[Concealing the body and living unchanged…] “Absolute obedience” that drove a housewife in her 50s to murder her mother-in-law and dump her body under the floor.

The presiding judge opined that

Sentencing the defendant to seven years in prison, Judge Emi first touched on the circumstances in which Watanabe was placed, asking, “To what extent should we take into consideration the circumstances and motives that led the defendant to commit this crime?

“Where the defendant was unable to disobey the victim’s instructions, he was forced over a period of several years to make false statements to his own mother containing details of his mismanagement, to request money transfers, and to hand over all the large amounts of cash he had received.” From around March 2011, the defendant continued to be subjected to particularly unreasonable demands for cash, and his despair at the prospect of an end to the victim’s demands for money is understandable. She woke up at 5:00 a.m. to take care of her cat, made lunches for her husband and sister-in-law, and did housework such as cleaning the house and doing laundry almost by herself.

On the walls in the house, there were many detailed instructions written by the victim on how to perform each household chore, as well as numerous written statements reflecting on the inadequacies of the defendant’s household chores. It is admitted that the victim was in a position of being treated more lightly than other family members and cats in the household, and it is true that these unreasonable circumstances existed. However, in this regard, the defendant has expressed in this court that he did not view such household chores as routine and unpleasant, and that they were not the motivation for this case.”

He also stated that “ it is difficult to say that he regarded the request for money on the day in question as the start of another usual request, and that he was not immediately driven to kill the victim.

In light of the fact that Watanabe had run away from home in the past and that his mother had suggested that he return to her home when she was still alive and well, the court also noted, “It is inconceivable that the defendant could not have taken steps such as leaving the house where he lived with the victims.