He ejaculated twice,” “He forged the contract,” … What was revealed in the trial of a former professor of the University of Tokyo’s “sex industry begging” by his “subordinate.

A case in which a former charismatic professor of the Graduate School of the University of Tokyo, Japan’s highest academic institution, forced his joint research partner to entertain him at a brothel and other places. A trial was held for a former professor, Shinichi Sato, who was also a recipient of entertainment. While Sato, the main defendant, denied bribery, claiming that the entertainment was compensation for his lectures, what did his trusted subordinate have to say? Nonfiction writer Takehide Mizutani, who observed the high-profile trial, delves deeper into the case.

On April 23, the Tokyo District Court heard the first trial of Ayumu Yoshizaki, 46, a former specially-appointed associate professor at the University of Tokyo’s Graduate School of Medicine, who is accused of bribery in a corruption case in which professors at the graduate school of the University of Tokyo were allegedly repeatedly offered high entertainment by their joint research partners.

Yoshizaki, who admitted to the prosecution, claimed that he could not refuse instructions from Shinichi Sato, 62, a former professor at the University of Tokyo who is also accused of similar crimes, citing “the culture of the University of Tokyo School of Medicine” as his background. However, it was revealed that he gave a false explanation to the university about the fact that he had received entertainment for entertainment, saying that it was for the purpose of research on sexually transmitted diseases at the direction of Sato.

According to the indictment, from March 2011 to August 2012, Yoshizaki, in conspiracy with Sato, a former professor of the university, received entertainment from Koichi Hikichi, the representative director of the Japan Cosmetic Association (JCA) (indicted on bribery charges), a total of 30 times in exchange for favors in establishing a course. He is accused of accepting a total of approximately 1,960,000 yen worth of bribes, including entertainment at a high-class club in Ginza and a soapland, on a total of 30 occasions in return for facilitating the establishment of the course.

Regret” revealed by a subordinate

At 10:30 a.m. on April 23 in Courtroom No. 706 of the Tokyo District Court.

Yoshizaki, dressed in a black suit, sits modestly on the witness stand. After admitting the facts of the prosecution, he was asked by his defense counsel, “Do you deeply regret what happened? He answered, “Yes,” and then continued, “I am deeply sorry for what I did.

I apologize for the trouble I have caused to all of you by this mistake. The President was forced to hold an apology press conference, the Director of the University of Tokyo Hospital resigned his responsibility, and I have caused inconvenience to researchers, their families, patients, and the public in my position as a deemed public official.”

Yoshizaki also revealed that he had donated 1 million yen as atonement and expressed his intention to part ways with his public duties.

I have shown my back to the young doctors who are lined up to follow in my footsteps, which I should never have shown. I will no longer be involved in public affairs. I hope that when I conduct my research in a private capacity, I can serve society in a fair manner.”

Although he expressed remorse when questioned by his defense counsel, he could not hide his confusion and seemed flustered by the questions from the prosecutor and the presiding judge that followed. Yoshizaki explained the circumstances surrounding the entertainment.

It is true that I requested [the entertainment]. It is not something that can be forgiven. I have no intention of saying that it did not happen. My boss told me, ‘Mr. Hikichi is like a sponsor,’ ‘It’s just business,’ and ‘It’s not right to refuse or not accept an invitation when he invited me.’ I didn’t want to offend Mr. Hikichi.”

The boss was Sato, who has absolute power within the University of Tokyo, and the defendant complained that he was forced into a situation where he could not refuse because of their master-servant relationship.

The first time the Yoshizaki defendants were entertained was on February 14, 2011. Yoshizaki designated a high-class French restaurant in Ginza, and sent an e-mail to Hikichi in advance saying, “We have a private room at ◯◯◯ (restaurant name), and the three of us would like to have a casual conversation over a delicious meal and a glass of wine to our hearts’ content. According to Mr. Hikichi, when it came time to pay the bill, both defendants did not receive it, so he picked it up and they said, “Thank you very much. The cost was approximately 156,000 yen.

The presiding judge asked about this time, “Didn’t you ask them to let you pay your share?” Yoshizaki was asked by the presiding judge, “Didn’t you ask to have your portion paid?

I tried to pay. I pretended to go to the restroom and told the clerk I was going to pay, but he told me he had received the money and was told not to take it, and I took advantage of that.”

In a master-slave relationship in which he cannot disobey Sato, is such a “sneak attack” allowed?

Taking a woman home on an overseas business trip

At a press conference held after the trial, Hikichi was asked by reporters whether this was true or not, and he replied, “No, it is not true. I have never heard Dr. Yoshizaki or Dr. Sato say that I would pay for it,” he denied it outright.

Later that day at the French restaurant, Yoshizaki asked Hikichi, “Is there a bar with a private room? This led to the addition of a club in Ginza to their dinners. After about a year of club-going, he went to Bangkok to inspect a marijuana plantation with the assistance of JCA’s research partner. During that trip, Yoshizaki and Sato “took home” a Thai woman in the nightlife district, and that was the decisive factor. After returning to Japan, Sato’s true colors were revealed and he complained, “Even though I paid so much money for the club, I couldn’t even hold hands or kiss her.

Regarding this soapland entertainment, he asked, “Is soapland a personal decision?　Do I have to listen to defendant Sato to that extent?” When the prosecutor asked Yoshizaki if he had to listen to Sato’s advice to that extent, Yoshizaki replied awkwardly, “I don’t think so.

He replied, “You know, ……, there is a culture at medical school. There is a culture of medical school, and in the culture of medical school, what professors say is quite strong. I was a graduate of Nagasaki University, and Dr. Sato was a professor of dermatology there at the time. I followed him all the way to the University of Tokyo. What Dr. Sato says has an absolute ring to it. I wouldn’t say that I do everything he tells me to do, but I would like to mention that that is the background behind this.”

At this point, the prosecutors made a sharp point.

What about (another doctor involved in a joint research project) who declined soap entertainment?”

Yoshizaki, sitting on the witness stand, shifted his chair with his hand and shrank back. He was clearly upset. Then he squeezed out the following words.

I’m afraid it’s difficult for you to understand this area. …… If I say something to Dr. Sato and he doesn’t like it, there will be no place for me in the Department of Dermatology at the University of Tokyo. I am also halfway through the Nagasaki medical office and have come to Todai, so if I am abandoned here, how will I be able to stand on my feet?”

Thus, Yoshizaki also fell deeply in love with Yoshiwara and “happily talked about how I would ejaculate twice” (Hikichi’s statement at the trial on the same day).

Falsifying documents to make it look like he was “on the job

The incident first came to light in late August 2012, when Sato verbally abused Hikichi, saying, “Bring me 13 million yen or I’ll kill you! He was so angry that his patience ran out and he began to show signs of being a liar. Hikichi’s patience ran out and he reported the incident to the police, which was later reported by the mass media, exposing the soap opera entertainment.

Upon receiving the report, Todai conducted an internal investigation and questioned Sato about the reason for his visit to the soap, to which Sato responded that his visit to the brothel was for the purpose of research on sexually transmitted diseases, and presented a business consignment contract. When confronted by the prosecutor about this document, Yoshizaki admitted that he had forged the contract and replied, “It’s not good for my appearance.

He admitted that he forged the contract and then replied, “Because it would not be good for my appearance, [defendant Sato] told me that it would be better to say that I went there to do research. I was told that we would draw up the contract, and I acted as the contact person.

The prosecution argued that the crime was premeditated and habitual. When defendant Sato was absent, he admitted to himself that he was alone and carefree and enjoyed the entertainment in this case. The motive was malicious, enjoyable, and sexually gratifying,” and the court sentenced him to one year and two months in prison with an additional fine of approximately 1,960,000 yen. In response, the defense argued, “In an absolute hierarchical relationship in which he also held the authority over personnel matters, he followed Sato’s instructions and indulged his fascination with the defendant, even though he knew it was a bribe. It is difficult for me to advocate the wishes of defendant Sato, whom I looked up to as my mentor. He also requested that the court show leniency in his case, saying, “He has been socially sanctioned by the media and other media reports.

When asked by the judge, “Any last questions? Yoshizaki took the stand and said, “Nothing in particular,” before going on to say, “I’m really sorry for the trouble I’ve caused you.

I am truly sorry for the trouble I have caused you. I would like to apologize deeply to all of you for betraying your trust.

Yoshizaki bowed lightly. The verdict will be handed down on May 22. What will Sato, who claims that “entertainment is compensation,” have to say in court?