Arama They Didn't

4:45 pm - 04/13/2012

‘Black widow’ killer Kanae Kijima found guilty of murder, sentenced to death



TOKYO (TR) – The Saitama District Court on Friday found accused serial killer Kanae Kijima guilty of three counts of murder and sentenced her to death, reports Sports Nippon (April 13).

“The ruthless crime of murder is extremely serious, and in this case it was repeated,” presiding judge Kazuyuki Okuma said in handing down the sentence. “The loss of three precious lives does not allow for serious consideration of another option.”

All told, the lay judge trial ruled Kijima to be guilty on ten counts, with fraud and theft also included.

Kijima met multiple men through matchmaking sites and quickly engaged in relationships not long before they died under suspicious circumstances.

The body of Yoshiyuki Oide, a 41-year-old company employee from Tokyo’s Chiyoda Ward, and a charcoal burner were discovered inside a rented car in Fujimi, Saitama Prefecture on August 6, 2009. Investigators found that he had been defrauded by Kijima for roughly 5 million yen. An autopsy revealed that he had died of carbon-monoxide poisoning and that his body contained the remains of sleeping pills. The 37-year-old Kijima was seen with him the day before his corpse was located.

Kijima also faced murder charges for the death of Takao Terada, a 53-year-old from Tokyo, and 80-year-old Kenzo Ando, a resident of Noda, Chiba Prefecture, who perished in a house fire.

All three of the victims died due to carbon-monoxide poisoning, with two containing sleep-inducing drugs in their systems.

“In order to live a luxurious lifestyle, she received money through deception, and then she ended the relationships with murder,” Okuma is quoted as saying. The defense countered by arguing that the deaths were due to suicide provoked by her threats to leave the men or accidental in nature, such as in the house fire.

The citizen judges served for 100 days — the longest period since the system began in 2009. The judges relied on circumstantial evidence only, as confessions and direct evidence were not available.

Tokyo Reporter
atarashiiyoake 13th-Apr-2012 05:31 am (UTC)
Not a big surprise that she was sentenced and I'm glad she was, but the death sentence Japan? Really?

One of their politicians said the other day that apparently it's still used because the people keep voting in favour. Made me smh a bit.

Also, things like this are the reason people are weary of matchmaking sites, wtf.
katzsong 13th-Apr-2012 05:32 am (UTC)
Wow, circumstantial evidence only and got her the death sentence? That's kinda impressive. And yeah, the crime is horrible. May the victim's soul RIP.

It's kinda weird to see a crime like this, which you usually watch in drama, happens in real life. I mean, I read several marriage-fraud cases, but not mariage-fraud + serial murder
atarashiiyoake 13th-Apr-2012 05:36 am (UTC)
Yeah, the evidence thing surprised me too. O.o
nene718 13th-Apr-2012 05:33 am (UTC)
The judges relied on circumstantial evidence only, as confessions and direct evidence were not available.

hmmmm
baboona 13th-Apr-2012 05:50 am (UTC)
mte
brucelynn 13th-Apr-2012 07:13 pm (UTC)
OMG IKR?

mjspice 13th-Apr-2012 05:35 am (UTC)
Damn.....that's just....no words really.
trifarashi 13th-Apr-2012 05:37 am (UTC)
this news totally drama-like...
i always see it in drama or movie no the real one...
well,it's not it never happen in other country but still to read it here totally sound like TV drama.
phishn37 13th-Apr-2012 06:15 am (UTC)
Circumstantial evidence only... hmm. Maybe that is legally acceptable in Japan, but if the case was in America it's not acceptable for homicide. For the fraud and theft stuff, maybe.
taylorniw 13th-Apr-2012 04:26 pm (UTC)
It is possible to get a murder conviction in the US with circumstantial evidence. I think getting the death penalty as the sentence would be pretty difficult, though.

Edited at 2012-04-13 04:26 pm (UTC)
brucelynn 13th-Apr-2012 07:14 pm (UTC)
Troy Davis got the death penalty based on circumstantial evidence.
nene718 13th-Apr-2012 11:28 pm (UTC)
I think getting the death penalty as the sentence would be pretty difficult, though.

unless you're black
mikilove13 13th-Apr-2012 06:48 am (UTC)
From what I heard about this case, it isn't at all surprising other than her being sentenced to death.
nozo_rin 13th-Apr-2012 07:04 am (UTC)
Why the death sentence? Why not life in prison? Letting them live on is a bigger punishment then death to me :/
x_vickiiiie 13th-Apr-2012 07:22 am (UTC)
Not trying to get into a huge argument here but I highly disagree about life in prison.

As a taxpayer, I lose a substantial amount of my income already... then I have to struggle with other debts like my car and rent.
Yet, those imprisoned get three square meals a day while I'm struggling to place food on my table after all my debts.
Who's being punished now?

Honestly, I'm not against the death sentence at all, if she can cruelly kill three, unless she is killed three times, justice isn't served anyway.


atarashiiyoake 13th-Apr-2012 07:58 am (UTC)
Actually the death penalty costs much more than you'd think because the system needs to be 100% sure the convicts are guilty (and even then regularly screw up).

(Pro/Con, Amnesty, NY Times.)

I hate it when people use financial reasons pro-death penalty, because imprisonment is really a much better financial option.
helsings 13th-Apr-2012 03:45 pm (UTC)
THIS

The death sentence is the easy way out for the convicted imo. I say let them rot in prison and suffer.
nozo_rin 14th-Apr-2012 08:29 am (UTC)
That's exactly what I thought!
lourher 14th-Apr-2012 09:44 am (UTC)
Exactly!
brucelynn 13th-Apr-2012 07:39 pm (UTC)
Thank u Cas
nozo_rin 14th-Apr-2012 08:28 am (UTC)
Oh, I'm sorry if my comment offended you...

I'm still a student and I really didn't think much about others struggling with money.

I just thought it would be a bigger punishment emotionally for them.

I apologize if my comment seemed insensitive to you D:
janesattva 13th-Apr-2012 07:32 am (UTC)
I think people on arama watch too much csi and have no idea what circumstantial evidence means.

I'm glad the jury didn't have that problem and she was found guilty, even if I don't agree with the punishment.
katzsong 13th-Apr-2012 07:58 am (UTC)
so, in real court room, circumstantial evidence is enough to get a conviction, without physical evidences or convictions? What kind of circumstantial evidence that can do that? yeah, I'm really curious. Please explain :)
janesattva 13th-Apr-2012 08:16 am (UTC)
Direct evidence means it was directly observable, like a witness sees the suspect stab the victim or video shows it happening. Circumstantial evidence is pretty much everything else (except a confession), including physical evidence like DNA and fingerprints. And as long as the jury believes that the suspect is guilty, it doesn't matter what kind of evidence is used to convict them.
taylorniw 13th-Apr-2012 04:27 pm (UTC)
I thought DNA and fingerprints weren't considered circumstantial? Since it puts them at the scene?
janesattva 13th-Apr-2012 08:06 pm (UTC)
All DNA and fingerprints say is that the person was there at some point of time. You still have to connect the dots to put them there at the time of the crime and prove that they did it. Like if they found a body in a grocery cart in a parking lot and it had my fingerprints on it. Just because my fingerprints are there, doesn't mean that I'm the one that did it, it depends on the circumstances. If they then found surveillance footage that showed me get the cart from the store and walk toward the parking lot without shopping and the time stamp on the video shows that this happened only minutes before they found the body, the three pieces work together to imply that I'm guilty. But on the other hand, if the video footage showed me taking the cart and shopping the day before they found the body, the evidence would imply I'm not guilty. Either way, you would have to connect the dots yourself to decide guilt or innocence, and that makes all those pieces of evidence circumstantial.
atarashiiyoake 13th-Apr-2012 08:02 am (UTC)
I think it's the degree of 'circumstantial' that has people puzzled here. I mean, seeing someone walking away with a smoking gun while someone behind them is bleeding to death with a bullet wound would be circumstantial evidence too, even though you can be 99% sure who was the killer.

But considering they didn't find out how the victims died until after autopsy makes me wonder how circumstantial these testimonies and the rest of the evidence were.
janesattva 13th-Apr-2012 08:27 am (UTC)
Yeah, we can never know exactly how strong the circumstantial evidence in this case was, but the details that were released are still pretty damning. She was dating each of them when they died, had stolen money from each of them, they all have the same cause of death, and two had the same sleeping pills in their system. And you can't know a cause of death for sure until an autopsy is done, so that shouldn't really matter.

She could of argued that she was set up or something, but since they found her guilty, her side either didn't or didn't do it well enough to convince the jury.
brucelynn 13th-Apr-2012 07:37 pm (UTC)
Ok fine but sentencing her to death is questionable


...but then again I'm from the states I don't know much about Japan's laws
janesattva 13th-Apr-2012 08:50 pm (UTC)
I personally don't agree with the death penalty in general, but it's actually pretty common in the US for death penalty sentences to come from convictions based on circumstantial evidence (off the top of my head: McVeigh & co., Scott Peterson).

And I'm not super sure about Japan's laws either, so maybe death penalty with circumstantial evidence is rare there and that's why that sentence is in the article? I'm just forever bitter about having to listen to prosecutors exlain to jury panels in child speak that most evidence is circumstantial and that being circumstantial doesn't make it less valid. Every time I've been on a panel.
harunomasu 14th-Apr-2012 02:29 am (UTC)
I think Death Penalty is common in Japan, since they believe the idiom of "eye for an eye", means if she killed someone then she has to get the same punishment.

Death Penalty is wrong and I could never agree to it but she had killed three men without feeling anything, so yeah.
chibi_hime 13th-Apr-2012 12:03 pm (UTC)
I totally agree with you.

For all we know the police found DNA or fingerprints inside the car.
lourher 13th-Apr-2012 02:57 pm (UTC)
Death sentence? It's... I can't.
fuzzyspider 13th-Apr-2012 03:08 pm (UTC)
good.
flashylicious 13th-Apr-2012 03:11 pm (UTC)
found guilty serial killer gets death sentence, what's so surprising
faye_bell 13th-Apr-2012 03:28 pm (UTC)
death penalty is always wrong smh
helsings 13th-Apr-2012 03:48 pm (UTC)
Oops, sorry. That wasn't meant to be a reply to your comment.
helsings 13th-Apr-2012 03:47 pm (UTC)
"The death penalty is wrong"
"I'm pro-death penalty"
etc.

We all have our own opinion on whether the death penalty is wrong or right. Just because someone is for it, it doesn't make them a bad person. It's based on a personal belief and moral system, nothing more.
lourher 13th-Apr-2012 09:10 pm (UTC)
Er no sorry. Death Penalty consists of killing someone, whatever this person had done, human beings do not have the right to kill anyone. Death Penalty is murder.

I could also talk about the political issues of death penalty but it would be quite long so I'm just going to leave here a quote from Robert Badinter.

"The true political meaning of death penalty is based on the idea that the State has power over its citizens as far as taking their life."

Terrorism is also a matter of belief or moral... And I'm pretty sure no one here thinks it's a good think.

Edited at 2012-04-13 09:13 pm (UTC)
helsings 14th-Apr-2012 07:59 am (UTC)
Um, yes, it is based on your personal opinions and beliefs.

If not, then how do you explain one person being pro and another being against it? Opinions are part of your internal belief system and workings.
lourher 14th-Apr-2012 09:43 am (UTC)
Sorry, I was not clear... Yes it's a matter of belief, but this is why we HAVE TO talk about it.

Edited at 2012-04-14 09:44 am (UTC)
helsings 14th-Apr-2012 10:58 am (UTC)
Of course. I'm never against discussing matters as serious as this.

My comment was more of an in-before-people-berate-others-for-their-viewpoint thing because I just know if someone says they're for the death penalty, others are going to jump on them for being an 'evil' and 'horrible' person, etc.
lourher 14th-Apr-2012 11:51 am (UTC)
Yeah okay, I misunderstood you, you're perfectly right bout this.
nene718 13th-Apr-2012 11:30 pm (UTC)
Speaking about the death penalty, so happy that Connecticut is going to repeal it soon.
newsvsyamapi 15th-Apr-2012 01:21 am (UTC)
Thanks for the info, did not know about it XD
This page was loaded Sep 21st 2014, 6:13 am GMT.