Quote:
Originally Posted by RealJames
What I felt was unfair was how other companies doing the same thing got much lighter punishments, or just warnings.
Is that because of tatemae apologies that they got off easy? I'm a bit confused about why he gets 2.5 when others get probational periods or nothing.
|
Why do some criminals get longer sentences than others? The same logic applies here.
Plea bargaining, basically. If you plead innocence, and then admit to doing it, but everyone else was doing it so okay right BEFORE YOUR TRIAL - do you expect that the judge is going to give you a lighter sentence than someone who admitted the wrongdoing, apologized, and worked with a lawyer on a sentence.
It is not a "Japan thing" - there is a reason why plea bargains are popular. You can plead guilty to a lesser charge and not risk getting the full brunt of a sentence. But if you plead innocence and are really guilty, it can backfire pretty seriously.
*Before* making any sort of plea, Horiemon stressed that he was completely innocent. He basically pleaded Not Guilty. But after his plea and BEFORE the trial, he admitted that he might have done it but, well, everyone else was doing it, so it would be unfair to charge him. (I think he saw that there was enough evidence to make sure that he would not get off scott free, so wanted to try and lessen the fall.) Basically, he was pleading not guilty while admitting his guilt. Then, when this (obviously) didn`t go well for him, he backpedalled and said that maybe it had happened, but he himself didn`t have anything to do with it, was so so very sorry that his company might have done something like that, etc etc.
If you think of it in terms of some other crime, it becomes a bit more clear. Imagine two identical murders.
1: The person is caught, breaks down and admits their guilt, and then works with the prosecution to plead guilty to a slightly lesser charge. They make offers to do anything within their power to lessen the pain of those affected.
2: The person is caught, says they`re completely innocent, and wants to plead not guilty... But tells all their friends and anyone who listens that anyone in that situation would have murdered someone, why should they get punished? It`s a totally normal response, so even if evidence comes out that they were guilty, umm, it should be disregarded because it was a normal thing. But when things take a turn for the worse, they start saying that, well, maybe the murder was related to them, but they didn`t really do it themself. It was a friend! And they should have been able to stop mystery friend, but didn`t, so are now very very sorry ... But still should get off without punishment.
Which do you think will get a steeper sentence?