“My Boss Threatened Me” — Man Who Ordered Arson to Drive Residents Out Reveals Damaging Facts in Court

“I was told (by the President) to burn down the property”

The trial of Hiroki Naito (31), who is charged with arson of an unoccupied structure and other offenses for setting fire to parts of private homes and ordering others to commit arson in order to force residents out of a redevelopment area, was held at the Tokyo District Court on September 2.

While admitting the charges, Naito repeatedly gave the astonishing testimony that he had acted on the instructions of the president of the real estate company where he worked.

“The incidents occurred between October and November last year. According to investigative sources, in February this year, six people, including the defendant, who worked for an apartment management company in Minato Ward, were arrested on suspicion of attempted arson of occupied structures and other offenses for allegedly setting fire to private homes and an adjacent apartment building. The six were acquaintances, and Naito is believed to have ordered the arson. The other five are believed to have divided up tasks such as preparing the tools, driving to the scene, and carrying out the arson. Subsequent investigation revealed that two of those believed to have actually carried out the arson received ¥1 million in compensation.” (National newspaper social affairs reporter)

According to the indictment and other documents, Naito worked for a real estate company, where he was responsible for negotiating property purchases. On October 31 last year, he allegedly set fire to the exterior wall of a home belonging to a resident in the redevelopment area who had refused to move out, damaging the mailbox.

Then, on November 18, he allegedly instructed several men to pour gasoline inside a room in an adjacent apartment building and set it on fire. During questioning, he also admitted to using cocaine and was additionally charged with violating the Narcotics and Psychotropics Control Act.

Wearing a navy suit and a black mask covering the lower half of his face, Naito clearly answered “There is no mistake” when asked whether the charges against him were correct.

During the witness examination held before questioning of the defendant, Naito’s common-law wife, Ms. A, took the stand and testified that Naito had been threatened by the company president. According to Ms. A, whenever the president called, Naito began leaving the room and answering the phone in secret. Suspecting that something was wrong, she listened in and said she heard the president shouting through the phone, “Hurry up and burn it!” and “Set it on fire!”

Naito began suffering from insomnia and started taking sleeping pills. As a result, his health deteriorated, including repeated vomiting, and he was hospitalized. Naito confided in Ms. A, “I’m being told (by the president) to burn down the property.” Ms. A urged him to quit, saying, “Are you stupid? Just quit that company already,” but several days later, a lawyer informed her that Naito had been arrested. Ms. A said:

“I felt betrayed. I was so sad, and I couldn’t contain my anger.”

Regarding the future, she said she would continue supporting him:

“I have to keep an eye on him. (Naito) doesn’t have any family, so I feel that I’m the only one who can help him get back on his feet.”

Questioning of the defendant was then conducted, during which Naito claimed that Ms. A had been made the target of threats used to pressure him, and that her presence had been a trigger for the crimes.

“You didn’t burn enough”

Naito had been negotiating with residents in the redevelopment area to get them to move out, but negotiations with several residents were proving difficult. One of them could not even be met with despite more than 10 visits. Naito was summoned to the company president’s office and instructed, “They’ll leave if you threaten them a little, right? You go burn it down.” He initially refused, but then:

“(The president) mentioned my common-law wife. He gave the specific location where (my common-law wife) runs her company and said, ‘You know what I mean, right?’ That made me think I had no choice but to do it.”

He therefore decided to commit the crime, believing that his common-law wife had been made the target of threats and that he had no choice but to carry out the crime.

He also testified:

“People who claimed to be members of an organized crime group were coming and going at the company, and I thought (the president) had connections with people like that.”

And then the incident occurred.

At around 5 a.m. on October 31 last year, Naito went to the resident’s home, spread lighter fluid, and set fire to the mailbox. He did so because he expected the damage to be minimal, with only the surface of the mailbox becoming blackened, and, as he had anticipated, the fire quickly went out. After confirming that the flames had not spread, he left the scene.

Several hours later, Naito returned to the scene by car with the company president. After seeing the mailbox, the president reportedly said dissatisfiedly, “You didn’t burn enough.”

In November last year, Naito was summoned to the president’s office again and pressed: “What’s going on? What about the Koyama property?” When Naito refused, saying, “I can’t do anything more,” the president proposed, “Find someone. I’ll make sure they don’t file a police report.”

Naito hired an acquaintance, B, for ¥1 million per person. B then recruited C, and on November 18 last year, they set fire to an empty room in an apartment building.

Afterward, Naito received ¥5 million in cash in a paper bag in the company’s underground parking lot. After deducting the ¥2 million he had paid upfront, he said he “used the remaining ¥3 million himself.”

Naito subsequently became increasingly stressed by his interactions with the company president. The president focused entirely on protecting himself, saying, “Even if we get caught, never mention my name.” When Naito asked, “Did you make sure the affected residents wouldn’t file a police report?” the president never answered. Naito said, “I was devastated,” and, as his stress left him emotionally unstable, he turned to cocaine.

When asked why he decided to tell the truth, he said:

“It’s not that I’m trying to avoid responsibility, but I wanted to tell them what actually happened.”

The prosecution condemned Naito, saying that the role he played was significant, and sought a sentence of five years and six months in prison. The company dismissed Naito as a disciplinary measure and issued a statement saying:

“To date, our company has found absolutely no evidence that it issued any instructions, orders, or other directives to the former employee in connection with this matter.”

The claims of the two sides are diametrically opposed. Was the incident really carried out solely by Naito? The verdict is scheduled to be handed down on September 29.