Before Ms. A’s testimony…” Expert Analyzes “Intention to Withdraw the Lawsuit” in Hitoshi Matsumoto’s Comment.

No physical evidence

On November 8, “Downtown” star Matsumoto Hitoshi withdrew his lawsuit against Bungei Shunju and others, seeking 550 million yen in damages and the publication of a corrected article. On the same day, Matsumoto’s side released a comment through Yoshimoto Kogyo’s website.

Hitoshi Matsumoto’s comments regarding the termination of the lawsuit are as follows

After stating that

Matsumoto confirmed that there is no physical evidence directly indicating the existence of coercion.

Matsumoto had attended a meeting attended by women in the past. I would like to frankly apologize if any of the women who participated in the meeting felt uncomfortable or hurt.

He commented, “I am sorry if any of the women who attended the meeting were offended or hurt.

However, this comment seems to have divided the public.

The phrase “if there were any” does not mean that he is apologizing to the victims.

There is no evidence and no exchange of money. Mr. Matsumoto wins.

While there are those who say “If you are here,” there are also those who say

“If they were offended,” it’s a hypothetical form of apology, and not even an apology.

If there is “no direct physical evidence,” then don’t withdraw from the trial and fight.

Many people seem to think that Matsumoto is trying to save his own skin.

Influence on future activities

I feel that the comment by Mr. Matsumoto released by Yoshimoto was written by his lawyer and Yoshimoto, using phrases such as “regarding the contents of Matsumoto’s complaint” or “at Matsumoto” instead of “I am” as the subject of the comment. Normally, if they were apologizing, they would have signed their comments. However, only the lawyer’s name appears at the end of the document. He has not apologized in his own words, and perhaps he does not think he has really done anything wrong. Due to Mr. Matsumoto’s personality, there is a strong possibility that he will return to work quietly without holding a press conference. Despite the fact that some of his juniors have lost their jobs due to the incident, he has been telling people that he “wants to work as soon as possible. Even so, Matsumoto’s popularity is so high that he can make a comeback, and Yoshimoto will give him a strong push.

What kind of agenda is hidden in Matsumoto’s document? We asked attorney Kenta Morimi of Morimi Law Office, a specialist in civil trials, to analyze the comments made by Matsumoto’s side.

The fact that Matsumoto confirmed that there was no “direct” physical evidence of coercion suggests that there was or may be indirect physical evidence or human evidence (statements from witnesses) that would indicate the existence of coercion. Therefore, it seems that physical evidence and human evidence (statements from witnesses) that indirectly indicate the existence of coercion have been produced or may be produced in the future. If the trial had continued as it was, the alleged victims would have been questioned, and it can be inferred that the possibility that the questioning would affect Matsumoto’s future activities may have led to the decision to drop the lawsuit.

If Ms. Ako or others had tearfully complained about the sexual assault by Matsumoto, Matsumoto might have suffered considerable damage as a TV personality.

The lawsuit ended without any explanation from his own mouth to the public. If Matsumoto could return to work as if nothing had happened, it might have been a very satisfying “drop-off point” for him.