途中2
1.
PERSONAL DATA - PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a)
Name: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis
Grade: LT, USN
Social Security #:
Organization: USS BENFOLD (DDG-65)
U.S. Address:
TRIAL OBSERVER'S REPORT
ON APPEAL OF
RIDGE HANNEMANN ALKONIS, LT, USN,
USS BENFOLD (DDG-65)
2. OFFENSE OF WHICH CONVICTED; SENTENCE IMPOSED BY LOWER COURT;
AND DATE OF LAST REPORT:
The accused was convicted of a violation of Article 5 of the
Law Concerning the Punishment for the Acts and So Forth Causing
Bodily Injury and Death of Others in the Operation of an
Automobile in that on 29 May 2021 the accused did, on the road
in the vicinity of # 59, Yamamiya, Fujinomiya city, Shizuoka
prefecture, Japan, cause two persons death and one person bodily
injury through negligence while operating an automobile.
The accused was sentenced by the Numazu Branch, Shizuoka
District Court, Numazu City, Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan, on 18
October 2021 to imprisonment without forced labor for a period
of three years.
The Court ordered that the accused not bear
court costs.
Court.
The previous report was dated 16 December 2021.
3. NAME, LOCATION AND TYPE OF APPELLATE COURT; AND DATE AND
PLACE OF APPEAL:
Tokyo High Court, Tokyo, Japan, Intermediate Appellate
Two appellate sessions were heard at the Tokyo High Court on
8 June and 13 July 2022.
4. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL:
The general basis for the appeal was that the sentence in
the original judgment was unreasonably severe when considering
the circumstances favorable to the accused. The defense counsel
requested the Court to overturn the original judgment and award
the accused a suspended sentence. A summary translation of the
specific reasons for the appeal is appended as Attachment 1.
5. RESULT OF APPEAL:
The original judgment was affirmed and the appeal was
dismissed.
6. FURTHER APPEAL:
No further appeal was filed by either the accused or the
prosecution and the judgment became final on 27 July 2022.
7. CITATION AND TEXT OF STATUTES PRIMARILY INVOLVED:
Law Concerning the Punishment for the Acts and So Forth Causing
Bodily Injury and Death of Others in the Operation of an
Automobile, Article 5:
"A person who fails to use such care as is required in the
conduct of operation of an automobile and thereby kills or injures
another shall be punished with imprisonment at or without forced
labor for not more than seven years or a fine not more than
1,000,000 yen. Provided that if the injury is minor, the penalty
may be remitted in the light of extenuating circumstances."
8. DEFENSE COUNSEL:
The accused selected and was represented by Mr. Yuki Ichikawa,
a Japanese attorney, who has a good command of the English
language.
Ichikawa has extensive experience in the trial of
Japanese criminal cases and is well qualified. The accused was
represented in a most able and conscientious manner.
At the request of the accused, an attorney's fee of 300,000 yen
was paid by the United States Government.
9. INTERPRETERS:
Ms. Yuko Hikimoto was appointed by the Court as its
interpreter.
Her translation was adequate. Mr. Rei Nakao of the
Staff Judge Advocate's Office, Commander, Fleet Activities
Yokosuka, Japan was assigned as the interpreter for the trial
observers at the appellate sessions. Mr. Nakao has an excellent
command of the English language and has legal experience.
10. BAIL:
Bail request was made on 18 October 2021. The request was
approved by the Numazu Branch, Shizuoka District Court on 19
October 2021. The amount of the bail on appeal was a sum of
2,000,000 yen. The Court granted that the 1,500,000 yen amount of
bail previously posted at trial on 21 June 2021 be allotted to the
amount of the bail adjudged on appeal. The additional amount of
500,000 yen was deposited on 19 October 2021, and the accused was
continued on bail on that date.
11. RESUME OF TRIAL PROCEEDINGS:
a. First Session - 8 June 2022
(1) Persons present:
Trial Observers:
Interpreter:
Judge:
(b) (6), (b)
Counsel, U.S. Forces, Japan.
(b) (6), (b)
, LCDR, JAGC, USN
Deputy FJA, Commander, U.S. Naval
Forces, Japan
Mr. (b) (6), (b) Staff Judge
Advocate's Office, Fleet
Activities, Yokosuka, Japan.
Hon. Akira Ando
Hon. Hideo Nirei
Principal Deputy
Hon. Takehiko Okada
Prosecutor:
Court Interpreter:
Accused:
Defense Counsel:
the accused.
Mr. Masanori Watanabe
Ms. Yuko Hikimoto
Ridge Hannemann Alkonis, LT,
USN
Mr. Yuki Ichikawa
(2) Proceedings:
The Court began the trial at 1105 hrs. with a five
minute delay due to the Court-appointed interpreter being five
minutes late for the trial due to traffic. The Court interpreter
was appointed and sworn in. The Court asked the accused
identifying questions, which he answered.
The presiding judge pronounced the commencement of the
proceedings at the appellate Court.
The defense counsel stated that the grounds for appeal
were as written in the Statement of Reasons for Koso Appeal (See
Attachment 1.) and the Written Correction of Statement of Reasons.
for Koso Appeal (See Attachment 2.) previously submitted to the
Court.
The prosecutor stated that the appeal should be
dismissed as the contention of the defense counsel was groundless.
The defense counsel moved to examine the evidence and
In order to support this request, the defense counsel
submitted the exhibits Ben-2 through Ben-9 and Ben-11.
The prosecution consented to the use of Ben-7, Ben-8
and Ben-11, stated that Ben-5 was not relevant and did not consent.
to the use of Ben-3, Ben-4, Ben-6 and Ben-9.
The prosecutor also stated that he consented to the
examination of the accused in regard to the facts only after the
judgment rendered in the first instance.
The defense counsel consented to the use of the exhibit
Ken-1 produced by the prosecution.
The Court ruled that the exhibits Ben-7, Ben-8 and Ben-
11 and Ken-1 were accepted by the Court while the others were
dismissed (See Attachment 4, Attachment 5, Attachment 6, Attachment
7 and Attachment 8.):
(Ben-7) The original bank transfer receipt made by
Mitsubishi UFJ Bank dated 14 February 2022, which was used to
demonstrate the accused has completed the payment of the remainder
of the monetary restitution based on the private settlement.
(Ben-8) The original bank transfer receipt made by
Mitsubishi UFJ Bank dated 14 February 2022, which was used to
demonstrate the accused has completed the payment of the remainder
of the monetary restitution based on the private settlement.
(Ben-11) The original report made by the defense
counsel dated 16 May 2022, which was used to demonstrate the
accused paid for the medical bills of the victims.
(Ken-1) Written statement made by the representative of
the victims, Ms. Tomoko Ichihara, dated 13 May 2022, which stated
the accused should have known the medical bills had been unpaid as
he kept in touch with the insurance company.
The defense counsel produced the original exhibits to
the Court for the examination.
The Court ruled that it would hear the examination of
the accused in regard to the circumstances only after the judgement
rendered in the first instance.
The accused took the stand and the defense counsel
questioned him. In response to questions by the defense counsel,
the accused testified substantially as follows:
Q: Did you break your left arm?
A: Yes.
Q: How did you break your left arm?
A: I was riding my bicycle to work when I stopped by the road and
then was hit by a car.
Q: When did it occur?
A: About a month ago.
Q: Have you fulfilled your obligation to make the compensation
for the other party after the judgment in the first instance last
October?
A: Yes.
Q: Was there a part of the compensation that the Japanese
Vehicular Compulsory Insurance and your liability insurance did not
cover?
A: Yes.
Q: How did you fund the remainder part of the settlement?
A: I used all of my personal money. I got loans from banks. My
parents gave me money from their retirement accounts and took out a
second mortgage of their home. I also collected money from my
friends and other family.
Q: Are you going to repay the money lent to you?
A: My intention is to repay the money in full, but I will need to
continue to work.
Q: Did you pay for the medical bills of the victims, the exhibit
of which was submitted to the Court?
6
A: Yes.
Q: Was there a change in your own life and your family's after
the judgment in the District Court?
A: My family has had a difficult time since the judgment. My
wife and I are on anti-anxiety drugs because of the stress. The
grief and pain from the accident is often overwhelming. My children
continue to suffer and have difficulty interacting with other kids.
Q: What about a change in your own life?
A: I feel pain, sorrow, and shame in every way possible. I feel
the burden of the damage I caused every minute of every day.
Q: Do you have something that you want to tell the Court?
A: I have so much sorrow for the pain I caused to the Sano and
Endo families. I am so sorry for the pain and suffering I caused.
Although I know I can't save or replace what they lost, I saved no
expense to pay them the restitution they deserved even at the
detriment to my own family. I am grateful for the opportunity to
pay the restitution to the Endo and Sano families and hope it makes
their lives a little easier going forward. I also wanted to say
that by sharing my medical condition I wasn't trying to relieve my
responsibility, I was just trying to tell the truth.
Then the prosecutor questioned him. In response to
questions by the prosecutor, the accused testified as follows.
Q: Did you go to the scene of the accident after the judgment in
the first instance?
A: No.
Q: Does that mean you did not pray for the two deceased at the
site of the accident?
A: I pray for the victims every single day.
Q: Why did you not pray for them at the scene of the accident?
A: I apologize if not going back to site was offensive. If I had
known, I would have gone back. I apologize.
The hearing was concluded.
b. Second Session - 13 July 2022
(1) Persons present
Same as in the previous session
(2) Proceedings:
The Court reopened the trial at 1500 hrs. Judgment was
rendered. The appeal was dismissed and the lower Court judgment
was affirmed. (See Attachment 3).
The accused was advised that an appeal to the Supreme
Court of Japan could be made within 14 days from the next date of
this judgment.
12. SAFEGUARDS:
In the opinion of the trial observers and as shown above, all
safeguards secured by the Status of Forces Agreement between the
governments of the United States and Japan were observed.
(b) (6), (b)
(b) (6), (b)
U.S. Forces, Japan
United States Representative
8/22/22
Date
Principal Deputy Counsel
(b) (6), (b)
LCDR [(b) (6), (b) JAGC, USN
Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Japan
United States Representative
8/17/22
Date
Attachment 1
2021 (U) No.1854
Statement of Reasons for Koso Appeal
Inflicting Death and Bodily Injury through Negligence in Operating
an Automobile
The accused: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis
In regard to the above case against the aforementioned accused, the
reasons for koso appeal are as follows.
5 January 2022
9
Defense Counsel: Yuki Ichikawa /seal/
To the 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court
I. Inappropriateness of sentencing
1. Sentencing in the original judgment is unreasonably severe.
This is a case that occurred when the accused and his family went
for a drive in the direction of Mt. Fuji and while the accused was
driving from the fifth station of Mt. Fuji to a farm in Fujinomiya
City, he felt something physically wrong, but he thought that he
would soon reach his destination, and continued driving, fell into
a state of drowsiness, permitted his car to proceed into a parking
lot on the right side of the road in his direction of travel, where
his vehicle rear-ended a car parked in the said parking lot,
killing two people outside the car and caused minor injury upon one
person.
The fact that the two victims lost their lives must be solemnly
accepted, and the accused is fully aware of his responsibility.
However, the sentence of unsuspended three-year imprisonment
imposed by the original judgment must be termed too severe
considering the circumstances of the case. It must be said that the
original judgment gave so much consideration to the (family of)
victim who participated in the proceedings that it deviated from
the righteous sentencing that should have been determined based on
the circumstances of this case.
Additionally, in this case, there exist circumstances to be
considered in favor of the accused as described in the following
paragraph, and therefore, a suspended sentence should be awarded in
this case.
2. Circumstances to be considered favorably for the accused:
10
(1) Regarding compensation for damages
a. The accused reached a settlement with the victims and families on
October 13, 2021 (Defense Exhibits Ben-31 in the original trial), and
has already paid 87 million yen, and the remaining amount pending is
expected to be paid by the due date by collecting insurance money.
The original judgment states that the settlement with the victims
and their families was made as to "a civil settlement for personal
damage" (p. 6), recognizing as if no settlement had been reached for
property damages, but in fact, the settlement agreement includes a
liquidation clause (Article 6 of the notarial deed of debt recognition
and repayment agreement (Defense Exhibits Ben-31 of the original
trial), and in the legal sense, a settlement including damage to
persons and property has been reached, because of which, it is an
error in the fact recognition in the original judgment. The factual
error in the original judgment probably stems from a misunderstanding
of the legal meaning of Exhibit KOU-36 (Telephonic interview record),
but the above settlement was all accepted by the accused without any
dispute as to the amount of damage from the viewpoint of early
implementation of compensation for the damage requested by the victims
(It can be said that if the case. were to go to a civil trial, the
amount would be lower than the victims' calculation in terms of lost.
earnings, etc., and the total amount would likely be considerably
lower than the settlement amount), and as the settlement including
the liquidation clause was thus reached, from which it can be said in
the legal sense that it is a settlement that includes both personal
and property damage, and from a practical point of view, it is
sufficient as a settlement for the victims' total damages.
b. As mentioned above, a settlement for all damages was reached
between the accused and the victims and their families, and the
accused is not legally obligated to make any other payment, but after
the original judgment, the accused has been paying the victims'
medical expenses by himself (Defense Exhibits Ben-1). The accused's
life is in a very difficult situation because he had to give up almost
all of his property to settle the case, but he paid the medical
expenses out of a desire to help the victims as much as possible.
c. In addition, the accused has reached settlements with victims of
property damage, other than the victims involved in the prosecution
of this case, and has completed the payment of settlements (Defense
Exhibits Ben-32 of the original trial). Regarding this point, the
original judgment states that "a civil settlement has been reached
for the victims who died and the victim who suffered injury..."
(page 6 of the original judgment), which makes it seem as if no
compensation had been made to the other victims of property damage,
and if this is the intention of the original judgment, it is a
clear error.
The accused has reached settlements with all the victims of the
accident in this case and has made reparations, and such his sincere
attitude must be fully appreciated, and it is not appropriate to
sentence him to three years without forced labor in prison without
its suspension.
d. Due to differences in understanding of how insurance operates in
Japan and in the U.S., automobile insurance policies purchased by
the U.S. military personnel in Japan often do not have unlimited
bodily injury coverage, and this was the case with the accused.
Unfortunately, as is often the case with U.S. military personnel
in Japan, they just purchase insurance with liability limits and
cause traffic accidents that result in grave damages. In many of
such cases, victims receive only payments from the Japanese
Compulsory Insurance and a limited amount of liability insurance,
which is insufficient to settle the case with the parties who cause
the accident, and sometimes appropriate compensation for damages is
not made.
In this case, however, the accused was able to procure a large
sum of money on his own in addition to the insurance money and
reach a settlement, which is extremely rare. The U.S. Navy
commanders also recognized that the accused's settlement was the
most expensive among the cases of the U.S. servicemen stationed at
Yokosuka Base (Defense Exhibits Ben-2 and Ben-3).
Although it cannot be said that there will be absolutely no
traffic accidents in the future involving vehicles driven by the
U.S. military personnel who do not have sufficient insurance, the
right assessment of sentencing in this case will contribute to the
compensation for damages in other cases in the future, and on the
contrary, rewarding the accused who procured a large sum of money
on his own and settled the case with a unsuspended three-year
prison sentence will even be an obstacle to appropriate
compensation for damages in other cases in the future.
(2) Regarding other circumstances to be considered in favor of the
accused
a. The accused has spent more than half of his ten-year military
career in Japan, and has devoted himself to the defense of our
country. The accused has gained the good confidence from senior
military officials (Defense Exhibits Ben-2 and Ben-3) and also by
an important person in the United States (Defense Exhibits Ben-4),
all of whom earnestly requested that the Court give the accused a
suspended sentence.
In addition, the accused is loved and appreciated by many
Japanese citizens, and they are all begging for a lenient
disposition for the accused (Defense Exhibits Ben-1 through Ben-11
of the original trial).
b. The accused has no previous conviction or criminal record in
Japan or in the United States. It is possible for a first-time
traffic offender to be sentenced to imprisonment without
suspension, but particularly in this case, the gravity of the
sentencing is too harsh.
12
c. Although it should be naturally condemned that the accused
continued driving despite the fact that he felt some abnormality in
his physical condition, which caused the grave consequences. What
the accused was feeling at the time of the accident in this case
was not the feeling of "sleepiness" caused by a lack of sleep in
daily life, but rather the feeling of being in a state of a nap and
losing consciousness (Refer to Postscript II for details). At the
time of the accident, the accused was neither drinking nor taking
drugs (Page 5 of the accused's statement), and he had had enough
sleep from the day before to the morning of the day of the accident
(Page 3 to 4 of the said statement). He had not yawned or felt
like closing his eyelids just before the accident (Page 5 of the
said statement). When they were almost to their destination and the
accused's wife was feeling uncomfortable due to car sickness (Page
6 to 7 of the said statement), it is not at all incomprehensible
that he continued to drive because he wanted to reach the
destination as soon as possible.
The manner of the accident in this case cannot be termed
extremely malicious, and the sentence of three years in prison is
clearly too harsh.
d. The accused deeply regrets this case and stated that he would
never drive in Japan again (Page 8 of the accused's statement).
The accused is a service member of the U.S. Armed Forces and will
eventually be returned to his home country and discharged there
(Page 10 to 11 of the said statement). It is almost impossible for
the accused to come to Japan after that under the immigration
control administration, so there is no possibility that the accused
will repeat an offense again in Japan.
In addition, the accused's wife testified at the original trial
that she would strictly supervise the accused, and the accused
himself swore that he would never commit a crime again, including
careless driving (Page 11 of the accused's statement), so there is
no possibility of the accused committing another crime in any
countries other than Japan as well.
13
e. Although there seems to have been a misunderstanding by the
member of the bereaved families who participated in the trial, the
accused wrote a letter of sincere apology to the victims and their
families from the beginning and tried to deliver it to the victims
and their families through the U.S. military legal office staff
(Page 15 to 17 of the accused's statement and Defense Exhibits Ben-
2 and Ben-3, etc.). In addition, around that time, the liaison for
the victims' families was not the member of the bereaved families,
who participated in the trial, but her husband (Page 20 of the said
statement). It is true that the accused contacted the bereaved
member for compensation for damages after he was released on bail,
but in a case like this, where a large amount of compensation is
required, the accused himself must secure the compensation funds,
and contacting the bereaved for compensation for damages after he
was released on bail itself is not something that deserves strong
criticism. (In practice, it is not unusual to discuss settlement
for compensation for damages after an accused is prosecuted.) At
the very least, the fact that the original judgment recognized that
"the accused's initial response was inadequate" (Page 6) and
considered this to be disadvantageous circumstances for the accused
is a clear error.
Furthermore, the victim (Fumiko Endo), who lost her own mother
and husband, and was herself injured, commented on her feelings
regarding punishment: "I myself was also victimized at the scene,
so I know that the offender had small children, and I have very
complicated feelings. However, considering the feelings of my
deceased husband, I want the perpetrator to be punished
appropriately in accordance with the law" (Page 6 of Exhibits KOU-
27), which shows a somewhat different view from that of the member
of the bereaved families who participated in the trial (this point
was also pointed out by the prosecutor during the questioning of
the accused at the original trial (Page 14 of the accused's
statement).
In addition to the circumstances described above, considering the
fact that a settlement was reached between the accused and the
victims and their families, and the fact that the accused has
already made compensatory payments of the high amount of 87 million
yen with funds raised by himself (not from the insurance money), it
is too harsh to sentence the accused to three-year imprisonment in
this case, even considering the feelings of the victims' families.
3. Conclusion
In light of the foregoing circumstances, the unsuspended three-
year imprisonment sentence is clearly too harsh a punishment for
this case, and the accused should rather be given a judgment with a
suspended sentence.
It is certainly important to isten sincerely to the victim'
voice, but this should not undermine the ideal amount of
punishment. If this case is a negative case, it will be difficult
to have "a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and
impartial tribunal" (Article 14 Paragraph 1 of the Covenant B of
the International Covenant on Human Rights).
14
The assessment of weighing penalty in the original judgment is
unjust and has to be overturned.
II. Regarding supplementary explanation
Since, in the original judgment, the accused's statement seemed
to be misunderstood and it was adjudged as if the accused denied
the alleged facts of the indictment (Page 8 and below), the defense
counsel will correct the error in this regard.
1. Since the investigation stage, the accused has consistently
conveyed to he court
he explai:
the original trial
(Pages 4 to 6 of the accused's statement) about the circumstances
under which he was about to fall into a doze just before the
accident in question, and this was not the first time he had
mentioned it at the trial stage.
The words used by the accused to describe the sensation just
before the accident in this case were tired and drowsy, but
translating the drowsy sensation as "drowsiness" is not a
mistranslation, and the defense counsel did not dare to dispute the
use of the word "drowsiness" (the translation in the following
Exhibit Ben-6 also translates the drowsy sensation as
"drowsiness".).
2. However, it is not clear from the evidence submitted by the
prosecutor, including the protocol recording the statement of the
accused, why the accused fell into such a state. As mentioned
above, the accused gave the same explanation at the investigation
stage as he did at the original trial, but the reason why this was
not recorded in the protocol recording the statement of the accused
seems to have resulted from the fact that the word "drowsy" used by
the accused in the interrogation was taken to mean "drowsiness" for
the moment and further investigation of finding the real cause was
avoided regarding the cause of the accident, which had not been
specified more than "due to some cause" in the early stages of the
investigation (Defense Exhibits Ben-5), under the circumstances
where, regrettably, due to a problem with the interpreter's
ability, the accused's statement was not conveyed correctly to the
police officers and the prosecutor.
3. As the accused stated at the original trial (Page 7 to 8 of the
accused's statement), the accused was examined by a neurologist at
Yokosuka Base on orders from the military authority, and the doctor
diagnosed the cause of his falling into a state of unconsciousness
as acute mountain sickness (Defense Exhibits Ben-6). On this
point, the original judgment denied the above diagnosis by
developing a "general" theory without any medical basis (Page 4).
However, such an attitude of the original judgment is not only
medically incorrect, but also contrary to the finding of the truth
in that it abandons the investigation of the cause of why the
accused fell into a state of unconsciousness, and even if the
contents of the above-mentioned statement of the accused are not
used as a disadvantageous circumstance against the accused (this
point is unclear from the original judgment), it is not
appropriate.
15
The reason why the defense attorney mentioned this point is not
only to discover the truth, but also to point out that the accused
is not supposed to be more strongly blamed for the cause of the
accident, but that the circumstances can be rather considered to be
more favorable to the accused when comparing this case with such
common cases of falling asleep at the wheel and causing a traffic
accident due to lack of sleep, flu symptoms, etc., from which
common cases this case is different in that the reason why the
accused fell into a state of "drowsy" and went into a state of
unconsciousness was not due to the cause of feeling "drowsy" in
daily life, such as at the time of lack of sleep or just before
going to bed, but due to the cause that is not experienced usually.
III. Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, the defense counsel sincerely moves
that the original judgment be quashed and that the accused be
granted a judgment with a suspended sentence.
Attachment 2
2021 (U) No. 1854
Written Correction of Statement of Reasons for Koso Appeal
Inflicting Death and Bodily Injury through Negligence in Operating
an Automobile
The accused: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis
In regard to the above case against the aforementioned accused, the
defense counsel has, as below, made corrections to part of
Statement of Reasons for Koso Appeal dated 15 January 2022.
16 May 2022
Defense Counsel: Yuki Ichikawa /seal/
To the 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court
1. The content of I. 2. (1) b. is corrected as below.
17
b. The accused has paid the victims' medical expenses by himself
after the original judgment (Defense Exhibits Ben-11). The
accused's life is in a very difficult situation because he had to
give up almost all of his property to settle the case, but he paid
the medical expenses out of a desire to help the victims as much as
possible.
2. The first sentence in I. 2. (1) c. is corrected as below.
In addition, the accused has reached settlements with 5 victims of
property damage, other than the victims involved in the prosecution
of this case, and has completed the payment of settlements (Defense
Exhibits Ben-23 through Ben-30 and Material 9 and 10 of Ben-32 of
the original trial).
Attachment 3
Pronounced on 13 July 2022 Court clerk: Nobuko Sekiguchi
2021 (U) No. 1854
Judgment
Nationality: The United States of Americal
Address: #6 -2, #1 Chome, Mabori-kaigan, Yokosuka City, Kanagawa
Prefecture
Military Service Member
Text
Ridge Hannemann Alkonis
In regard to the accused case of Inflicting Death and Bodily
Injury through Negligence in Operating an Automobile against the
aforementioned person, the accused filed a koso appeal against
the judgment rendered by Numazu Branch, Shizuoka District Court,
on 18 October 2021. This Court, hearing the case at the
presence of the prosecutor Masanori Watanabe, makes a judgment
as follows.
Date of Birth:
Rationale
The Court dismisses the koso appeal in this case.
1. Reasons for Koso Appeal of the defense counsel Yuki
Ichikawa states that the sentencing of the original
judgment that sentenced the accused to imprisonment without
forced labor for a period of three years is too harsh and
is unjust, and a suspended sentence should be awarded.
2. This case is a case in which the accused did, at or about
1300 on 29 May 2021, while driving an ordinary passenger
vehicle and proceeding on the road in Fujinomiya City,
Shizuoka Prefecture, continue driving notwithstanding that
he felt drowsy, through which negligence, the accused did,
at or about 1309 on the said day, while proceeding at the
speed of approximately 45 kilometers per hour, falling into
a state of unconsciousness, steering his own vehicle off
into the off-street parking lot, permitting his own vehicle
to collide with the parked vehicles, thereby permitting the
vehicles to be pushed out, catching a male victim (54 years
old at that time) and a female victim (85 years old at that
time), who was his mother-in-law, in between each parked
vehicle one after another, injuring them, killing the two
victims, and did, permitted the parked vehicle to collide
with a female victim (53 years old at that time), who was
the wife of the aforementioned male victim, knocking her
down, injuring her.
The original judgment recognized that the accused
continued driving although he felt concrete trouble in
operating the wheel due to drowsiness, which act of driving
is very dangerous and the negligence is very grave. No
fault is recognized at all in the three victims, who were
relatives to each other, and who were victimized suddenly
in the parking lot of the establishment to which they
happened to go for a meal, and that the two persons died by
being caught in between the vehicles, their death of which
is immeasurable. That one victim who was injured lost her
mother and husband at once and has fallen into a situation
where she cannot find hope to live, and the rest of the
bereaved families also keep bearing a deep sense of loss.
The consequences of which are really grave, and that it can
be termed natural that the bereaved families, coupled with
the fact that the accused's first response to the situation
was insufficient, plead for severe punishment against him.
On the other hand, the original judgment did recognize that
there are circumstances that the accused shows an attitude
of remorse, that the accused's wife stated that she would
supervise him, that the civil settlement with the victims
who died and the victim who was injured was concluded in
regard to the human damage, that the accused has no
criminal record, that he has a wife, and children of tender
years to raise, etc., and judging that an unsuspended
sentence was unavoidable although considering these
circumstances fully, did sentence the accused to
imprisonment without forced labor for a period of three
years (recommended penalty was imprisonment without forced
labor for a period of four years and six months).
3. (1) To consider this case here, based on the gravity of the
negligence in this case that the accused fell into a state
of unconsciousness through the negligence of continuing
driving while feeling abnormal such as feeling drowsy, and
the gravity of the consequences in this case that the
accused permitted the two victims to be killed, etc., who
were just walking, etc. in the parking lot after getting
out of a parked car and had no fault at all, it can be said
that this case is a case where it is appropriate to make
consideration, centering a choice of an unsuspended
sentence. Then, it cannot be said that the sentencing of
the original judgment that did, taking into consideration
together the fact that the accused concluded the civil
settlement with the bereaved families of the victims, the
bereaved families' feeling of penalization, the fact that
the accused shows an attitude of remorse and has no
criminal record, etc., sentenced the accused to
imprisonment without forced labor for a period of three
years without suspension, including a point of the term of
imprisonment, is too harsh and is unjust.
Hereinafter, the Court, based on the Statement of Reasons
for Koso Appeal of the defense counsel, makes a
supplemental explanation.
(2) (A) The Statement insists that in regard to the point
where the original judgment instructs that the civil
settlement was concluded regarding the personal injuries,
there is an error in the recognition as if the civil
settlement had not been concluded in regard to the property
damage because the agreement of the civil settlement has a
clause of release and discharge, which includes the
property damage as well. However, what the Statement
points out does not influence the sentencing of the
original judgment as even if the civil settlement including
the property damage is concluded, the compensation for the
human damage should be emphasized in terms of interests
protected by law from this offense and it can be thought it
is the part regarding the personal injuries that account
for much of the monetary compensation.
(B) The Statement insists that in regard to the point
where the original judgment instructs that the civil
settlement was concluded as to the personal injuries with
the victims who died and the victim who was injured, the
accused concluded the civil settlement with all of the five
victims as well of the property damage, aside from which
the aforementioned three vid ms, and there is an error in
the original judgment if it has thought that the accused
did not compensate these victims of the property damage.
However, the Statement is unjust as it is thought that the
instructions of the original judgment, based on the fact
that the accused was indicted for the offense of inflicting
death and bodily injury through negligence in operating an
automobile to the three victims, merely referred to the
civil settlement only about the three victims who suffered
personal injuries.
(C) The Statement insists that the original judgment did not fully take it into consideration that this is an extremely rare case among the personnel of the U.S. Armed Forces in Japan that the accused concluded the civil settlement by procuring a large sum of money on his own in addition to the insurance amount of the Japanese Compulsory Insurance and the liability insurance which has the amount of limit of liability. However, the Statement cannot be adopted as it is construed that the original judgment, while fully taking into consideration the conclusion of the civil settlement at the time of the original judgment and the accused's efforts at it, etc., considered from a comprehensive perspective various circumstances of the gravity, etc., of the negligence and the consequences in this case and assessed the sentence.
(D) The Statement insists that the circumstances of the commitment of the offense cannot be termed extremely malicious because the accused continued driving as he wanted to arrive at the destination soon under the circumstances where his wife looked sick due to a car sickness while he, although not drinking alcohol or taking.
medicine, was dozing off and almost losing consciousness.
However, even if the accused at the time of the offense was under the circumstances as the Statement points out, there is no error in the original judgment that judged that continuation of driving is not allowed of course, and that the accused's act of continuing driving while he felt concrete trouble in operating the wheel due to his drowsiness is very dangerous and the negligence is very grave.
(E) The Statement insists that in regard to the point where the original judgment instructs that the accused's first response to the situation was insufficient, the accused wrote letters of apology to the victims and their bereaved families and tried to give the letters to them.
from early on, and the fact that he contacted the bereaved families for compensation after release on bail is not strongly blameworthy and it is erroneous to handle it as the disadvantageous circumstances. However, what the Statement points out does not influence the sentencing of the original judgment as the original judgement does not handle the accused's first response itself as the disadvantageous circumstances, but merely points it out as a cause of the fact that the bereaved families' feeling of penalization is severe, and it cannot be said as well that the assessment by the original judgment regarding such process is erroneous.
(F) The Statement insists that the original judgment is erroneous as it instructs as if the accused had made a denial, taking back the statement that he made during the investigation stage in regard to the presence or absence and the cause of the drowsiness and that the original judgment is not appropriate as although the cause due to which the accused felt drowsy was diagnosed as acute mountain sickness by the doctor after this case, it launches into a generalization and contradicts this.
However, based on the points that the original judgment points out such as the concreteness and consistency of the accused's statement and the accuracy of the interpretation during the investigation stage regarding the circumstances, etc.
under which the accused felt drowsy, the Court finds it impossible to say that there is an error in the assessment by the original judgment regarding the transition of the accused's statements, and in light of the original judgment's instructions in regard to the sentencing, it does not take the transition of these statements into consideration in disfavor of the accused in terms of sentencing. Also, as to the cause of the drowsiness, the original judgment as well instructs that the accused got mild mountain sickness and that it can be thought that fatigue accumulates in the body due to continuation of driving for hours, etc., but that even under such circumstances it is difficult to think that one has an acute condition where he or she, not feeling drowsy, all of a sudden falls into a state of unconsciousness just before an accident, from which it is construed that the original judgment takes into consideration the possibility that the accused got mild mountain sickness, and the Court finds not unreasonable the judgment that it is difficult to think that the accused all of a sudden fell into a state of unconsciousness, based on the content of the statement made by the accused during the investigation stage and the process leading to this case. The Statement cannot be adopted.
(G) Even considering the rest of the Statement, the Court finds no reasons that should influence the sentencing of the original judgment.
(3) Furthermore, according to the results of the examination of evidence in this trial, after the original judgment, it is recognized 1) that the accused completed the payment of the remainder of the compensation money, which was approximately 92, 620,000 yen in total, and paid the medical bills for the victims in the total amount of approximately 1,880,000 yen; 2) that the accused has deepened his remorse and again expresses his intention to apologize; and 3) the accused's family is also in the economically and mentally tough situation, etc. However, as the original judgment assessed the sentence considering that the accused concluded with the bereaved families the civil settlement to the effect that he would pay each of the victims who died approximately 43,760,000 yen and approximately 135,860,000 yen, the Court cannot, even based on the fact that the accused paid the large sum of money by borrowing money in addition to the insurance amount of the Japanese Compulsory Insurance and the liability insurance, greatly take into consideration the fact of the payment of the remainder of the compensation money agreed upon, etc.
1) as the circumstances after the original judgment, or does not go far enough to reassess the sentencing of the original judgment even considering together the circumstances of 2) and 3).
Therefore, the argument of the defense counsel is unpersuasive.
4. Therefore, the Court, dismissing the koso appeal in this case in accordance with Article 396 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in application of the proviso of Paragraph 1 of Article 181 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in regard to the disposition of court costs in this trial, judges as in the Text.
14 July 2022 The 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court Presiding Judge Akira Ando /Seal/ Judge Hideo Nirei /Seal/ Judge Takehiko Okada /Seal/ Attachment 4 2021 (U) No. 1854 Written Request for the Examination of Evidence Inflicting Death and Bodily Injury through Negligence in Operating an Automobile The defense counsel hereby requests for the examination of evidence as written below in regard to the above case against the aforementioned accused.
5 January 2022 The accused: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis To the 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court 1 Documentary evidence (1) Ben-1 Report (Original) made by the defense counsel dated 5 January 2022 Defense Counsel: Yuki Ichikawa /seal/ Purpose of proof is 1) that the accused made a payment of the medical bills of the victims apart from the monetary (2) Ben-2 compensation based on the private settlement after the conclusion of the private settlement (after the original judgment) and 2) the conditions of preparedness for the payment of the remainder of the monetary restitution based on the private settlement.
Letter (translated by the defense counsel) (Original) made by the U.S. Naval Vice Admiral Carl Thomas dated 29 December 2021 (3) Ben-3 Purpose of proof is that the commander of the U.S. Armed Forces values the accused's performance at work and that the U.S. Armed Forces as well requests a suspended sentence to be awarded to the accused.
Letter (translated by the defense counsel) (Original) made by the U.S. Naval Rear Admiral Carl A. Lahti dated 30 December 2021 Purpose of proof is that the commander of the U.S. Armed Forces values the accused's performance at work and that the U.S. Armed Forces as well requests a suspended sentence to be awarded to the accused.
(4) Ben-4 Letter (translated by the defense counsel) (Original) made by the U.S. Congress member Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen dated 25 October 2021 Purpose of proof is that the U.S. Congress member with whom the accused is acquainted requests a suspended sentence to be awarded to the accused.
(5) Ben-5 Transcript of the detention warrant (Original) made by clerk of Numazu Summary Court Yusuke Naito dated 8 June 2021 Purpose of proof is that the cause of the accident was "due to some cause" and was not specified at the initial stage of the investigation in this case.
(6) Ben-6 Medical record (translated by the defense counsel) (Transcript) made by Yokosuka Neurology Clinic dated 30 June through 1 July 2021 Purpose of proof is that the accused saw a doctor in a neurology clinic on Yokosuka Base and was diagnosed with acute mountain sickness regarding the cause due to which he fell into a state of drowsiness in the accident in this case.
2 Examination of the accused.
Approximately 15 minutes for the time for the examination (including the time for translation) To prove the state of progress of the compensation for the victim after the original judgment and to prove that the original judgment, due to misunderstanding, recognized as if the statement that the accused made in the public trial denied the facts constituting the offenses charged.
Attachment 5 2021 (U) No.1854 Written Request for the Examination of Evidence (2) Inflicting Death and Bodily Injury through Negligence in Operating an Automobile.
The accused: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis The defense counsel hereby adds a request for the examination of evidence as written below in regard to the above case against the aforementioned accused.
2 March 2022 To the 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court 1 Documentary evidence (1) Ben-7 Defense Counsel: Yuki Ichikawa /seal/ Bank transfer receipt (Original) made by Mitsubishi UFJ Bank dated 14 February 2022 Purpose of proof is that the accused has completed the payment of the remainder of the monetary restitution based on the private settlement.
(2) Ben-8 Bank transfer receipt (Original) made by Mitsubishi UFJ Bank dated 14 February 2022 Purpose of proof is that the accused has completed the payment of the remainder of the monetary restitution based on the private settlement.
(3) Ben-9 Letter (translated by the defense counsel) (Transcript) made by the accused dated 14 February 2022 Purpose of proof is that the accused again extended his apology to the bereaved family when he completed the payment of the remainder of the monetary restitution based on the private settlement.
Attachment 6 2021 (U) No.1854 Written Request for the Examination of Evidence (3) Inflicting Death and Bodily Injury through Negligence in Operating an Automobile The accused: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis The defense counsel hereby adds a request for the examination of evidence as written below in regard to the above case against the aforementioned accused.
15 April 2022 Defense Counsel: Yuki Ichikawa /seal/ To the 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court 1 Documentary evidence (1) Ben-10 Report (Original) made by the defense counsel dated 15 April 2022 Purpose of proof is that the accused paid for the medical bills of the victims, which was not subjected to the private settlement.
Attachment 7 2021 (U) No.1854 Written Request for the Examination of Evidence (4) Inflicting Death and Bodily Injury through Negligence in Operating an Automobile The accused: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis The defense counsel hereby adds a request for the examination of evidence as written below in regard to the above case against the aforementioned accused.
16 May 2022 Defense Counsel: Yuki Ichikawa /seal/ To the 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court 1 Documentary evidence (1) Ben-11 Report (Original) made by the defense counsel dated 16 May 2022 Purpose of proof is that the accused paid for the medical bills of the victims.
Attachment 8 2021 (U) No. 1854 Written Withdrawal of Part of Request for the Examination of Evidence Inflicting Death and Bodily Injury through Negligence in Operating an Automobile The accused: Ridge Hannemann Alkonis The defense counsel hereby withdraws a request for the examination of evidence of Ben-1 and Ben-10 in regard to the above case against the aforementioned accused.
16 May 2022 Defense Counsel: Yuki Ichikawa /seal/ To the 3rd Criminal Department, Tokyo High Court
28 Sep 2022
The Honorable Jackie Speier
U.S. House of Representatives
2465 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congresswoman Speier,
I wish to advise Members of Congress and the House Armed Services Committee of the disagreement
between the U.S. Navy and myself regarding the violations of the U.S.-Japan Status of Forces Agreement
(SOFA) in the case of Lieutenant (LT) Ridge Alkonis.
For over 15 months, the U.S. Navy has advised Members of Congress through the Office of Legislative
Affairs (OLA) that no SOFA violations occurred in the case of my husband, LT Alkonis.
I vehemently disagree with this claim for the following reasons:
U.S. Navy lawyers from Commander, Naval Forces Japan (CNFJ) and U.S. Forces, Japan (USFJ)
informed me via phone, email, and in person on numerous occasions that SOFA violations
occurred.
●
●
This leads me to question why the U.S. Navy is misleading Members of Congress by disseminating not
only inaccurate information but blatant untruths.
●
Japan's SOFA violations directly resulted in a false conviction and prison sentence for LT Alkonis. The
violations affected the outcome in this manner:
●
●
Enclosure (1) contains emails from Commander (CDR) Delicia Zimmerman, CNFJ Judge Advocate
General (JAG), and Mr. Nathan Frost (GS-14), U.S. Secretary to the Joint Committee, who
manages the U.S.-Japan SOFA. In these emails, CDR Zimmerman and Mr. Frost outline the SOFA
violations that occurred in LT Alkonis's case.
●
In a meeting in Japan in September 2022, Senator Mike Lee met with Brigadier General (BGEN)
James Wellons, USFJ Deputy Commander, who told Senator Lee that SOFA violations occurred in
the case of LT Alkonis.
●
The 26-day confinement of LT Alkonis violated the SOFA because there was not "adequate cause
and necessity" to detain him.
LT Alkonis was given poor and conflicting legal advice from a Navy JAG who did not represent LT
Alkonis as outlined Enclosure (2).
During this 26-day detainment, LT Alkonis was held in solitary confinement and sleep deprived.
He was interrogated for hours each day without legal counsel present. His statements were
manipulated to conform to the investigators' narrative. LT Alkonis was coerced into signing
these statements in Japanese in order to display his cooperativeness and be granted bail.
After being released on bail, LT Alkonis's defense attorney informed him of the language
contained in the signed statements to which LT Alkonis commented that he had never made
those statements.
The interrogation statements were the sole piece of evidence used to prosecute LT Alkonis.
If Japan had not violated the SOFA, LT Alkonis would not have been detained for nearly a month and
subject to hours of interrogation without legal counsel or an adequate interpreter. LT Alkonis would
thus have never been coerced into signing manipulated interrogation statements; and, the prosecutor
would have had no evidence to prosecute LT Alkonis.
In another SOFA violation, a competent interpreter was not provided during LT Alkonis's legal
proceedings which nullified the ability of any non-Japanese speaker to testify during the trial.
Despite the obvious violations of the SOFA and their direct effect on the outcome of LT Alkonis's case,
the U.S. Navy continues to communicate to Congress that violations did not occur and did not affect the
outcome. This misinformation has undermined my family's efforts to obtain government assistance in
these ways:
●
While LT Alkonis was in Japanese custody in June 2021, my family contacted numerous
members of Congress for assistance. Members were sympathetic; however, when Members
reached out to the U.S. Navy, the Navy's OLA effectively counselled Members not to take action
because no SOFA violations occurred and that everything with the case was going according to
legal norms. The message that was repeatedly delivered was that the Japanese legal system just
needed to play out and that everything would be fine.
The information the Navy communicated to Congressional Members directly contradicted the
information my family was communicating to Congress. This assuredly caused Members to
doubt my family's information and encouraged Members to exercise less oversight over the
situation.
To this day, the U.S. Navy communicates information that conflicts with the truth, which
continues to undermine my efforts to work with members of Congress and the Biden
Administration.
As the U.S. Navy has so readily and consistently spread misinformation to Congress, I fear that the Navy
is also spreading this same false information to the Secretary of Defense, National Security Council, and
President Biden.
I urge Congress to exercise their full right and responsibility to conduct Congressional oversight of the
U.S. Armed Forces and the compliance of ratified treaties.
Sincerely,
Brittany Alkonis
この記事が気に入ったらサポートをしてみませんか？