Even though he “doesn’t remember”?　The owner of a private tutoring school who indecently assaulted two junior high school girls told the court that he was “responsible” for the incident.

Putting his hand inside a female junior high school student’s clothes…

He admitted, “My memory is not clear, but I admit that such things must have happened.”

The owner of the cram school, who is alleged to have committed indecent acts with two junior high school girls who attended the school he manages, admitted his guilt at trial, saying that he was not sure of his memory.

‘ On October 2, 2013, the Chiba Prefectural Police arrested Mikiya Maeda, 56, the manager of Maeda Juku (now closed), a cram school, on suspicion of indecency with non-consent. In early September, Maeda is suspected of having committed indecent acts, such as putting his hands inside the clothes of a teenage girl, a student, and touching her body. Maeda admitted that there was no doubt in his mind.

Maeda, who is the owner of the school, was the main instructor at Maeda Juku, although some of the students who graduated from the school occasionally taught at the school.

Upon hearing the news of Maeda’s arrest, parents who had sent their children to Maeda Juku checked with their daughters to see if they had been harmed. One after another, additional charges were uncovered.

A reporter from the social affairs section continued, “The Chiba Prefectural Police reported the arrest of the defendant on October 23.

By October 23, the Chiba Prefectural Police re-arrested Maeda on suspicion of indecent assault. In late July 2012, he was suspected of having committed indecent acts, such as putting his hands inside the clothes of his student, a junior high school girl named A, and touching her body.

The arrest was apparently triggered by a report from Ms. A’s mother, who saw the news report and said, ‘My daughter might have been a victim, too,’ but Maeda denied the charge, saying, ‘I don’t remember anything at all.

The arrests continued.

In mid-August of last year, Maeda was arrested for the third time on November 13 on suspicion of indecent assault and touching his student, a junior high school girl named Ms. B. Her father saw the news report and told Maeda, ‘I’m sorry, but I can’t help it. Her father, who saw the news report, reported that his daughter had also been touched.

The prosecutor dropped the first charge, but charged Maeda with indecent assault against Ms. A and Mr. B.

I don’t remember anything”?

On February 18, ’26, Maeda’s first trial was held at the Chiba District Court and concluded on the same day.

The indictment and opening statement read by the prosecutor revealed a despicable crime that took advantage of the power relationship between a cram school teacher and a student, a relationship that is difficult to resist and difficult to discuss with others.

In late July 2012, the defendant committed an indecent act against Ms. A, who was a student at the cram school (Maeda Juku), by making her lie on her face on a stretching pole, inserting his hand inside her clothes, and touching her breast, saying that he was going to give her a massage, etc.” (The defendant committed the crime against Ms. A.) (The defendant committed the crime against Ms. A).

“Before this incident, the defendant had been telling Ms. B, who was a student at the time, that she had a ‘nice style,’ and had measured her chest with a tape measure and noted the measurements on a notepad. Then, around mid-August 2013, he told Ms. B that he would take her measurements one more time, and measured her breast circumference with a tape measure over her clothes, and then touched her with his hand in an indecent manner.

As mentioned at the beginning of this article, Maeda admits the facts of the indictment, but claims that his “memory is not clear” as to the crime itself. During the defendant’s questioning, the prosecutor asked , “What do you remember about the incident? Maeda replied, ” I don’t remember anything about Mr. A’s case.

If Mr. A said so, I thought there might have been such a situation, and considering the feelings of the victim, I admitted it.”

As for Ms. B’s case, she “remembers” that she measured her chest once in order to buy clothes for Ms. B, who was helping her with her duties at the school. Later, when he found a diagram with Mr. B’s size written on it, he realized that he had measured him on another day.

However, he continued, “I don’t remember” measuring her with a tape measure or touching her body on more than one occasion.

I just believed that if a girl who used to be my student said that, then that must have happened.”

Judge Eri Nishizawa asked, “If you want to know your clothing size, why don’t you just ask, ‘Which size do you want, M or L?’ If you want to know the size of the clothes, why don’t you just ask, ‘Which size do you want, a medium or a large? to which Maeda replied, “Yes, I think I did, but I went beyond what was necessary.

The crime was vile, clever, and malicious.

When asked by the prosecutor if he had sexual feelings toward an immature child under the age of 16, Maeda denied having any. The prosecutor pursued the issue further.

Prosecutor : “In this case, you say that you committed an indecent act, but since you don’t remember it and you don’t recognize that you committed an indecent act, does that mean that you don’t see Mr. A or Ms. B as sexual objects?”

Defendant Maeda : “Not because I don’t remember, but because I don’t have such sexual preferences.”

Prosecutor : “This time, you admit that there was a damage report and that these incidents occurred. That makes me wonder if you view minors as sexual objects.”

Defendant Maeda : “I see. However, I do not believe myself that my actions were for the purpose of indecency.”

Caught between words and slurred speech, Maeda insisted, “I have never looked at a minor in a sexual way.

At the trial, the defense attorney revealed that he had reached a settlement with the custodians of Ms. A and Mr. B and stated that he did not wish to be criminally punished, and finally, he made his closing argument.

The prosecutor requested a sentence of “two years in prison” on the grounds that the crime was “a despicable, clever, and malicious act of taking advantage of the victims’ sexual immaturity and satisfying his own sexual desires. On the other hand, the defense counsel argued that the defendant had shown remorse by settling with each of the victims and that there was little likelihood of recidivism since he could expect supervision from his relatives, and asked for a “lenient sentence with a stay of execution.

At the trial, Maeda answered the prosecutor’s question, “You say you don’t remember any of the incidents, but how did you feel when you settled the case and apologized?

I have a feeling that I really did it, but I don’t know if I am the one who did it.　I have a feeling that I did, but considering the feelings of the victims, I thought it was my responsibility to admit that such a thing must have happened and to apologize.

Neither A nor B were able to confide in their parents about their sexual victimization until after the initial arrest was reported and they were asked by concerned parents if they had been victimized. They must have spent many anguished days, wanting to confide in their parents but unable to do so.

However, it seems that for Maeda, it was just “unmemorable ” to her.

The verdict is scheduled to be handed down on March 2.

FRIDAY Digital welcomes information and tip-offs from everyone. Please send your information to the following information form or to the official X.

Information Form: https://friday.kodansha.co.jp/tips
Official X: https://x.com/FRIDAY_twit