The Court Didn't Take the Psychiatry Assessment of the Commitment of Series Arsons
The accused committed an arson of an uninhabited building, an arson of an inhabited building, a property damage and a business interference between 2017 and 2018. Shizuoka District Court believed that the accused during the arsons still had the criminal responsibility, even though the accused suffered from the pathological arson according to the psychiatry assessment. Nevertheless the court insisted that it lacked explanation about the effect from the psychosis of the accused and its relationship with the committed crimes, and even the extent the psychosis caused. The accused filed an appeal on the ground of the affected impartiality because the judges had contacted with the audience and of the misunderstanding of the facts which was the object of the assessment. Tokyo High Court found that the original court had done everything to avoid the contact out of the procedure. Besides it was hard to say the impartiality of the judgment had been affected that the judges took information unilaterally. As to the assessment which wasn’t taken, the appeal court found that the moment the assessment made was too far from the time of the commitments. Without focusing on the mental status in the moment of committing, the psychiatrist diagnosed the syndrome of the pathological arson only by the elimination instead of material explanation how the syndrome had affected the commitment.