By Ann Simmons, Los Angeles Times Staff WriterAugust 16, 2008
A hearing on a defense motion to dismiss murder and conspiracy charges against a Japanese national accused in his wife's 1981 slaying in downtown Los Angeles ended today without a ruling.
Torrance Superior Court Judge Steven Van Sicklen continued the case against Kazuyoshi Miura, now 61, who was found guilty of his wife's murder in Japan in 1994 but was later acquitted.
Mark Geragos, who is representing Miura, argued that his client can't be tried for the crime in the United States without unconstitutionally placing him in double jeopardy.
However, the prosecution, headed by David Jackson, countered today that the crime of conspiracy does not exist in Japanese law and, therefore, Miura could still be prosecuted on this charge in California.
Prosecutors allege that Miura staged his wife's killing on a Los Angeles street by saying she was shot by street thugs. Originally viewed as a "tragic hero" who personified every Japanese tourist's fear of being harmed in the United States' crime-ridden inner cities, Miura later was charged in Japan for masterminding the killing after suspicions rose that Miura had planned the killing to collect $650,000 in life insurance money.
As Los Angeles and Japanese police worked together, Miura was convicted of the crime by a Japanese court and sentenced to life in prison. But that decision was reversed by the Tokyo High Court in 1998 when a judge determined that the wife's assailant was unknown.
The current case against Miura hangs on the question of whether the charge of conspiracy exists in Japan. If Miura had not been charged with conspiracy there, it would not be double jeopardy to try him under California's conspiracy law.
Miura listened to the proceeding through a live video hookup in the U.S. territory of Saipan as Mark West, a Michigan law professor who specializes in Japanese comparative law, testified for the prosecution that there is no such thing as a stand-alone conspiracy law in Japan. Geragos countered by challenging West's qualifications to render such an opinion, asking whether he'd taught any courses in California criminal law or the history of California conspiracy law, to which West replied he had not. Geragos then told the judge he objected to West's qualifications to offer such testimony, but the judge did not disqualify him as an expert.
West's questioning grew heated when Geragos demanded that the professor define the meaning of the Japanese word kyobo, which was used multiple times in the Japanese court ruling. West said the word can be translated as "conspire," but also could mean "collude" or "plot." In response, Geragos showed West the translation of the Japanese high court ruling, in which the word "conspiracy" is used repeatedly, but West didn't wavered from his opinion.
A visibly agitated Geragos responded by asking West if he had a predetermined bias in the case, which West denied.
Talking to reporters after the proceeding, Geragos said he was "gratified" by West's testimony because it clearly demonstrated that his client had already been prosecuted under this theory of conspiracy in Japan. "The Japanese high court's own translation . . . says conspiracy. They know the difference between conspiracy and plotting."
There is clearly a conspiracy theory in Japanese law, he said. "The whole thing is much ado about nothing. [Miura] was already acquitted. . . . That's the end of it."
Jackson, also speaking to reporters, said he was "pleased and proud" to have this preeminent legal scholar testify. "The question was answered," Jackson said. "There is no law of conspiracy in Japan. A double-jeopardy theory would not pass muster."
It is unclear when testimony will resume in the case. Geragos will possibly call his own expert on the Japanese legal system.
Photo: Kazuyoshi Miura was convicted of murder in Japan in 1994 but later cleared. A hearing on a defense motion to dismiss murder and conspiracy charges here ended without a ruling.Click for Los Angeles Times to view video coverage.
Posts
