A joint translation with @speranzom, who was generous enough to provide the Takken Taro part from the summary https://jbbs.shitaraba.net/bbs/read.cgi/music/29852/1553736787 for 11/10 (Sunday).
Note: I try to repeat the Japanese thread as closely as possible here. Where I do make some editorial additions I’ll put them in [ ], though I do occasionally soften the posters’ tone.
- Blog of someone associated with AKS
- The yakkai did as they wished in Niigata without rebuke
- Renting rooms in the dorm, having relationships with more than 1/3 of the members
- Yamaguchi Maho was the one to come up and say “this is strange”, and “I want this to be stopped”
- Her words reached AKS headquarters, but AKS did not have good sentiments towards Yamaguchi
- Some part of the members realized, “she’s tattling on us!” and thought, “let’s punish her!”
- So that’s how these intimately related “idol hunters” came about… that’s the “reality”
- https://i.imgur.com/FyoY7iB.jpg
- https://i.imgur.com/AIMVzQG.png
- https://i.imgur.com/uNSoms3.jpg
- “Former NGT48 member Yamaguchi Maho’s assault incident “conspiracy” trial! How long will it go on? I hope Maho won’t be troubled with questioning.”
- Rena’s tweets
- Homma Hinata’s mobame: “This last year I lost the most important thing”
- Takken Taro: “NGT48 Considerations on the “rental contract papers” of rooms #602 and #314″
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10RcTuaGdsM
- If only the defendants had instead brought up proof and statements to point out that it’s because of AKS not taking the proper measures that their theater shows were halted and their reputation in the eyes of the public plummeted, it would have gone to their own benefit, and would have constituted a rebuttal
- However, even though they have brought out the rental contract papers, it doesn’t even begin to make for a rebuttal of the claims from the plaintiffs
- Then again, it was always so, what with the defendant side spending several of their document’s pages to claim any association with Yamaguchi-san, for some reason
- Even if they ever managed to make a case about consorting with Yamaguchi-san, they cannot begin to deny the assault act itself as such
- Even about the fact they let out the names of other members while at it, this doesn’t make a case that they aren’t consorting with other members, which makes the whole operation useless
- Thus, this doesn’t constitute a rebuttal by the defendant side in the least
- Submitting those rental contract papers serves as no rebuttal whatsoever, either
- For what purpose did they even bring out this stuff, then? Even if they happened to be the tenants, it doesn’t make a valid rebuttal at all
- Tentatively, this can serve as an evidence that there was no unlawful trespassing involved
- If we assume it’s of any use, it’s not to show to the court judge
“Look, Tano left and she has nothing to do with this”,
the feeling you get is rather that they are bringing it out to make an excuse aimed at the general public and popular opinion on the Internet, instead
- –
- It’s curious why it’s the defendants that would testify that Tano is unrelated to this
- The ones who would benefit from this would actually be the plaintiff side, AKS
- AKS after all wants to testify that “There’s no guilty members, everyone is innocent”
- It just complies to the agenda of the plaintiff, AKS, which wants to show how everything is all Yamaguchi-san’s misgivings and suspicions, of how there were no problems at all but it is only due to these doubts that things developed to this point
- In this case, this would tie in with the fact that the defendant side would somehow bring out these rental contract papers, even though it has no value as a rebuttal
- Indeed, one can’t help finding it dubious how the defendant side for some odd reason is vehemently acting in a way that is only going to the benefit of the plaintiff’s side
- –
- One is left to assume if room #314 was borrowed by the perpetrators in their own name
- In turn, it leads one to guess that, on the day of the incident itself, the tenant didn’t happen to be Tano
- Even if, as both the defendants and the plaintiff (AKS) claim, at the time of the incident the name on the rental contract papers happened to be that of the culprits
it doesn’t means this equals the suspicions about Tano being cleared and making her completely innocent
- Even if the room in front wasn’t signed to Tano’s name anymore, doubts still remain if she kept using it just as before
- By which it means, didn’t she still use that room for her Showroom broadcasts? Or didn’t members return home together by bus after the ending of theater shows?
- Then, she wouldn’t have rode all the way there on the bus if she had moved out, and as such there’s no way that Yamaguchi-san and the others wouldn’t have realized she moved out
- If, vice versa, the tenant was another person, it would be quite as easy to also imagine meeting each other by chance in front of your doors during your everyday life, what with being an apartment right next to yours. Yet, Yamaguchi-san and the rest didn’t notice it for months.
- So, for what it concerns the room in front, while in terms of contracts Tano’s name didn’t show up, couldn’t it be that by some way or another she could keep using it even afterwards? In short, that she had access inside of it?
- For one thing, what’s the reason for Tano moving out?
- There’s no particular necessity that, when she supposedly moved out, she decided not to say a word to inform the other members, with them going “What? She moved out?” afterwards, as the situation was.
- Could it be that, between Tano and the yakkai culprits, a sort of agreement was stipulated, like “I’ll pay the rent fee, wouldn’t you let me borrow the apartment sometimes?”
- –
- For what reason would it be necessary for the yakkai side to borrow yet another room on the same building, after all?
- Does it mean that this was supposed to be a sort of party room, not one for the purpose of assaulting Yamaguchi-san, but to have fun together with the girls?
- Did they want a second apartment for those times they wanted to have a one-on-one moment with them?
- And by renting the room and then letting Tano use it, wouldn’t it constitute a form of patron relationship?
- Should we assume that even after the contract was rescinded, Tano was then free to continually use that room?
- Wouldn’t this be why Yamaguchi-san and the others then didn’t notice about her moving out, then?
- Even the culprits admittedly first walked out of another apartment they had rented to the other one. So this means it’s not intended to be a place for everyday living.
- Therefore, even if they bring out the rental papers and say they did rent it themselves, it isn’t anything that testifies Tano didn’t use that room as well.
- Likewise, it is not a demonstration that, concerning the other members, everyone is innocent and that this is nothing but misgivings on Yamaguchi-san’s part
0 Comments