[bradchris]

You clearly have a different view of “innocent until proven guilty” than most US citizens, which is fine, maybe you aren’t one, but that line of rhetoric is going to be anathema to most people on this website.

Not that the US criminal system isn’t its own complete mess, but thank God for the concept of bail (going about your life outside of jail until trial or dismissal, within certain parameters) and right to see a judge within 24 hours, to avoid any kafkaesque nightmares like this.

[commandersaki]

According to her video it appears she was deemed a flight risk because she didn't respond to an email requesting information on the matter being investigated while she was overseas. She didn't have the information on hand or at the time or at all and instead of saying that she didn't respond to the email. When she returned from her trip they deemed her a flight risk.

In the US if you're a flight risk you wouldn't get bail either.

[walletdrainer]

You wouldn’t be deemed a flight risk in the US on that basis. Returning to the country after receiving email notifying you about the investigation is obviously evidence against flight risk.

[EA-3167]

> You clearly have a different view of “innocent until proven guilty”

Most people don't really understand it, and even the ones who do often have personal exceptions driven by emotion. The idea that you need to defend the guilty to protect the innocent is alien to a lot of people. Japan takes the lack of that assumption a step further though, since it's a society based on strict compliance to cultural norms... for better and for worse.

Having said all of that, most of these systems do a credible job of distinguishing the innocent from the guilty, although there's always more to do on that front. If you've ever worked anywhere near the court system you start to notice that people who make it through the system all of the way to a trial are frequently guilty and even more frequently recidivist.

Most people aren't criminals and never commit a serious offense, but speaking for myself I don't think the "sorting" the system does has to be anywhere close to as brutal and impersonal as it often is in many countries including Japan.

[bradchris]

Primarily the US’s approach is: “we know our system will never be perfect [and the system we have is actually a hell of its own making], so we will ensure an escape hatch for BOTH innocent/guilty from the shortcomings of the system until a definitive verdict has been reached”

While Japan’s/many other countries approach is: “We intend our court system to be a perfect representation of our culture, history, and policy objectives. Therefore it should apply in every case, regardless of individual circumstance, so there is no escape hatch, because why deviate from a perfect process.”

The former is how you get the wildly inconsistent US approach to the criminal system, while the latter is how you get a kafkaesque nightmare (or worse, a system weaponized to intentionally target innocent undesirables, like El Salvador’s CECOT)

Both are simplified, none are perfect, of course. But I know which system I’d rather be accused under.

[nihonde]

We're not talking about the US. We're talking about Japan, where the authorities are extremely conservative and cautious. Most Japanese people know how to stay completely clear of trouble. Ask yourself why this person did not.