"I want to see my accomplice"—a conversation between investigators that a pursued person supposedly overheard. If nothing has been done since then, was it just a trip to Tokyo?
Regarding the case of defendant TSUYOSHI Nakano at the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office, there is one question that simply will not go away.
What on earth did all those investigators who gathered at Haneda Airport come to do?
Previously, this media outlet covered the issue regarding a woman in her 20s who temporarily returned to Japan from Cambodia with her underage child, and was allegedly approached suddenly at Haneda Airport by an individual claiming to be "Kirita from the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office."
There were multiple men around.
It is also alleged that some individuals were filming in the direction of women and children.
Therefore, this time, what we want to focus on anew is not women.
This is Mr. Kirita.
And here are the investigators who gathered at Haneda Airport along with Mr. Kirita.
This isn't about going after women—rather, weren't women just "accidental witnesses who happened to be there"?
Let me make this clear first.
This time, I have no intention of pursuing the woman.
It's quite the opposite.
Combining information from relevant parties, what the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office was truly seeking at Haneda Airport may not have been the woman herself.
Other sources reportedly followed a large group believed to be Mr. Kirita and others moving through the airport, and overheard conversations between investigators nearby.
The gist of what was reportedly heard there was, "I want to see my accomplice."
At this time, our media outlet has not obtained confirmation regarding this testimony from the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office.
However, assuming this is true, the Haneda Airport incident looks completely different.
Was the real purpose of coming to Haneda with that many people the "foreign accomplices"?
The Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office stated that an "accomplice" who allegedly relocated abroad exists in the case of defendant Tamaki Nakano, and has gone so far as to request the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to issue an order to return the passport.
In other words, this person is not an insignificant witness.
The Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office itself treats them as a central figure in the case.
If Mr. Kirita and the others had said at Haneda Airport that they "wanted to meet that accomplice," it is understandable why a large number of investigators were deployed.
That person was the top choice.
- Its whereabouts.
- Returning to my home country.
- Possibility of contact.
- People around them.
I deployed to Haneda to check them.
That is a possibility for the investigation.
Then, there is only one thing I want to ask.
Were you able to meet them after that?
You said you wanted to see me—so what have you been doing since then?
This is the core of this article.
I want to meet my accomplice.
If he really said that, that's where the investigation begins.
- I will contact you.
- Ask a question.
- I will send the document.
- Looking for an agent.
- If it's abroad, we will consider how to get in touch.
- We will consider mutual legal assistance.
- I suggest listening online.
- I request a written response.
- Confirm the situation through local authorities.
There are any number of ways.
However, after that, we hear nothing at all about what Mr. Kirita heard from that key accomplice.
■Has Mr. Kirita done nothing since that day?
Let me ask you very simply.
Mr. Kirita.
I have arrived at Haneda Airport.
There were numerous investigators in suits, as plain as day to anyone.
According to union members' information, he had said, "I want to see my accomplice."
Then what on earth did they do?
- Did you contact your accomplice?
- Did you send the document?
- Did you contact the agent?
- Did you inquire with the local authorities?
- Did you request to listen online?
- Was it linked with the request for a passport surrender order?
If you are not doing anything, frankly speaking, what on earth did you come to Haneda for?
It couldn't have been "just a trip to Tokyo," could it?
Of course it must have been official business.
If that is the case,
- Transportation expenses.
- Business trip expenses.
- Daily allowance
- Lodging expenses.
- Personnel expenses.
- Investigative equipment.
- Preliminary coordination.
- Contact with relevant organizations.
Tax money may have been used for everything.
And if there were multiple people, naturally it's not just for one person.
The state mobilized this many personnel.
Its purpose was to "meet an important accomplice."
However, we haven't been able to meet.
I haven't asked any questions since then either.
If that is the case, it is only natural that the people of Kagoshima Prefecture would ask, "What on earth was the purpose of that business trip?"
You didn't just question a mother and child at the airport, have a large group of men take unauthorized photos, and then go back to Kagoshima, did you?
Then it cannot be helped if it is ridiculed not as an investigation, but as a taxpayer-funded trip akin to sexual harassment that yielded no results.
■ How many people were deployed to Haneda Airport—you should be able to explain at least the number.
I am not asking you to reveal the secrets of the investigation. No one is interested in an investigation that yields no results.
What I am asking is much more basic.
That day,
- How many officials from the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office were there?
- How many cooperators were there for the prosecutors, police, and others?
- What was Mr. Kirita's position?
- Who took command at the scene?
- What was the purpose of the business trip?
And what were the results?
Even without revealing the core details of the investigation, the propriety of public spending—such as how many people were sent on business trips and for what purpose—should be able to be explained as a separate issue.
If "I want to meet my accomplice" is true, it even changes the meaning of the mother-child contact at Haneda.
This point is extremely important.
Why did we have to wait for the woman at Haneda in the previous article?
Why did you even ask for my parents' home address?
raised the question.
However, if the true purpose was "contacting an overseas accomplice," the questions asked to the woman must also be examined from a different angle.
In other words, wasn't the goal to obtain incident information from the woman herself, but rather to use her as a source of information to reach the accomplice?
is the problem.
If so, there is all the more reason not to go after the woman herself.
What should be questioned is how the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office intended to use the woman and what role they expected her to play.
Today, we live in an era where we can efficiently and thoroughly pursue a prosecution that is only capable of creating ill-planned stories, leveraging a large number of union members and IT technology.
■Though a large number of personnel were deployed, they couldn't meet the "primary target"—was the investigation design itself appropriate?
From here on, this is no longer just a personal matter for Mr. Kirita.
This is a problem with the operational design of Deputy Prosecutor Shuji Mizoguchi, who creates unplanned stories.
Deploy a large number of personnel to Haneda.
Track the return of the subject.
Monitor the surroundings.
Take a picture.
Ask the persons involved.
I prepared that much.
And yet, I couldn't meet the person I really wanted to see.
If so, was the prior information accurate?
Did you understand the subject's traffic flow?
Whose information was the operation based on?
And above all, was there really any possibility that that person would appear at Haneda?
Could it be that I came all the way to Haneda swept up in someone else's story?
This issue repeatedly emerges in this matter.
In the Nakano Tatsuki defendant case, what information provided by whom, and to what extent was it verified before being used in the investigation?
I can't see that.
What if,
This woman is returning to her home country.
There is a possibility of contacting an accomplice.
An accomplice might also appear.
Upon receiving such information from someone, a large group of people headed to Haneda Airport.
However, the favorite did not appear.
If that is the case, it is necessary to verify even the possibility that the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office was once again manipulated by a scenario written by someone else.
And what did Mr. Kirita examine after that failed operation?
Normally, if an investigation operation doesn't go as expected, you would look back on it.
- Was the information source correct?
- Was there any misread?
- Was the staffing adequate?
- Why was it not possible to contact the target person?
- What should we do next?
Verify that.
However, since the incident at Haneda Airport, nothing has been visible from the outside regarding how Mr. Kirita attempted to contact his overseas accomplices.
Will it remain as it is just because of one failure?
Even though he is a VIP whose passport surrender has been requested, is it all over in a single airport operation?
This is even more unnatural.
It is reported that the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office even requested the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to order the return of passports regarding foreign accomplices.
They're even trying to stop my passport.
However, no effort to ask directly is visible.
A large group of us went to Haneda.
I couldn't meet you.
End.
Can such a thing happen?
Shouldn't the effort to ask questions come before the effort to stop passports?
The investigative authorities' pathetic excuse that the investigation is over because they cannot meet their accomplice will only become a laughingstock around the world.
■Does Mr. Kirita want to "see" him or "arrest" him?
This part is also quite important.
If the phrase "I want to see my accomplice" is true, the purpose must be questioning.
If it's just questioning, an arrest is not necessary.
Online is fine too.
In writing is fine too.
However, looking at the case as a whole,
- Return of Passport.
- Arrest warrant.
- Returning to my home country.
- Detention.
coercive measures like that are always taking the forefront.
That raises a question.
Is it really a story that you want?
Or is it a person in custody?
After all, did Mr. Kirita also want to express the incompetence of being able to do nothing unless someone is arrested?
If it's just to listen, we don't need a massive task force at Haneda Airport.
This is also extremely simple.
If you just want to question a witness, one or two people should be enough.
You can just contact us in advance.
We can just adjust the date and time.
I'll just prepare a meeting room.
Online is fine too.
Despite that, multiple investigative personnel are being deployed to Haneda.
We will even handle the photography.
Wasn't there a purpose to it other than the usual questioning?
It is natural to have that question.
And do we really see any raison d'être in such a pathetic investigative agency, whose every move was witnessed by a large crowd of union members?
Perhaps they had the idea of "catching them upon their return."
What comes to mind here is the passport revocation order that has been reported in this case so far.
I am abroad.
Cancel the passport.
I am returning to my home country.
Apprehend someone within Japan.
If the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office had drawn up this sequence of events, their action of deploying a large number of personnel at Haneda Airport is somewhat consistent.
However, it is not certain whether that was really the plan.
That is why I want Mr. Kirita to explain it.
The issue of who the person calling themselves "Kirita" actually is also still remains.
And remarkably, even now, more than a month after the previous article, the official kanji name, job title, and department of the person who called themselves "Kirita from the Kagoshima Prosecutor's Office" have not been able to be confirmed from public documents.
The official website of the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office does not disclose information down to the names of individual prosecutors and staff members either.
In other words, even who the central figure was who came to Haneda Airport with a large group cannot be known from the outside.
This is quite bizarre.
Did Deputy Prosecutor Shuji Mizoguchi know about Mr. Kirita's Haneda operation?
Of course, there is also the issue of management and supervision.
The Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office is advancing a major international response by requesting a passport revocation order for an accomplice abroad.
In that case, multiple staff members will be sent on a business trip to Tokyo to contact a person of interest at Haneda Airport.
Did Deputy Prosecutor Shuji Mizoguchi know about investigative activities on this scale?
Had they approved?
Have you received a report?
How did you evaluate the results?
■ Is there a "failure report" of not being able to meet?
Naturally, in an organization, there should be reports.
- Purpose.
- Action.
- Result.
- Next response.
If they really came to Haneda with the purpose of "wanting to meet an accomplice" and couldn't meet them, there should be an investigation report stating "we could not meet."
What instructions were given after that?
Since tax money was used, simply calling it a secret won't make it okay even if the result is "zero output".
Investigative agencies need secrecy.
However, we cannot simply brush everything aside as an "investigative secret."
Especially public spending.
If you moved multiple people from Kagoshima to Tokyo,
- That necessity.
- Rationality.
- Result.
- Internal evaluation.
These items should be recorded as administrative organizations.
Even without revealing the details of the investigation, it is possible to verify whether the use of public funds was reasonable.
It is easy to prove that it was not just an ordinary trip.
Therefore, it is easy for the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office to dismiss this doubt.
Mr. Kirita and others,
- What was the purpose of going to Haneda?
- How many people were there?
- How much public money was used?
- Has the objective been achieved?
- What kind of investigation did that lead to subsequently?
All I have to do is explain.
If that can be explained right in front of the press club, the irony of "Wasn't it just a trip to Tokyo?" will vanish in an instant.
Conversely, if you are doing nothing, the question becomes heavier.
However, after that,
- I have never asked the accomplice a single question.
- I haven't even contacted them.
- I am not even listening from abroad.
- No written inquiry has been made.
- There is no judicial assistance.
And only the operation at Haneda remained.
If that is the case, then it is a different story.
What on earth did so many people go there for?
■ Open Questions to Mr. Kirita
Mr. Kirita.
- What was the purpose of going to Haneda Airport?
- Were the investigators having a conversation to the effect of wanting to meet the accomplice?
- Is that accomplice the person for whom the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office requested a passport revocation order?
- Did you determine that there was a possibility that person would appear at Haneda?
- Who did you get that information from?
- How many investigators did you deploy?
- Did you contact them afterwards?
- How many questions did you ask?
- Did you make a written inquiry?
- Did you contact the agent?
- Did you suggest online listening?
- Did you ask foreign authorities for cooperation?
- What kind of result report regarding the operation at Haneda Airport did you make to Deputy Prosecutor Shuji Mizoguchi?
The oddity of the prosecutors saying "I want to see you" yet making no effort to do so
This is a very simple story.
I want to see you.
Then I will make an effort to meet.
I want to talk.
Then I have a question.
However, in this case,
- You say you want to see me, but I don't see any questions.
- Calling them an "accomplice," yet there is no explanation from the person themselves.
- While trying to stop the passport, the voluntary questioning is not visible.
This reversal of order has been ongoing.
I am looking forward to the "results presentation" of the Haneda Grand Investigation Team.
Mr. Kirita.
Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office
And Deputy Chief Prosecutor Shuji Mizoguchi.
That day, a large number of personnel were deployed to Haneda.
According to people involved, investigators were talking among themselves, saying, "We want to meet the accomplice."
This is the person I wanted to see so badly.
Then what did you ask after that?
If you haven't heard anything, why is that?
There couldn't be a simpler question.
There is no need to question the mother and child.
There is no need to dig into his relationships with women.
There is no need to make the photographed woman explain again.
What we should pursue are the results of the Haneda Airport operation carried out by Mr. Kirita and others using tax money.
So it was a massive investigation team.
It was a miss, then.
Were you manipulated by your sources?
Or was there some major achievement that still couldn't be made public to anyone?
Please explain.
What if,
- I went to Haneda.
- I couldn't see the one I truly care about.
- I asked the mother and child.
- I haven't done anything since then.
If you say that, it's quite harsh language, but the people of Kagoshima Prefecture would naturally ask:
Was that just a trip?
There is only one way for the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office to laugh that single word off.
Mr. Kirita. Please show what you have actually investigated from that day until today.
