Former JumPoke Shinji Saito on Trial Experts Say Prison Sentence Likely and the Future of the Baumkuchen Shop
“I want criminal punishment, not a settlement”
The second trial of Shinji Saito (43), former member of the comedy trio “Jungle Pocket”, was held on March 17.
The case concerns allegations that Saito sexually assaulted a woman in her 20s whom he had just met on a location bus, charged with non-consensual indecent acts and non-consensual intercourse. At the first trial on March 13, he denied the charges, claiming, “I believed the woman consented to my actions,” and pleaded not guilty.
On this day, the prosecution called the victim herself and her mother as witnesses. The victim testified that Saito grabbed her cheek and kissed her, saying:
“I was shocked. We had just met, it was still morning, and I knew Saito had a wife and children. I thought it was abnormal and became scared when he kissed me on the work location bus.”
Her mother recalled the LINE message she received from her daughter:
“‘JumPoke Saito is really gross; he tried to kiss me,’ and I thought it was disgusting.”
The victim further revealed that Saito’s side had offered 25 million yen in a settlement under two conditions: Continuation of his entertainment activities, no request for punishment.
She declared:
“I want criminal punishment, not a settlement,”
expressing a strong desire for justice. Crime journalist Taihei Ogawa commented:
“I think there’s a possibility that, given the prosecution seeks five years’ imprisonment, the court could hand down a four-year prison sentence.”
Media reports also indicate a high likelihood of a prison sentence.
Meanwhile, the official X account for Kuchen SAITO, Saito’s Baumkuchen sales business, was updated by March 18, announcing that Baumkuchen would be sold in Kofu City, Yamanashi, from March 20 to 22. The attached poster stated, “The owner will be present! Photo sessions, etc., will also be held,” suggesting Saito intends to continue running his store.
However, Saito has had past troubles with the store.
“FRIDAY” reported in the combined November 28 / December 5, 2025 issue on a financial dispute between Saito and the company managing the Baumkuchen business. We revisit that incident here. (The following quotes are from the original article, with names and expressions preserved as published.)
The money still hasn’t been transferred
“When he was sent to the prosecutors, he tearfully told us, ‘I don’t have enough to live on and I’m in trouble.’ We felt sorry for him and, to help with his living expenses even a little, a group of volunteers set up company T to sell Baumkuchen. But he trampled on our goodwill. We can never forgive that.”
A, a current employee of company T, which runs the Baumkuchen sales business, confessed this to reporters while suppressing his anger.
In October 2024, former “Jungle Pocket” member Saito had his contract with Yoshimoto Kogyo terminated, making a return to the public stage difficult. It is well known that from April 2025, Saito has been earning a living by selling Baumkuchen.
However, Saito is said to have betrayed company T—the very benefactors and support system he relied on to restart his career. A holds up the business outsourcing contract and explains:
“The contract stipulated that Baumkuchen sales profits would be split 50/50 between T and Saito. Sales were not bad, but the approximately 1.6 million yen earned in Fukuoka on October 8 and 9, 2025, along with the change funds in the register, were never transferred to the company account.
The sales money from Fukuoka was first deposited into Saito’s personal account and then sent to T’s account. Saito was responsible for reporting sales, and T handled the accounting. According to the agreement, half of the profit after expenses was to be paid as remuneration by the end of the following month—but despite repeated reminders, there was no response, and he still holds the 1.6 million yen. From our perspective, it’s as if he ran off with the sales revenue.”
Why did Saito not transfer the sales money? Later, T received a message from Saito’s attorney stating roughly:
“Part of the remuneration due has not been paid, and there is concern that future payments may also remain unpaid. Therefore, until this issue is resolved, the sales revenue is temporarily retained by Mr. Saito.”
A continued:
“Even though the financial dispute has not been resolved, Saito began purchasing Baumkuchen directly at the end of October without going through T, selling it individually. The contents were the same; only the product name and packaging design were changed.”
Though difficult to believe, company T responded to “FRIDAY’s” inquiry:
“It is true that a financial dispute has arisen with Mr. Saito. We plan to file a police report for embezzlement in the course of business.”
Saito also vows to fight to the end
When questioned about the alleged embezzlement, Saito responded in the presence of his attorney:
“It is true that approximately 1.6 million yen in Baumkuchen sales from Fukuoka is in my possession. However, this is because the remuneration for August and September has not been paid. I became strongly concerned that even if I sent the sales money to company T, my pay would still not be given. Therefore, I decided not to transfer the 1.6 million yen until the issue is resolved. I only have the sales money in my possession; I do not hold the cash register’s change fund.”
Saito’s attorney added:
“Except for the Fukuoka sales in October, the Baumkuchen sales money was managed by company T. However, T has not clarified the breakdown of sales and expenses since August. Without knowing the details of sales and expenses, we cannot determine Saito’s remuneration. This is a problem that predates any alleged non-payment. We have requested that T disclose all sales and expense details, but they have refused.
Thus, under the principle of simultaneous performance (the right to withhold one’s own obligations until the other party fulfills theirs), the sales money is being retained by Saito. He is merely holding the funds, so the allegation of embezzlement does not apply. Legally, there is no reason to censure Saito’s actions.”
Regarding his individual sale of the same Baumkuchen since the end of October, his attorney argued:
“The contract with company T does not include a non-compete clause. Furthermore, to avoid confusion with the Baumkuchen sold through T, the product name has been changed. Legally, there is no problem here either.”
Maintaining a stance of full resistance, toward the end of the interview, Saito himself expressed his thoughts about T:
“Because they started the Baumkuchen business for me, I’ve been able to come out into the public like this. For that, I am grateful to company T. That’s why I endured even with unpaid wages. But over time, I became increasingly anxious, wondering how long I should endure, and whether the unpaid amounts would continue.”
According to reports from the day after this coverage, the police accepted a complaint and launched an investigation. The subsequent developments remain unclear, but depending on the outcome of Saito’s trial, continuing the Baumkuchen business could become difficult.