<figure id="attachment_480184" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 2329px;" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-480184"><a href="#" data-ident_hash="22b04a53"><img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/fridaydigital/image/private/t_article_image/wpmedia/2026/09/22ccbc35f16315c3aeaebd7cb6460345.jpg" alt=""></a><figcaption id="caption-attachment-480184" class="wp-caption-text">Dewi Sukarno Leaves the Tokyo District Court After the First Hearing</figcaption></figure>
<h2> Disappointed by Nippon TV’s reporting</h2>
Watching the reports on the trial of Dewi Sukarno, 86, better known as “Madame Dewi,” I could not help but be reminded of a scene from 34 years ago.
The second hearing in the case against Madame Dewi, who is charged with assaulting two former female staff members, was held at the Tokyo District Court on September 8. Prosecutors sought a fine of ¥200,000.
According to the indictment, in February 2025, she allegedly threw hand towels and a champagne glass at a former secretary at a restaurant in Tokyo, and in October of the same year, she allegedly assaulted a former manager at an animal hospital.
While the defense indicated that it would not contest the assault charges themselves, Madame Dewi herself denied some of the allegations in court, saying:
“I did not throw a champagne glass.”
“I did not hit or kick her at all.”
The verdict is scheduled to be handed down on October 6.
At this point, the trial has yet to reach a conclusion. However, there was something that I simply could not shake off. It was Madame Dewi’s reaction after the hearing.
Regarding Nippon TV’s coverage of the trial, she expressed her dissatisfaction on X, writing:
“I am disappointed by Nippon TV’s reporting.”
She maintained that she had not thrown a champagne glass and had neither hit nor kicked anyone, and criticized the network on the grounds that focusing its reporting on statements from the side claiming to have been victimized was,
“Unfair and biased.”
Nippon TV, of course, is a network with which Madame Dewi has had a long-standing relationship, appearing on numerous programs including &#8220;ItteQ! Around the World with Nippon TV, Odoru! Sanma Goten!!,&#8221; and &#8220;Guruguru Ninety-Nine.&#8221; Perhaps that is precisely why she feels, “Why aren’t you properly reporting my side of the story?”
<div data-friday-ad-slot="AD_inArticle"></div>
<div data-friday-nextpage-lead="As for the other “champagne incident”..."></div>
<div class="expapp-yahoo-paragraph-break"></div>
<figure id="attachment_480203" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 677px;" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-480203"><a href="#" data-ident_hash="d84f6f73"><img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/fridaydigital/image/private/t_article_image/wpmedia/2026/09/2ca48c70f6f701fe2583461e8f73b8bb.jpg" alt=""></a><figcaption id="caption-attachment-480203" class="wp-caption-text">Madame Dewi appears in Criminal Court on charges of assaulting her manager and others. She also promoted Animal Welfare in court.</figcaption></figure>
<h2> Victim suffered an injury requiring 37 stitches</h2>
Watching Madame Dewi’s rebuttal, I vividly remembered her words and actions from 34 years ago. Back then, too, she fiercely pushed back against 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 &#8220;Aspen Club Lodge.&#8221;
About 200 people from around the world had been invited, making for a glamorous evening attended by American tycoons and celebrities. During the event, Madame Dewi got into an argument with Mrs. Victoria M. Osmeina, a woman with whom she had once been close, and was arrested for allegedly injuring the woman’s face with a champagne glass.
The victim suffered serious facial injuries requiring 37 stitches. Madame Dewi was found guilty and sentenced to 60 days in jail and a $750 fine, and was incarcerated.
At the time, I was a reporter for a Fuji TV-affiliated variety news program. I traveled to the United States and spent four days interviewing Madame Dewi while she was in custody.
When she appeared before me at the detention facility, she looked nothing like the prisoner I had imagined. She was dressed casually in a sweatshirt and leggings. She had apparently been riding a stationary bike until just before I arrived, inside the heated facility.
And speaking about the detention facility, she said with a laugh:
“Isn’t it kind of like a country club?”
I asked her frankly:
“The other woman needed 37 stitches in her face.”
Madame Dewi immediately pushed back.
“I am an Eastern woman. I would never do something that would injure another woman’s face.”
She went on:
“The glass only struck her when she grabbed my hand.”
“Even now, I am not satisfied with the guilty verdict.”
She spoke in a forceful tone.
Even 34 years ago, after already being found guilty in court, she was telling me that she was not satisfied with the verdict.
And now, in 2026, the words champagne glass have once again appeared in court.
This time, however, Madame Dewi is specifically denying the prosecution’s allegation that she threw the champagne glass. Therefore, the 1992 case, which has already been conclusively decided, cannot be treated as equivalent to the case currently before the court.
<div data-friday-ad-slot="AD_inArticle"></div>
<div data-friday-nextpage-lead="“Similarities” to the guilty verdict from 34 years ago"></div>
<div class="expapp-yahoo-paragraph-break"></div>
<h2>&#8220;I am still not satisfied with the guilty verdict&#8221;</h2>
Even so, I cannot help but feel that the two incidents have something in common. It is not the champagne glasses, but rather the way she processes her anger through the beliefs that:
“I did not do such a thing with malicious intent.”
“The circumstances on my side have not been properly understood.”
What I sensed during my interview with Madame Dewi at the detention facility in 1992 was an intense indignation over the situation she found herself in, more than an apology to the victim.
In the current trial, Madame Dewi has explained her personality in terms suggesting that she can be like a short-fused person whose temper quickly boils over. Somehow, I found myself agreeing with that description.
Judging from the circumstances reported about both the 1992 incident in Aspen and the two assault cases for which she has now been indicted, what lies behind them appears to be moments when emotions suddenly become heightened amid interpersonal conflicts.
Everyone gets angry. The issue is how that anger is dealt with.
Madame Dewi has had a remarkable career and continued to work on the front lines of television even after turning 80. On &#8220;ItteQ!,&#8221; she fearlessly took on grueling assignments, and there are surely many viewers who were encouraged by her determination. That is precisely why this is so disappointing.
On the final day of my reporting in 1992, Madame Dewi was crossing a road when she was struck by a car and taken to the hospital by ambulance. About 10 years later, I happened to run into her again at Haneda Airport. I asked her:
“Are you all right after the injury you suffered back then?”
She replied with a laugh:
“Oh? Did that happen?”
At that moment, I thought that for her, the past might pass by at an astonishing speed.
Thirty-four years ago in Aspen and 2026 in Tokyo. What connects the two places is not simply a champagne glass.
To me, it seems to be Madame Dewi’s intense conviction that “I am not being properly understood.” The words she said to me at the detention facility in Aspen—
“I am still not satisfied with the guilty verdict.”
—I simply cannot get them out of my head.
This time, rather than ending with “I am not satisfied,” will she be able to confront her own anger? That is what I want to see through to the end.
&#8220;FRIDAY Digital&#8221; welcomes information and tips from our readers. Please send us information through the tip-off form below or via our official X account.
Tip Submission Form: https://friday.kodansha.co.jp/tips 
Official X: https://x.com/FRIDAY_twit
<div class="expapp-no-provided-scope expapp-no-provided-scope-end"></div>

 Mitsutoshi Abe (Former TV Reporter)

 Shinji Hasuo, Hiroyuki Komatsu

 Mrs. Devi appeared in court for her second criminal trial on September 8. She was indicted on charges of assault, including throwing a champagne glass at her former secretary, but 34 years ago, there was a similar incident involving a champagne glass…

Another Champagne Glass Incident—34 Years Later: Reporter Says Devi’s Target of Anger Hasn’t Changed

Access Ranking