takada fined for frivolous use of courts time.

well technically it wouldn't be Takada, it would be the prosecutor's office

by **Bombadil** » Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:42 pm

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Bombadil wrote:It comes from the meaning 'happy individual' or 'happy person', and of course he's happy to just receive $1000..

Case dismissed, Takada fined for frivolous use of courts time.

well technically it wouldn't be Takada, it would be the prosecutor's office

"You're out of order! You're out of order! The whole trial is out of order!"

by **Page** » Sun Aug 12, 2018 11:10 pm

1. If you were on the jury, and you were asked to convict only if is "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the Suspect is the murderer... would you convict? Is there enough evidence?

As a juror I would have to acquit. Responding to the name Yoshiro is not proof. The suspect already knows that the detective believes that he is Yoshiro, which explains why he would answer to the name. It is not difficult to get someone to answer to another name, either. It is not only a certain sequence of syllables that get one's attention that they are being addressed, it is also a matter of the tone of voice, eye contact, and other nonverbal language. Most people when addressed by the wrong name but still thinking it is they who are being addressed would still answer, maybe correcting the person who addressed them or maybe not.

Being near the scene of two of the twelve murders is also insufficient, especially in a large city. If the suspect was near two of twelve murder scenes in rural hinterlands, or near six of the twelve murder scenes in the city, I would have a greater suspicion.

But essentially what we have is a profile which I do not consider solid evidence, him answering to a name which is not solid evidence, and him being present near two of the twelve murder scenes in a large city which is still well within the possibility of coincidental.

2. What is the weight that should be afforded to the fact that in an informal investigation, while distracted, the Suspect responded twice without objection/comment while being called Yoshiro?

Very little. I have seen how an intelligent person who understands psychology can provoke even more explicit false confessions. Rather than merely answering to a name, there have been several people who have confessed in detail: "I killed (name) with (murder weapon) at (crime scene). And some of these people have been exonerated, or their confession is shown to be extremely dubious because of the tactics used to get them to confess. For an example of this, you can find The Confession Tapes on Netflix. The first episode had a young suspect "confessing" to an undercover cop disguised as a mobster named Mr. Big. Several months worth of effort went into eliciting this confession and when you look at the entire case, you can see it's extremely unlikely that the suspects were actually behind the murder.

So since I have to be skeptical even of an explicit confession in which one says "I killed ____", I have to be even more skeptical of merely answering to a name.

3. (this is a slightly different take from 1); do you PERSONALLY think (irrespective of jury duty) that the Suspect, based on the facts, was Yoshiro?

I don't see any evidence to show this guy wasn't Yoshiro, and only a few small things to suggest that he was, so I am true agnostic on this one, I don't have enough to lean toward innocent or guilty. I simply don't know.

by **Soldati Senza Confini** » Sun Aug 12, 2018 11:22 pm

There is no evidence to convict, so no, I wouldn't convict on the hearsay and the answer call of a person to another.

This would be a travesty of justice if carried out.

by **Ifreann** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 1:59 am

How do the police know the name of the murderer if there's no evidence at any of the crime scenes?

by **Vassenor** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:04 am

No. If the only evidence you have is "responded to a name" you're not even close to proving the case beyond reasonable doubt. In fact you're not even close to proving the case on the balance of probabilities either.

by **Vassenor** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:05 am

Ifreann wrote:How do the police know the name of the murderer if there's no evidence at any of the crime scenes?

You're not supposed to question things like that, or come up with plausible alternative scenarios that completely wreck the thought experiment.

by **The New California Republic** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:21 am

Ifreann wrote:How do the police know the name of the murderer if there's no evidence at any of the crime scenes?

Yes I was wondering this too. Maybe a ghost informed him.

by **The Multiverse of Holly Starlight** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:25 am

The New California Republic wrote:
Ifreann wrote:How do the police know the name of the murderer if there's no evidence at any of the crime scenes?

Yes I was wondering this too. Maybe a ghost informed him.

Erm... Aliens.

But then again, further investigation is needed, I suppose? You cannot just arrest someone because he was there, and because he responded to that name, which is an alias.

Even a Facebook search would yield tens of results, so the police database would provide a hundred more Yoshiros.

1. If you were on the jury, and you were asked to convict only if is "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the Suspect is the murderer... would you convict? Is there enough evidence?

> No.

2. What is the weight that should be afforded to the fact that in an informal investigation, while distracted, the Suspect responded twice without objection/comment while being called Yoshiro?

> No. Like I said, there can be many people with the name Yoshiro.

3. (this is a slightly different take from 1); do you PERSONALLY think (irrespective of jury duty) that the Suspect, based on the facts, was Yoshiro?

> No. See above.

What I would do, is probably to secrectly tell the police to monitor the man, to keep a close eye on him in case this "Yoshiro" is the suspect that they are looking for.

by **Runestasia** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:26 am

This would be the flimsiest and nonsensical court case in the history of law.

by **Thermodolia** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:27 am

No evidence no trial.

I think we are done here.

Well that was fun, another IM thread come and gone.

by **Runestasia** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:28 am

Thermodolia wrote:No evidence no trial.

I think we are done here.

Well that was fun, another IM thread come and gone.

First it was GoT, now it's some new franchise.

by **The New California Republic** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:32 am

Runestasia wrote:This would be the flimsiest and nonsensical court case in the history of law.

It isn't even law. It is a bunch of nonsensical and unrelated events that doesn't constitute evidence. There wouldn't be any trial. No prosecutor on the face of the earth would attempt to bring this to trial. Any trial in this case would be a show trial that would put even Stalin to shame...

by **Thermodolia** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:36 am

The New California Republic wrote:
Runestasia wrote:This would be the flimsiest and nonsensical court case in the history of law.

It isn't even law. It is a bunch of nonsensical and unrelated events that doesn't constitute evidence. There wouldn't be any trial. No prosecutor on the face of the earth would attempt to bring this to trial. Any trial in this case would be a show trial that would put even Stalin to shame...

Hummm think think think .

Wants to ban dogs? Check
Wants to ban suits? Check
Wants to install Governors on cars that tell the police where you are when you speed? Check
Advocates for other super totalitarian bonkers ideas? Check

Guys I think IM is the reincarnation of Stalin

by **The New California Republic** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:41 am

Thermodolia wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:It isn't even law. It is a bunch of nonsensical and unrelated events that doesn't constitute evidence. There wouldn't be any trial. No prosecutor on the face of the earth would attempt to bring this to trial. Any trial in this case would be a show trial that would put even Stalin to shame...

Hummm think think think .

Wants to ban dogs? Check
Wants to ban suits? Check
Wants to install Governors on cars that tell the police where you are when you speed? Check
Advocates for other super totalitarian bonkers ideas? Check

Guys I think IM is the reincarnation of Stalin

Did Stalin believe in ghosts? There'd be a hell of a waiting list of gulag ghosts waiting to haunt him. They'd need to take a numbered ticket and take a seat...

by **Geneviev** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:39 am

That's really, really not evidence. So...

1. No. There's practically no evidence.
2. It doesn't matter, people respond to names that aren't their names.
3. No.

by **Ifreann** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:42 am

The New California Republic wrote:
Ifreann wrote:How do the police know the name of the murderer if there's no evidence at any of the crime scenes?

Yes I was wondering this too. Maybe a ghost informed him.

And what if the suspect's name just is Yoshiro?

"And you admit that you answered to the name Yoshiro?"
"Well that is my name, so yes..."
"I rest my case, your honour!"

by **The New California Republic** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:52 am

Ifreann wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Yes I was wondering this too. Maybe a ghost informed him.

And what if the suspect's name just is Yoshiro?

"And you admit that you answered to the name Yoshiro?"
"Well that is my name, so yes..."
"I rest my case, your honour!"

It's like assuming that Russell's teapot belongs to me, as my name actually is Russell. Don't know how it ended up in space though...

by **The Holy Therns** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:56 am

IM, you should never be on a jury.

by **The Multiverse of Holly Starlight** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 5:21 am

To add on to this, "Innocent until proven guilty" plays a part, but the proof itself has to be concrete. As I have said, there are so many Yoshiros in Japan alone, and that is exactly why he used that alias to blend in.

A sensible thing to do is to just let him go, but keep a look out on him for a good 30 days or even months. Some might say it's an intrusion of his privacy, but it is a much more viable option to do towards a suspect rather than arresting him over filmsy evidence.

Or you could even let him go for reals and don't check on him. If he happens to be at another crime scene (or a would-be crime), then it's probably not a coincidence anymore and you can probably chalk it up to something.

by **Chan Island** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 5:57 am

Responding to the name, especially after a 30 minute discussion where the suspect has been told the detective suspects he is Yoshiro. Of course the person has been primed to respond to the name.

In addition, Yoshiro means happy person. And I don't know about you, but I'd be very happy to find that the detective has cleared me from a murder suspect list (because &%*@! that's a scary place to be) and is also giving me 11000 yen (which is not a bad sum of money) for the trouble. So yes, calling me 'happy person' would elicit a response from me.

Also, being close to 2 out of 12 murder locations, especially in as big and dense a city as Tokyo, is flimsy evidence.

by **Ifreann** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:01 am

The New California Republic wrote:
Ifreann wrote:And what if the suspect's name just is Yoshiro?

"And you admit that you answered to the name Yoshiro?"
"Well that is my name, so yes..."
"I rest my case, your honour!"

It's like assuming that Russell's teapot belongs to me, as my name actually is Russell. Don't know how it ended up in space though...

Maybe Yoshiro stole it from you?

by **The New California Republic** » Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:03 am

Ifreann wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:It's like assuming that Russell's teapot belongs to me, as my name actually is Russell. Don't know how it ended up in space though...

Maybe Yoshiro stole it from you?

Yoshiro's list of crimes is growing...

Yoshiro?

Yoshiro?

Who is online