A “Champagne Glass Incident” Also Occurred 34 Years Ago… The Reporter Who Covered the Story Sensed That Mrs. Devi’s “Target of Anger” Hasn’t Changed

Disappointed by Nippon TV’s Coverage

Watching the news coverage of the trial of defendant Devi Sukarno (86), known as “Mrs. Devi,” I couldn’t help but recall a scene from 34 years ago—

The second hearing in the trial of “Mrs. Devi,” who is charged with assaulting two former female staff members, was held on September 8 at the Tokyo District Court. The prosecution sought a fine of 200,000 yen.

According to the indictment, she is accused of throwing a wet towel and a champagne glass at a former female secretary at a restaurant in Tokyo in February 2025, and of assaulting a former female manager at a veterinary clinic in October of the same year.

While the defense indicated it would not contest the assault charges themselves, Mrs. Devi herself stated in court,

“I did not throw the champagne glass,”

“I did not punch or kick anyone at all,”

and denied parts of the charges. The verdict is scheduled to be handed down on October 6.

At this point, the trial has not yet reached a conclusion. However, there was something that really bothered me: Mrs. Devi’s reaction after the hearing.

Regarding Nippon TV’s coverage of the trial, she posted on her X account,

“I am disappointed in Nippon TV’s coverage,”

. She asserted that she had not thrown a champagne glass nor hit or kicked anyone, and argued that focusing the coverage on statements from the alleged victim was

“is unfair and biased,”

.

Speaking of Nippon TV, it is the network with which Mrs. Devi has built a relationship over the years through numerous programs, including *Itte Q! To the Ends of the World!*,“Odoru! Sanma Goten!!” and “Guru Guru Ninety-Nine,” among many others. That is precisely why, from her perspective, she likely wonders, “Why aren’t they properly conveying my side of the story?”

The victim suffered injuries requiring 37 stitches

As I watched Mrs. Devi’s rebuttal, I vividly recalled her words and actions from 34 years ago. That was because, back then as well, she had fiercely countered the “anger” and “criticism” directed at her.

In 1992, in Aspen, Colorado, USA. The incident occurred at an international party held at the luxury resort hotel “Aspen Club Lodge.”

Approximately 200 people from around the world were invited, making for a glamorous evening attended by American millionaires and celebrities. During the event, Mrs. Devi got into an argument with Mrs. Victoria M. Osmeña, with whom she had once been close, and was arrested for injuring the other woman’s face with a champagne glass.

The victim suffered serious injuries to her face, requiring 37 stitches. Mrs. Devi was found guilty, sentenced to 60 days in jail and a $750 fine, and was incarcerated in a detention center.

At the time, I was a reporter for a Fuji TV network talk show, and I traveled to the scene to cover Mrs. Devi at the detention center for four days.

When she appeared before me at the detention center, she looked nothing like the “prisoner” I had imagined. She was dressed casually in a sweatshirt and leggings. She told me she had been riding an exercise bike right up until that moment inside the heated facility.

And, laughing as she spoke about the detention center,

“Isn’t it just like a country club?”

she said.

I asked her directly.

“The other woman had to get 37 stitches in her face,”

” Mrs. Devi immediately retorted,

“I’m an Asian woman. I would never do anything to hurt another woman’s face.”

Furthermore,

“The glass just hit her when she grabbed my hand.”

“I still do not accept the guilty verdict,”

She spoke in such a firm tone.

Even 34 years ago, after she had already been found guilty in court, she told me she “still didn’t accept” the verdict.

And now, in ’26. The term “champagne glass” has resurfaced in court once again.

However, this time, Mrs. Devi categorically denies the act that the prosecution claims she “threw.” Therefore, the finalized case from 1992 and the case currently under trial cannot be treated as equivalent.

I do not accept the guilty verdict

Even so, I can’t help but sense a common thread between these two incidents. It’s not the champagne glass, but rather

“I didn’t do that with malicious intent,”

“My side of the story isn’t being properly understood”—

—that is, the “way of dealing with” anger.

During my interview with Mrs. Devi at the detention center in 1992, what struck me more than her apology to the victim was her intense indignation at the situation she found herself in.

In this trial, Mrs. Devi has explained that there is a side to her personality that is like an “instant water heater.” I found myself strangely convinced by this description.

Judging from media reports, both the incident in Aspen 34 years ago and the two assault cases for which she is currently being prosecuted stem from moments when emotions flared up suddenly within interpersonal relationships.

Everyone gets angry from time to time. The problem lies in how one handles that anger.

Mrs. Devi has had a brilliant career and has remained active on the front lines of television even after turning 80. On *Itte Q!*, she boldly took on grueling location shoots, and no doubt many viewers were inspired by her example. That is precisely why this situation is so regrettable.

On the final day of an interview in 1992, Mrs. Devi was struck by a car while crossing the street and was rushed to the hospital by ambulance. About 10 years later, when I happened to run into her again at Haneda Airport, I asked,

“Were you okay after that accident?”

She laughed and replied,

“Oh? Did something like that really happen?”

she replied.

At that moment, I realized that for her, the past might be something that slips away surprisingly quickly.

Aspen 34 years ago and Tokyo in 2026. What connects these two places is not merely a champagne glass.

I can’t help but feel that it’s Mrs. Devi’s intense self-awareness—the sense that “I am not properly understood.” As she told me at the Aspen detention center,

“I still don’t accept the guilty verdict,”

I simply cannot get those words out of my head.

Will she finally be able to confront her own anger this time, rather than simply ending with “I can’t accept it”? I want to see that through to the end.

“FRIDAY Digital” welcomes tips and information from our readers. Please submit your information via the form below or through our official X account.

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