[Nasu: Murder and Body Dumping of Mr. and Mrs. Takarajima] “I Was Told to Do Everything”: The Man Who Acted as an Intermediary Describes the “Details of the Crime” in Court
Defendant Hirayama pleads “aiding and abetting murder”
In the case where the charred bodies of a couple who ran a restaurant in Ueno, Tokyo, were found in Nasu Town, Tochigi Prefecture, in April 2024, the lay judge trials for defendants Hikaru Sasaki (30) and Ayaken Hirayama (27)—who are charged with murder,abandonment and mutilation of a corpse, were held on June 25 at the Tokyo District Court. On that day, defendant Hirayama was cross-examined, and his testimony contradicted that of defendant Sasaki from the previous day.
According to the indictment and other documents, regarding Ryutaro Takarajima (then 55) and his wife Sachiko (then 56), who operated a restaurant in Ueno’sAmeyoko, Ryutaro Takarajima (55 at the time) and his wife Sachiko (56 at the time), who ran a restaurant, were murdered as part of a plot hatched by the couple’s eldest daughter, Manami Takarajima (33), and her common-law husband, Seihata Sekine (34), among others, who had grown increasingly dissatisfied with the business operations.Ryo Maeda (38), a former real estate company executive, lured the victims to the garage of a vacant house in Gotanda, Tokyo, under the pretense of showing them a property. There, Akito Wakayama (22) and Koki Kang (22)—acting on instructions from defendants Sasaki and Hirayama—carried out the murder by strangling the victims with an electrical cord, among other methods.They transported the body by car to Nasu Town, where they set it on fire to destroy the evidence. Seven men and women have been indicted in connection with the case.
Sasaki is believed to have been the mastermind, while Hirayama is believed to have acted as an intermediary. During the trial, the focus was on the hierarchical relationship between Sasaki and Hirayama and the extent to which each was actively involved in the crime.
At the first hearing on June 22, defendant Sasaki admitted to the charges, while defendant Hirayama stated,
“It is true that I was involved in the incident, but it was because I was instructed to do so (by defendant Sasaki),”
arguing that he acted as an accomplice and partially denying the charges. During the defendants’ questioning the previous day, Sasaki claimed that he had been threatened by the ringleader, Sekine, and could not refuse the request; regarding his relationship with Hirayama, he stated, “ I thought [Hirayama] was my superior.”
Both defendants, Sasaki and Hirayama, appeared in court again that day. Defendant Hirayama bowed deeply before entering the courtroom. Dressed in a black suit with a navy blue tie, he gave the impression of being polite, but a tattoo was visible on his right hand as he placed it on the witness stand to take his seat.
During cross-examination the previous day, Defendant Sasaki testified that he met Defendant Hirayama in February ’24, shortly after moving to Tokyo from his hometown of Fukuoka, at a club in Shibuya, where an acquaintance “introduced him as a member of the Sumiyoshi-kai yakuza group.” However, when asked by his defense attorney about how he met Defendant Sasaki,
“I believe it was at the end of Reiwa 5 (’23),”
revealing a discrepancy from the outset. Although they met at a club in Shibuya, a mutual acquaintance had introduced Defendant Sasaki to him as “a driver for the gang—a hardcore member,” and Defendant Hirayama also recognized Defendant Sasaki as a yakuza member. Furthermore,
“It is true that an acquaintance introduced me to Mr. Sasaki while laughing, saying I was ‘someone affiliated with the Sumiyoshi-kai,’ but I told him I was not a member of a yakuza group,”
she denied. When asked again by her defense attorney about her ties to organized crime, she denied them, stating, “I have never had any involvement whatsoever.” As Defendant Hirayama gave this testimony, Defendant Sasaki fixed her with a piercing gaze.
Amid this atmosphere, Defendant Hirayama’s testimony continued. When asked about his impression of Defendant Sasaki,
“Since no one wears a suit to a club, I thought he looked intimidating. He was thinner than he is now and muscular. His hair was also cut short, with a crew cut,”
he recalled. Although he gave this testimony, he noted that when they first met, he spoke to Defendant Sasaki in a casual tone, while Defendant Sasaki addressed him using honorifics. The following is a summary of Defendant Hirayama’s testimony during cross-examination, in which he described the events leading up to the incident.
Insisting it was strictly “on the instructions of Defendant Sasaki”
Although the two had not met in person since they first met, Defendant Sasaki called him around April 8, 2024. The call was regarding a request to “dispose of the bodies of a Chinese couple” for a fee of 5 to 6 million yen. When he asked for details, Defendant Sasaki explained , “The couple is elderly, so it won’t be difficult. Since they’re Chinese, no one will notice if they die.” According to Defendant Hirayama, during that phone call, he apologized to the older Defendant Sasaki , saying, “I’m sorry I spoke to you informally, thinking we were the same age, ” and then accepted the request. When asked by his defense attorney , “Why didn’t you refuse?” he replied , “He looked intimidating. I didn’t know what he might do to me if I refused, especially given that I’d spoken to him informally.”
Defendant Hirayama said he believed that “Defendants Jiang and Wakayama would boast about their exploits at the club and were fearless in any situation, ” which is why he singled them out for the job.When the proposal was made to Defendant Kang, he readily agreed, saying, “I’ll do it.” Even after being told the task involved disposing of a body, he answered “I’ll do it” without hesitation. Defendant Wakayama also agreed once he learned that Defendant Kang had accepted the job.
When he reported to Defendant Sasaki that he had found someone to carry out the plan, Sasaki requested, “I’ll pay generously, so please start by taking care of the couple.” The reward was increased to 15 million yen, and when Defendant Hirayama relayed this to Defendant Kang, he replied, “I’ll do it.” Defendant Hirayama asked for confirmation, saying, “Are you serious? If you want to back out, now’s the time,” but Defendant Kang replied , “It’s totally fine.” Defendant Wakayama, who was approached with the proposal , seemed hesitant at first but agreed, saying, “If Defendant Kang is going to do it, then I’ll do it too .”
When asked by the defense attorney, “ Even abandonment or mutilation of a corpse is a serious crime, isn’t it? Murder would be an even more serious offense. Didn’t you consider backing out at that point?” Defendant Hirayama replied,
“Since they asked us to find someone to carry it out, I thought there would be two of us doing it. I didn’t take it very seriously at the time,”
he reflected, indicating a lack of guilt.
The date for the murder was set for April 13. However, by that day, the vehicle and route for transporting the body—which Defendant Sasaki was supposed to arrange—had not been finalized.Since a rental car could leave a paper trail, Defendant Sasaki instructed them to use a stolen car, but Defendant Hirayama had no connections to obtain one. Reluctantly, they decided to use the black Prius owned by Defendant Hirayama.
On that same day, Defendant Sasaki designated an area under the elevated tracks in Ueno—a spot with little foot traffic—and instructed Defendant Hirayama to attack the couple with a baseball bat. When meeting up with Defendants Kang and Wakayama, Defendant Hirayama brought an extension cord, zip ties, duct tape, plastic bags, gasoline, and a fire starter, but he emphasized that “ this was also on Defendant Sasaki’s instructions.” However, although the area had little foot traffic, it was not a suitable location to carry out the murder, so the plan was not executed that day.
On April 14, he was instructed to ram his car into Mr. and Mrs. Takarajima on a street in Ueno and load them into the car to transport them, but the plan was again not carried out because defendants Kang and Wakayama voiced their dissatisfaction, saying, “There’s no way we can do this here.” Then, Defendant Hirayama suggested to Defendant Sasaki, “Can’t we arrange a secluded room?” When the defense attorney asked, “Whose idea was the secluded room?” Defendant Hirayama claimed he was not involved, stating, “It was Mr. Kang and Mr. Wakayama’s idea.” Defendant Sasaki instructed them to prepare a rope, but Defendant Hirayama instead prepared an extension cord. Regarding the reason for this, he explained, “Mr. Kang said the rope was too thick, so we used the extension cord instead.”
Ultimately, the plan was changed to luring Mr. and Mrs. Takarajima to the garage of a vacant house in Gotanda, drugging them with sleeping pills, and strangling them to death. Here as well, Defendant Hirayama asserted that he was not actively involved in the crime, stating, “I understood it to be Mr. Sasaki’s idea.”
Purchased a 1.2 million yen necklace after the crime
Then, on the night of April 15, ’24, the plan was carried out. After Kang and defendant Wakayama committed the crime inside the garage and Hirayama saw the car carrying the body head toward Nasu Town in Tochigi Prefecture, he met up with defendant Sasaki at an izakaya in front of Gotanda Station.There, he received a shoulder bag containing a messy bundle of bills, not even secured with a money strap. He then stored the bag in a coin locker and headed to clean the garage.During the crime, he reportedly received a report from defendant Wakayama stating , “The man (Ryutaro Takarajima) went down right away, but the woman (Sachiko Takarajima) wouldn’t go down, so Kang got irritated and hit her with a hammer, ” and he said he was “sent a photo of the garage splattered with blood on his cell phone.”
After finishing the cleaning and returning home, Defendant Hirayama counted the bundles of bills and found that instead of the expected 15 million yen in compensation, there was only 13.2 million yen. Although Defendant Sasaki had testified at the previous day’s trial that “he had not received any compensation, ” Defendant Hirayama countered as follows:
“On the day the attack on the streets of Ueno was called off, Mr. Sasaki told me, ‘I haven’t received a single yen.’Since it was the day before Mr. Sasaki’s birthday, I told him, ‘You can take 1 million yen out of it if you want.’” (Editor’s note: It appears that Defendant Hirayama conveyed to Defendant Sasaki words implying that he was allowed to take 1 million yen as part of his payment.The remuneration Defendant Hirayama received from Defendant Sasaki was 13.2 million yen, and the whereabouts of the 1.8 million yen remain a mystery. It is likely that Defendant Hirayama believed Defendant Sasaki had taken the 1.8 million yen, and it is thought that he answered, “You can take 1 million yen,” with that implication in mind.)
Later, he handed 5 million yen to Defendant Kang as a reward when he came to return the car.When the defense attorney pointed out , “Who decided on the split? Shouldn’t the perpetrator who took the risk get a larger share?” Defendant Hirayama replied , “I didn’t think about it deeply at the time.” True to his word, after handing 5 million yen to Defendant Kang , Defendant Hirayama went to Ueno and purchased a necklace worth 1.2 million yen.
Although he had received a report from Defendant Wakayama stating , “I disposed of the body in a place where it would absolutely never be found. No one will find out if it’s there,” news of the body’s discovery was reported very early the next day.
Defendant Hirayama was instructed by Defendant Sasaki to have the person who carried out the crime turn himself in, and he relayed this to Defendant Kang. Defendant Kang replied, “I want to turn myself in with Defendant Wakayama,” but in reality, the two did not turn themselves in and went into hiding. When Defendant Hirayama informed Defendant Sasaki of this, Defendant Sasaki then instructed Defendant Hirayama to turn himself in.
Defendant Hirayama stated,
“I thought the client might be associated with a yakuza group, and since I felt remorse for being involved in the incident, I decided to turn myself in,”
He met with Defendant Sasaki near the police box in front of Gotanda Station in the early morning, handed over his cell phone and car keys, and went straight to the police box to turn himself in around 6:00 a.m.At that time, Defendant Hirayama made a false statement to the police, saying, “The two perpetrators approached a couple who looked like they might be carrying money on a street in Ueno, and after a dispute ensued, they killed them. I lent them my car after hearing that,” and a statement of voluntary surrender was prepared. When asked why he made the false statement,
“I was told to make a false statement so that Mr. Sasaki and the client wouldn’t get caught,”
he revealed.
“The bereaved family even thanked me.”
During subsequent questioning, another detective who found something suspicious in Defendant Hirayama’s statement upon turning himself in asked , “You have a family, don’t you? You have a girlfriend, don’t you?” At that, Defendant Hirayama reportedly began to cry and immediately started telling the truth. When asked why he had decided to be honest, Defendant Hirayama explained,
“It’s because my feelings of remorse and regret became stronger than my fear,”
he said, sniffling.
When his lawyer asked him again, “Why didn’t you refuse Defendant Sasaki’s request?” he emphasized that he was afraid of Defendant Sasaki , saying, “I thought he would beat me up. I’m not entirely sure, though.” Trials for other defendants involved in this case will continue in the future, but Defendant Hirayama said,
“The police told me that they were able to arrest my accomplices thanks to my testimony. The bereaved family also thanked me for speaking honestly. If my testimony can be of even the slightest help, I will be happy to testify,”
He expressed his willingness to cooperate. While he showed a strong tendency toward self-defense, he gave the impression of having fully broken down and testifying honestly.
However, on June 24, during a hearing at the Tokyo District Court to clarify the grounds for his detention, defendant Sekine—who is believed to be the ringleader—asserted, “I did not conspire with anyone, and I am absolutely innocent.” Defendants Sasaki, Hirayama, and Sekine are each making entirely different claims.
It seems that an ugly blame game will continue to unfold in the courtroom going forward—.
For those who wish to know more details about the witness examination of defendant Hikaru Sasaki, please refer to the report published in Friday Digital on June 25, ’26.
PHOTO： Shinji Hasuo