This is not the case in other countries. Any American who has visited Mexico knows that Mexican justice is a misnomer, based as it is on violence, graft and corruption. But Japanese justice is also not perfect. The Times has discovered what any expatriate who lived in Japan and reads the Japanese papers knows- that Japanese prosecutors and police tend to believe that one is guilty until proven innocent. An acquittal is a black mark for the prosecutor and judge, and they will use psychological torture to achieve it. For the Times staff, that would be real torture, not what was practiced by our Intelligence officers to try to keep us safe from violent Muslim terrorists.
The Times writes that,
The Japanese authorities have long relied on confessions to take suspects to court, instead of building cases based on solid evidence. Human rights groups have criticized the practice for leading to abuses of due process and convictions of innocent people.
The law allows the police to detain suspects for up to 23 days without an indictment. Suspects have almost no contact with the outside world and are subject to constant interrogation, a practice that has long drawn criticism from organizations like the United Nations Human Rights Committee and Amnesty International.
Suspects are strongly pressed to plead guilty, on the premise that confession is the first step toward rehabilitation.
For all the faults in the United States' justice system, such as ambulance-chasing attorneys and overly activist judges, I think our system is much fairer than most. Yes, O.J. got off, but that was the result of a flawed prosecution, not a flawed system. On balance, we are privileged to live in the wealthiest and most free country on Earth. The New York Times has spent the better part of the past six years trying to help Islamic terrorists desstroy this country. Maybe this article will open their eyes to what they are trying to destroy. At least we can hope. Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds.