SASEBO, Nagasaki Pref. (Kyodo) A family court here decided Wednesday to institutionalize an 11-year-old girl who killed her classmate while at school in June.

Under the decision by the Nagasaki Family Court's Sasebo branch, the girl can be kept in solitary confinement at the institution if her behavior is determined problematic. The step is effective for two years, beginning Wednesday.

Her name has been withheld because she is a minor.

The court ruled that the girl had firm intent and killed the friend as planned.

"She has no disorder resulting from any mental illness," presiding Judge Heinai Komatsu said in handing down the decision, according to court officials. "She fed her aggressive ego, affected by horror novels she had immersed herself in."

In response to the court decision, the child consultation office in Sasebo is expected to send the girl to Japan's only state-run facility for girls that is empowered to lock inmates in solitary.

The institution is in Tochigi Prefecture.

There are 58 similar facilities in Japan, established under the Child Welfare Law. But only two, one for boys and the one to which the girl will be sent, are permitted to keep the children locked in solitary confinement. People aged 20 or younger who have committed or are feared to commit serious offenses are sent to such facilities.

The girl killed Satomi Mitarai, 12, on June 1 by slashing her throat with a box cutter in an empty classroom of Okubo Elementary School in Sasebo during lunch hour. Mitarai bled to death.

Earlier, investigative sources said the girl told police she killed Mitarai because the victim had taunted her on an Internet bulletin board.

The girls each had a Web site and often used their personal computers to communicate via text messages.

Mitarai had written a message that the girl did not like, the sources said, and they argued after the girl asked Mitarai to stop sending such messages.

The family court held a secret session Wednesday.

The girl, her lawyer and parents, and 11 other concerned people were in attendance, according to court officials.

Under the Juvenile Law, the girl will not be held criminally liable because she is younger than 14.

Police had to refer the case to a local child consultation office immediately after taking the child into custody.

The consultation office sent the girl to the family court with recommendations to justify putting her into a facility that can keep her in solitary.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What do you think about this whole case?
The section that said "She fed her aggressive ego, affected by horror novels she had immersed herself in." kind freaked me out..showing what some of these things can do to young minds.

Kinda strange. You hear things like this happening in the U.S so its kinda weird to hear about it happening in Japan. She should be locked up though.

I don't know..
I keep trying to picture what would go through someones mind at the age of eleven while killing someone..hm.

That's freaky.

wow after watching alot of japanese movies i can see why she did it

I believe in America, if the person murdered someone intwentioanlly, they can be put to probabtion, then life after that.

She's 11. I bet she didn't think about the girl actually dying, like no longer being there at all, and only thought about stopping the taunting. It's sad, but she should be punished. Solitary's an interesting choice though...

she. I think she wanted to make her done..... Sometimes ppl can get that angry.

Japanese civil law needs reform. If a girl killed a classmate completely understanding what she was doing, regardless of her age, she should receive a VERY strong punishment.

Americans understand that. Japanese insist that people change. We need to get rid of our old beliefs and realize that humans are governed by science, not be hokey religions. People can't just magically change or get better. People who commit these crimes are mentally ill.

I'm terrified to think that in nine years, that girl will be amongst us and we won't know her face or her name because of all the laws in Japan that protect the "rights" of child criminals.

Well it guess the victim was b!tch since she managed to provoke such a reaction.

I don't know about that
11 years old = grade 6, and by then, I knew that death is a permanent thing
young people are not given nearly enough credit
young people, and cripples
society has a way of dismissing them

I'm not a big fan of that "name withheld" crap either
the way I see it, is if you don't want people to know that you killed someone / robbed a store / commited any crime, then don't commit the crime in the first place

when you choose to become a criminal, you forfeit some of your rights (or at least, you should forfeit some rights, but we're too soft on criminals)

Americans understand?
Uh isn't it the same here?
There's always a big mess when a child kills someone.
I have yet to see a child in the united states receive a "very strong punishment".
Worse I seen is they wait till the child is 18 and then throw them in jail for life.

I'm not saying she didn't know death was permanent, but you can't say with any certainty that she actually realized that the other girl was going to die. The thought process of an 11 year old isn't very complete, no 11 year old thinks too much about the consequences.

Usually an 11 year olds mistakes will be dealt with by a parent, and the 11 year old has to deal with the parent. They're not exactly exposed to the real world. Besides, if she was stupid enough to get angry over a text message, then I think you're giving her too much credit.

but if a 30 year old were to get upset over a text message, and kill someone, then it would be alright to sentence him/her to life in jail, because they were mature enough to understand the consequences?

you are focusing on the age, when you should be focused on the act
murder is still murder, and something is obviously not right with this girl
she should not be free to walk among regular citizens; she has already proven to be a threat to society
you will probably think that this is a cold-hearted thing for me to say (because she's a child), but if I said it about a 30 year old, most people wouldn't think twice about it

You're focusing on the act, and not on the maturity level. I don't care about age at all, it's just a number. This girl is obviously immature mentally. Murder is murder, but the circumstances in which the act was committed are never the same, and you don't seem to take that into any account. The girl was being bullied, she was provoked and she killed in rage. 12 year olds can suffer from severe emotional distress as well as adults, but in Japan, you can't argue that, so they don't care. In America she would have had a good chance to get a probation, or been sent to a psychological institute, this girl gets solitary confinement, which, if anything will make her worse.

actually, I do take the circumstances into account
as she was not killing someone in self-defence, I don't feel sorry for her
as you said, she was provoked

if she was provoked, she could have just said "fuck you" and left it at that
but instead, she killed someone who was supposedly her friend

and in America, the legal system is too soft on "emotional trauma"
if you're emotionally unbalanced enough to kill someone because you were provoked, regardless of age, then you should be institutionalized
I have no problem with having a seperate institute to send phychologically unbalanced criminals, but they should not get reduced sentences

Canada is no better
we are far too soft on serious crimes here

I'm not asking you to feel sorry for her, nobody cares about that, but the punishment isn't going to help. Solitary is possibly the worst choice of punishment available.


Telling the other girl to fu-k off wasn't going to get her to stop. To an 11 year old, she had practically no options left, and read novels where the solution is to kill the other person off. Those novels almost never go into detail on what happens after the murder was comitted, so her view was rather jaded. She is a product of the things she is exposed to, and to society what she did was wrong, but to herself it might not be. That is a mental condidtion, and no ammount of leaving her alone, with her own thoughts and mindset is going to help or change anything.


This is an opinion, you don't really have any right to state it as a fact. The system is as it is, for reasons. Nobody can know what it's like to be emotionally unstable, unless they are, and they don't know what it's like to not be. Unbalanced criminals almost never get reduced sentances, or if they do it's in conjuction with an institution.

yes and no
solitary is the worst choice of punishment available for her
but I did not say that she needs to be put into solitary
I said she needs to be seperated from society

because when you kill someone, it is no longer about what is best for you
it is about what is best for society
I'm sure it would be better for her if she was allowed to run free, killing anyone else who provokes her
but no matter what that girl posted on the net, she didn't deserve to die for it


when I was a kid, I read horror novels, I watched scary movies, I played war games, and I played those games in arcades with the guns, like Area 51
and many people have told me things that have offended / provoked me
I'm sure I have pissed off my share of people as well

I have yet to kill a single person
there is always an alternative

and it is not the books that made her this way; she is mentally ill
as such, she needs treatment, and she needs to be seperated from society, in accordance with the severity of her actions
murder should be a life sentence, except for exceptional cases
and the only thing that makes murder excusable is self-defence

someone who kills in self defence, does so because they have no options left, and they fear for their lives
this girl had several options left, and was not in mortal danger
can you prove that she will not kill again?

this is an opinion, and the right to free speech allows me to state it as such
I never gave any source for my opinion, or otherwise claimed it as fact

the system is as it is for reasons
that does not mean that it does not have flaws
some of which are bigger than others

Alright, but she's only seperated from society for two years. Leaving her in solitary for two years isn't going to do anything about her problems.


Well, mentally ill people are part of society too. The girl is obviously mentally unstable, normal people don't kill other people. Locking the girl up for two years isn't going to magically cure her. It would be better for her if she was rehabilitated enough to stop killing people.


Which is part of the reason why the girl is mentally ill. Her boundries of definition for what is real and what is not are distorted. Yours weren't. You can't compare yourself to her.


Good for you? I don't know why you felt the need to state that. You're can't compare normal people to her.


Which is again, why this is the wrong treatment for this girl. Two years won't do anything for her psyche. Treatment doesn't mean locking her up and keeping everybody else happy. She's a person too, and deserves the chance to get healthy and live the rest of her life normally. Solitary won't do it.


Who's talking about self defense?

I can't prove that she can't kill again, but then again, I can't prove that you won't kill, or my mother won't kill.


And nowhere did you state it was an opinion. You said it as if everybody believed the way you did, and " the legal system is too soft on "emotional trauma" is stated as fact. Freedom of speach allows me to call the sky green, but that doesn't always make it true.


Of course it has flaws, everything has flaws, but no matter what change you make to it there will still be flaws. Cracking down on the mentally ill, and sticking them in jail forever will not improve anything.

I don't agree with her being put in solitary confinement either
but, she should be seperated from society, barring a conclusive psychological evaluation showing definite reform
and two years is extremely short for murder

yes, mentally ill people are a part of society
but she's not the "I work at Sarcan" mentally ill
or the "I have Alzheimer's" mentally ill
she's the "I killed my friend because she publicly humiliated me" mentally ill

I don't expect locking her up to cure her
she is most likely beyond help

not in a direct comparison
but I can compare the effects of horror novels on an individual with the results shown in both my behaviour and hers
horror novels are not the source of this girl's rage, and should not be used as a "Get Out of Jail Free" card

I think solitary confinement is taking it too far, however, she should not be released on grounds on mental illness
her sentence should have been longer than two years, and medical/psychological treatment should have been a condition
unfortunately, they were not

I'm talking about scenarios where she should be released back into the public
murder-by-rage is not one of those scenarios

I'm sorry you misinterpreted what I posted, or I did not post clearly enough for you
but I am not in the habit of making a footnote to indicate fact from opinion
it is more common practice to give sources for facts, than to give disclaimers for opinion, especially on a public forum

nobody is cracking down on the mentally ill
this is a murder case

are you this strong of an advocate for mentally sane people who kill for moral reasons?
(i.e.: someone who caught their husband/wife cheating / someone who's family is being blackmailed / mercy-killing / etc.)

You're speculating, so I will to. If she is the "I killed my friend because she humiliated me" type of person, then there's a good chance she's suffereing from an enlargement in the hypothallamus, causing her to get angered quickly, and act impulsively. They are currently testing ways to get to get these peoples brains to act normally again.


Nobody's saying she should, but the reacted to that stimulus differently. It's not fair to compare the actions of a sick person, to those of a healthy one.


You seem to be under the impression that I think she should be released, I don't, unless of course you consider a mental facility as being released.


This I vhemently disagree with you on. There are documented scenarios where rage is the only controling factor in a person's actions, and they were no longer acting as their own person, but as an uncontrolable concentration of rage.


I'm sorry, I usually state my opinions, and have everything else be fact. It was my fault for assuming that everybody else was like me.


Yes, I am, but this girl is not mentally sane, and neither are those people.

if she can be cured, I'm all for it

I wasn't saying that to compare actions of a healthy person and a sick person
obviously, something is not right with her
but, if her future actions can be predicted, and if the predictions point to her being likely to kill again, then her sickness should not be used as a defence

I didn't say I think that you want her released, but it sounds like you would find her not guilty, which is essentially the same
I also never said that I thought she should be in solitary confinement, and you seem to think that that is my standpoint, or at least, that's what I get from reading your posts
sorry for the misunderstanding

I believe that people will do things when they are possessed by rage that they would not normally do
which seems to be what you are saying
but that does not mean that it should be used as a defence to acquit them of their crime
if they have a disease (mental or physical) that causes them to be possessed by rage, and this condition is likely to lead to another murder in the future, then the disease should not allow the person to be found not guilty, as that person remains a threat to society

I will try to be more clear from now on, then

alright
my point, anyway, is that I don't think she should be locked up because she has an illness
I think she should be institutionalized because she killed a person, and has the capacity to do it again

if there is a treatment that can change that, then that is different
rehabilitation should always be the first course of action