Collective lynching by the “human rights” sect
When you return home tired after work, your children rush and say, "Welcome back!" Their small hands hold on to you tightly. You swear to do your best to take care of your dearest children. Such daily happiness is suddenly taken away. When you get home, no one is there. No furniture either. You find it completely empty. Such abductions of children have occurred a lot in this country. The one who abducts the child is a parent (often a mother). In most developed nations, such as the West, this act is regarded as a felony.
However, in Japan, child abduction is not a crime and is practiced on a daily basis under the guidance of lawyers. Suddenly, a parent (usually the father) is deprived of his beloved child, and he can no longer see his child. Despite this situation, he is forced to pay child support, which distresses him mentally and financially and often leads to suicide.
A father, Maki Sotsuda (a pseudonym), one of the victims of such a child abduction, alleges that 39 lawyers and others conspired to defame him in connection with his divorce suit saying, "They fabricated a lie that I was a DV husband who violated my wife." He filed a civil action suit against them. The defendants include lawyers, a former judge, as well as prominent figures such as NPO representatives, university professors, and former editorialists of Asahi Newspaper Company.
The complaint states that their defamation was "a systematic and deliberate offense that is completely different from normal defamation," and "The judge could easily understand how severely I was damaged mentally and financially from the accusation if only the judge could imagine that he himself was the target of such a collective lynching.”
Indeed, if the divorce lawsuit was just an expansion of a marital quarrel, it would not occur that 39 people would conspire to collectively defame the other side. That would be nonsense. The strange thing is that Sotsuda had never met most of the 39 people nor had any acquaintance with them at all. So why did Sotsuda get a collective lynching from 39 lawyers and a former judge whom he did not know? It seems that he tread upon the tigers’ tails of the so-called divorce business.
The 39 defendants, whose professions and affiliations vary, seem at first glance to commit defamation independent of one another. However, according to the complaint, "the defendants have common interests for the abduction of children by parents, which constitutes a criminal offense in the United States and Europe, and for the separation of parents and children, which violates the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. They all wish these acts could be left unpunished in Japan." They seem to have contacted one another closely and set up a collective lynching of Sotsuda. The complainant provided the evidence of the conspiracy in which Sotsuda's wife (at that time) took the initiative and exchanged emails with each defendant.
Sotsuda’s case depicts clearly the problems of child abduction, which destroys the family, hurts the mind of small children, and forces the abandoned parents into a tight corner. By investigating his case, we can identify the group rigging the kidnapping business. How are judges and lawyers at the center of the group generally involved in child abductions?
Ridiculing a father who is contemplating suicide
Judges usually render custody of a child based on the “principle of continuity” (as described below) to the parent who has kidnapped the child. Lawyers recommend that parents should kidnap their children to ensure the custody of the children. This is not speculation. There is a lot of evidence.
In one women's magazine, a lawyer wrote confidently that "the first thing you have to do to fight against your husband to get the child’s custody is to take your child when leaving home." Also, in a book published by the Research Institute of the Japan Federation of Bar Association (JFBA), there is a sentence at the beginning of its preface: "there is common consensus among lawyers in divorce cases involving a custody conflict: The first step is to secure the child with the client."
When lawyers induce one parent to abduct the child and file for trial, judges are in a position to give custody to the parent as a reward. The lawyers then pocket a portion of the child support, etc., which are taken from the other parent. It is often the case that the lawyers who get advantageous treatment by judges, in return, hire these judges when they retire from the bench. The trick is quite simple. However, many people cannot see through their plot because it is hard to imagine that a lawyer, who should side with the weak, and a judge, who should be neutral and fair, actually collude in this way.
But the reality of the court is completely different from what many would imagine. There is a well-known blog by a court official which was featured in Diet deliberations. The court official ridiculed a parent whose child had been abducted. He wrote, "There is a parent who attempted to commit suicide just because the court does not accept his request. He has a delusion that the court takes sides with his wife’s team. It is really annoying for us that he feels desperate and jumps out a window of the court building. Don’t do it inside the courthouse, for it is troublesome to clean up. Oh, please do it wherever you want as long as you do it out of the court area… hahahaha”
It’s not a delusion. This is the reality happening inside the courts. The darkness of the judicial world awaits you if your child is abducted and your spouse sues for a divorce. Sotsuda cut into the darkness of the community of the "Parental Child Abduction Business” although such business is already a daily occurrence and a big source of income for lawyers. That is why he was almost completely alienated from society by lawyers and judges.
