Black Box

In Black Box (Tilted Axis Press, Feminist Press, Blackstone Publishing), Shiori Ito writes she was raped sometime around 5:20 AM. The man who she accused of drug-facilitated rape was a senior press reporter for a major tv broadcaster. As he was not indicted, she filed a civil suit against him. Critics and commentators praised her as a brave heroine fighting not for vengeance but for changing old and rigid systems. Her fight was for her little sister, friends, family, and the victims of sex crime. The setting looked perfect. Many soon fell into her story.The reporter categorically denied the charge. He said he had friendly-but-unenthusiastic sex with her sometime around 2 to 3 AM under her persistent sexual provocation. Many did not believe his story. He, at the prime of his career and life, soon found he was already publicly erased, losing his respectable job, family, friends, and, most of all, credence. Agony lasted long. But he miraculously located her medical data that she never voluntarily disclosed. The data, he believed, could be the decisive evidence exonerating him once and for all. But, at that time, he never imagined that, years later, his hope and belief would be shattered most cruelly by judiciary that he himself trusted without reservation.Her 5-year-long civil trial ended in summer of 2022. The court determined that, due to a lack of relevant evidence, the drug was not used that night. Her testimony that she was, completely and for hours, unconscious and amnesic became a groundless story. The court determined that her medical data was credible because the data was entered by a doctor of medicine as part of routine medical work, and deemed that she told the clinic doctor she remembered she had normal intercourse around 2 to 3 AM. Besides, she, after all, could not submit not only the evidence that she was raped but also even the evidence that she had sex sometime around 5 AM that day in the first place. Her testimony that she was unconscious till around 5 AM and violently raped after awaking became an unbelievable story. The foundation of her Black Box story which engaged and empowered many people began to crumble down silently and slowly.As she claimed she couldn’t recall what she did after entering the bathroom of the Sushi restaurant, the civil court neither ordered nor even asked her to explain her action of such time. Examining her testimony, evidence, his account, and witness accounts, the court determined what happened to her that night. She was not drugged by him that night. The master of the Sushi restaurant testified that she, after getting out of the bathroom, voluntarily started drinking again while repeating the same talk. She hadn’t written the address of her condominium in the resume. (Note: her condominium was not much far from the Sushi restaurant.) Due to the absence of relevant evidence, the court determined that she, that night, did not orally tell him of her address. She got into the taxicab first to sit on the far-side seat. She told the driver to take the two (she and the reporter) to a nearby station. As the driver mentioned the name of a station, she concurred. (Note: the station that she concurred to go to was in the quite opposite direction from her condominium.) Though saying, once, to the reporter that she would like to get off at the station, she anyhow stayed in the cab. She, later, vomited at least once before getting off. Whether or not the court was able to objectively determine the state of her mind (intent, motive, etc.) is not certain.The taxicab arrived at the hotel. Failing to get up from the far-side seat by herself, she let the reporter help her out of the cab. Walking with him side-by-side sometimes wobbly and sometimes propped with his right arm, she kept walking up to the elevator. She was drunk much but not unconscious. The court failed to find any evidence that she was dragged into his room. In the room, she vomited hard and ran into the bathroom. Managing to get up on her feet with his help, she slowly walked to the bed while taking off her blouse and slim pants with, again, his help. Then she laid in bed but, as assumed by the court, might get up around 2 AM once. The court also determined that her statements in testimony were not necessarily accurate and her dramatic and vivid expressions in Black Box were often exaggerated.Scrutinizing his testimony, critically and, often, word by word, and collating it with evidence and her account and witness accounts, the civil court determined what he did that night. He neither tricked nor drugged her that night. Thinking of hurrying back to the hotel to do his job, not knowing exactly where she lived, and seeing her first walking into the cab to sit on the far-side seat, he didn’t stop her coming with him. Seeing she told the driver to take them to a nearby station and that the driver mentioned the name of a station and she concurred, he didn’t say anything particular. When the cab was getting close to the station that she spoke of earlier, he told the driver to change the destination to the hotel. Whether or not the court was able to objectively determine the state of his mind (intent, motive, etc.) is not certain. The court did not vouch the truth of the words she and the reporter exchanged in the cab because the driver’s testimony was not necessarily 100 percent credible.After the car arrived at the hotel, he got off first, put his bag down on the entrance approach, and came back to the car. Putting his shoulder under her left arm and propping her up, he slid her sideways toward the exit side of the car. It took over 2 minutes for the two to be out of the car. Carrying her bags in his left hand and, sometimes, propping her with his right arm, he walked across the lobby with her side-by-side toward the elevator. The court failed to find any evidence that he dragged her into his room. Entering the room and seeing her vomiting and running into the bathroom, he left her there and, anyway, started checking e-mails on PC. He stopped e-mail checking once. Entering the bathroom, he helped her getting up on her feet. He helped her taking off her blouse (not underwear) and her walking to the bed. Helping her taking off her slim pants (not underwear), he laid her in bed. Leaving her in bed, washing her clothes smudged with vomit, and hanging it on a hanger, he resumed checking e-mails. Checking e-mails and finishing the preparation for morning check-out, he lay in bed sometime around 1 AM. Which one of the two beds was used and whether or not he slept alone in bed were not referred to.As mentioned earlier, the court determined that her medical data showed that she herself told the clinic doctor she remembered she had normal intercourse around 2 to 3 AM. Before drawing a conclusion of what she and he did after midnight, they proceeded to verification of her physical and psychological conditions. They seemed to have some intent to conclusively determine that she was in a state of alcohol-caused amnesia which lasted till around 5 AM instead of drug-induced disorder. But they failed to objectively prove that she was really in such a state because the exact amount of alcohol she consumed and the exact time she awoke were undeterminable and relevant evidence was not discovered at all. However, the civil court made a startling move. Taking full advantage of presiding at a non-jury civil trial where discretion can override evidence-based objective judgement, the court judge replaced the evidence-based judgement of normal intercourse around 2 to 3 AM with her unsubstantiated story of hostile intercourse around 5 AM. Their intent remains undeterminable.The court judge ordered the reporter to compensate not for a rape but for an unlawful act of non-consensual but accidental intercourse around 5 AM. The judge also ordered Shiori Ito to compensate for defamation and violation of privacy of the reporter who she depicted as the one using the drug to knock her into unconscious state and rape her. She, however, quickly and openly declared she won the case. Some supporters cried out, “a win is a win”. Many who believed “lying is not justice” were thrown into inexpressible dismay and disbelief. The reporter who knew that her medical data showed that he was not the one who lied realized how naïve he was to value justice and trust judiciary. But it was all too late.Shortly after she made the case public in 2017, the news media, particularly critics and commentators, harshly and bitterly denounced the reporter. Then, they gradually and quietly lessened the intensity of accusation. Eventually, they stopped calling him names. Maybe because they somehow knew or, at least, sensed that someone was lying. But they had no intent to explore who that was. They now, avoiding talking about specifics of her case, direct their focus to general subjects like human rights, woman’s rights, societal issues, politics. They seem afraid that finding out who lied would expose who were deceived this much easy after all.In Black Box, Shiori Ito accused the reporter of perpetrating a premeditated and drug-facilitated rape. Her court trial is a civil trial. The said accusation in her book was judged untrue and, therefore, her act of accusation in her book was judged unlawful. The Supreme Court ordered the author, Shiori Ito, to compensate for her unlawful act which is defamation of the reporter and violation of the privacy of the reporter. As of October 2022, Black Box (Shiori Ito, Alison Markin Powell) is still in circulation and is neither corrected nor revised in a major way reflecting explicitly the 2022 final ruling.

If this was a fictional crime drama it would be hard to imagine a better book. The fact that this happened is shocking, sad and should be a wake up call for the public as well as politicians. The fact that it was politicians that were responsible for this happening is the worst crime of all. Extremely well written, this should be on everyone’s reading list.