Wife Killed by Criminal Psychologist Husband Writes: “Anger at Husband”
Why did Tadashi Asano, a former associate professor at Bunkyo University who met the defendant at the Ministry of Justice, and his wife have to end up like this?

The Saitama District Court (presided over by Kenji Koike) is holding a jury trial against Tadashi Asano, 53, a former associate professor at Bunkyo University, who was charged with murder and other crimes for stabbing his wife, 53, to death on a street in Saitama City in 2020.
On March 16 of the same year, the defendant ambushed his estranged wife, who worked at the Saitama Juvenile Rehabilitation Center, near her government building. As soon as he saw her riding a bicycle toward Urawa, he allegedly grabbed the rear of the bicycle, knocked her down, and stabbed her in the chest with a kitchen knife, killing her.
At the time of his arrest, it was reported that an investigation was underway, with marital problems believed to have been behind the incident. At the trial, however, it was revealed that the defendant had developed a “delusional disorder” prior to the incident. He had been harboring one-sided hatred toward his wife and family under the influence of delusions.
There is no doubt that I killed them. My wife and second daughter were trying to make me kill myself.
Asano said at his arraignment in his first trial on May 13. The story that his family was trying to make him commit suicide is a delusion. There is no dispute about that. At trial, the prosecution argued that the defendant was suffering from delusional disorder at the time and was in a state of diminished mental capacity. The defense, on the other hand, argued that the defendant was under the overwhelming influence of a delusional disorder and was insane at the time, and pleaded not guilty.
According to his opening statement and the evidence, the defendant originally worked for the Ministry of Justice, and met and married his wife, who worked for the Ministry as a legal technical officer. They have three daughters. The defendant later retired and went into research. At the time of the incident, he was an associate professor specializing in clinical and criminal psychology. However, the couple gradually became “dissatisfied with each other in terms of their attitude toward life and child-rearing, and their relationship deteriorated” (from the prosecution’s opening statement).
In the spring of 2019, the family moved to a government housing complex in Saitama City due to a change in his wife’s place of employment. In September of the same year, only the defendant and their second daughter moved to Kanagawa Prefecture, leaving the couple living separately. The couple moved to a new location because it was convenient for their second daughter, who was a student at the time, to commute to school.
In October of the same year, the defendant began to feel unwell and visited a psychiatrist, where she was diagnosed as “depressed” and prescribed medication. His symptoms did not improve, and “by January 2020 at the latest, he began to believe that his wife and second daughter were driving him and trying to rob him of his property due to mental anxiety and stress” (from the prosecution’s opening statement).
The following month, the defendant moved alone to Saitama Prefecture, and his second daughter returned to his wife, but it was around this time that he began to harbor murderous thoughts toward her. He made repeated preparations, including purchasing a kitchen knife, and in March, he committed the crime.
According to the opening statement by the defense, the defendant began to feel a mental disorder because “his wife stopped talking to him after they moved to Saitama City.
I wrote to her many times, saying that my words and actions might have hurt her, but she never took any notice of me. My anxiety increased. I thought that if I moved out with my second daughter and stayed away from my wife, my anxiety would subside, but even after we moved out, I never felt at ease” (opening statement by the defense).
When a credit card used by his wife was debited from the defendant’s account, he thought that his property might be taken, and when the phone he left at home was misplaced, he began to suspect that his second daughter might be looking at his phone.