Leaked Emails Stir Doubts Over Toru Hashimoto and Nakai’s Supporters

The defamation and slander against victim A-ko continue to increase

It has been six months since the scandal involving Masahiro Nakai (52) and a female associate came to light—an issue that has now escalated into a management crisis for Fuji TV. The network wrapped up its shareholder meeting on June 25, and sponsors are gradually returning. On July 6, a special investigative program was broadcast.

However, the core issue involving Nakai remains unresolved.

While many thought the release of the third-party committee’s investigative report would mark the end of the matter, Nakai’s legal team issued a rebuttal disputing the committee’s finding of sexual violence, igniting a public back-and-forth.

The committee, having repeatedly rejected demands from Nakai’s side, has since cut off communication, and there’s been no further progress.

Some speculate Nakai’s rebuttal was a strategic move in case Fuji TV pursued legal action. But now that such a lawsuit seems unlikely, the matter may quietly fade away unless Nakai’s team initiates further action.

Still, the online harassment and defamation of the victim, former Fuji TV announcer A-ko, have once again surged—indicating the issue is far from resolved.

This renewed wave of slander was fueled not only by Nakai’s denial of sexual violence, but also by public comments from his supporters who claimed the third-party report was flawed or reduced the case to a mere breakup drama.

Now, however, backlash against Nakai is growing following the public release of email exchanges between him and A-ko, shedding light on the nature of the incident.

In the July 11 issue of Shukan Post, screenshots of these emails were published.

The messages were exchanged after the alleged incident. On June 3, 2024—the day after the incident—Nakai wrote:

“I had a good time. Let’s meet up soon for a normal one, yeah? Hope to see you soon!”

And on June 4:

“Let’s reset and go for drinks.”

Judging by these messages, Nakai seemed completely unaware of A-ko’s emotional state at the time—and even pushed to meet again.

Reportedly, A-ko responded only briefly with polite thank-yous and declined further invitations. Despite this, Nakai continued sending persistent messages, showing a level of tone-deafness that has left many stunned.

The third-party committee’s report included the following statement.

“Even after the incident, Mr. Nakai continued to send short messages to Woman A, which she stated caused her such emotional distress that she could no longer bear it and felt mentally broken.”

While this part of their communication had been mentioned in the report, the recent disclosure of the actual email content has now cast it in a much starker light. The phrase causing the most uproar online is:

“Let’s meet up soon for a normal one.”

This particular line has sparked a firestorm on social media. The vagueness of a normal one has left many speculating what kind of treatment Nakai had subjected A-ko to that made her unable to emotionally process even receiving his messages.

What now resurfaces in public discussion are earlier comments made by Nakai’s so-called supporter camp—the “Nakai defense squad”—whose statements had previously tried to downplay the incident, fueling further controversy.

“I also know some things from my own sources,” says Furuichi.

Sociologist Noritoshi Furuichi (40) appeared on Kansai TV’s Shunkan LIVE Toretate! aired on April 4 and criticized the third-party committee for citing the WHO definition. He also remarked:

“I also know some things from my own sources,”

referring to information not included in the committee’s report.

Meanwhile, Toru Hashimoto (56) appeared on the same program on May 14 and, while acknowledging that Nakai had engaged in sexual acts against the woman’s will, said:

“Looking at the situation on the day itself, I think there will be a significant number of people who won’t view this as sexual violence or as something warranting this level of social punishment.”

He further suggested that if all of Nakai’s side of the story were to be revealed, many would likely question whether this really constituted sexual violence, adding:

“A lot of legal professionals who’ve seen the situation feel it’s very different from what’s currently being said.”

Later, during an interview with Shukan Bunshun, Hashimoto drew criticism after referring to the incident as a heartbreak case.

In response to the backlash, Hashimoto posted on X:

“I never said this was a heartbreak case. I said it was a case of emotional misalignment between the man and woman. If only one party’s internal feelings determine consent, then even a heartbreak case could lead to later legal consequences. That was just a general point. Also, it’s being said that I’ve only heard Nakai’s side, but if that’s the case, I’m happy to hear the woman’s side too. After hearing both, I believe I could assess whether it was sexual violence more accurately than Fuji TV’s third-party committee.”

He maintained that his remarks were meant only as a general statement.

Criticism directed at me should also be aimed at the third-party committee

It’s unclear how Furuichi obtained the information he claimed to know, but Hashimoto stated that he heard it from people close to Nakai.

On this matter, lawyer Kyosuke Nishiwaki, former head of TV Asahi’s legal department, commented:

“Neither Furuichi nor Hashimoto are official representatives of Nakai, and it’s unclear how they confirmed the facts. Spreading fragmented information like these risks manipulating public perception and is, in my view, inappropriate.”

While the released messages offer a partial glimpse into the situation at the time, it remains highly questionable whether Hashimoto and Furuichi truly had access to all the facts or if many legal experts really felt the situation was being misrepresented.

The outlet sent Hashimoto a written inquiry by email:

Q: In regard to your comments about Nakai on programs like Shunkan LIVE Toretate!, how did you confirm the facts?

A: I cannot disclose my sources.

Q: Were you aware of the SMS exchanges between Nakai and A-ko, published in the July 11 issue of Shukan Post, prior to the reporting?

A: Yes, I knew about them.

Q: How do you respond to criticism from legal professionals who say that sharing fragmented stories without being an official representative could lead to manipulation of public perception?

A: Commentators are entitled to freedom of expression. Furthermore, the Fuji TV third-party committee holds the same position as I do — that of an outside commentator in relation to Nakai — so I believe any criticism directed at me should also be directed at them.

Yet, the comments made by these individuals have contributed to A-ko experiencing secondary harm. One must wonder if they feel any responsibility for that.