From Denial to Confession in Japanese Investigations: How are Changes in Testimony Handled and Documented?

In the course of criminal investigations, it is not uncommon for individuals—whether suspects or witnesses—to alter their accounts of events. A suspect might initially deny all involvement only to later confess, or a witness might recall new details or correct previous statements. Such shifts in testimony are pivotal moments in an investigation and can significantly impact its trajectory and outcome. The Japanese criminal justice system places considerable emphasis on meticulously documenting not just the change itself, but, critically, the reasons behind why a declarant has modified their statement. This practice is deeply rooted in the pursuit of ensuring the voluntariness and credibility of statements, particularly confessions, and in safeguarding against potential miscarriages of justice.

The Phenomenon of Changing Testimonies

Statements are not static. Various factors can lead an individual to change their testimony during an investigation:

• Psychological Factors: Remorse, guilt, or a desire to alleviate the burden of a secret can motivate a confession after initial denials. Conversely, fear, shame, or confusion can lead to initial inaccuracies or omissions that are later corrected.
• Emergence of Evidence: As investigators gather more evidence and confront a suspect or witness with new facts, a previously maintained denial may become untenable, leading to a revised account.
• Strategic Considerations: A suspect might change their statement believing it could lead to a more lenient outcome, or after legal advice.
• Influence of Others: The arrest or confession of a co-conspirator can remove the motivation for an individual to continue denying their own involvement or to protect others.
• Genuine Memory Processes: Memory is malleable. A witness might genuinely misremember an event initially but later recall details more accurately, perhaps after being prompted by specific questions, shown related materials, or through the simple passage of time and reflection.

Regardless of the cause, any significant change in a statement presents a challenge for investigators and, ultimately, for the courts: to discern which version is truthful and to understand the dynamics that led to the alteration.

The Critical Importance of Documenting the "Why": Reasons for Testimonial Shifts

Recognizing the complexities and potential ambiguities surrounding changed testimonies, Japanese investigative practice mandates a thorough exploration and recording of the reasons provided by the declarant for any significant shift in their account. This isn't a mere formality; it is a crucial step in assessing the reliability and voluntariness of the revised statement.

This applies most critically when a suspect transitions from a position of denial to one of confession, but it is also relevant for substantial changes in factual details provided by either suspects or witnesses. The underlying principle is that an unexplained, abrupt change in a statement can raise suspicions about the integrity of the interrogation process or the reliability of the new account. Conversely, a well-documented, rational explanation for the change can significantly bolster its credibility.

Common Reasons for Shifting from Denial to Confession (and Their Documentation)

When a suspect moves from denying an allegation to admitting involvement, investigators are trained to elicit and record the specific motivations and circumstances that prompted this change. Some common reasons include:

1. Remorse and Repentance (反省悔悟 - Hansei Kaigo):
   A suspect may express genuine regret for their actions and a desire to take responsibility, apologize to victims, or make amends. In such cases, the investigator would carefully document the suspect's expressions of remorse, any specific apologies offered, their stated understanding of the harm caused, and how these feelings led to their decision to confess.
2. Realization that Concealment is Futile (隠し通せないと観念 - Kakushi Tōsenai to Kannen):
   The suspect may come to believe that the evidence against them is overwhelming or that their continued denials are no longer sustainable. The statement record (kyojutsu chosho) would then detail what specific factors led to this realization—for example, being confronted with compelling forensic evidence, witness testimony, or inconsistencies in their own prior statements.
3. Cessation of Need to Protect Others (共犯者をかばう必要がなくなった - Kyōhansha o Kabau Hitsuyō ga Nakunatta):
   If a suspect was initially lying or denying involvement to protect a co-conspirator, family member, or friend, the arrest or confession of that other individual might remove the reason for continued deception. The chosho would document this change in circumstances and the suspect's subsequent reasoning for deciding to tell the truth about their own role.
4. Overcoming Personal Barriers to Confession (気持ちの整理がついた - Kimochi no Seiri ga Tsuita):
   Internal struggles can also play a significant role. A suspect might have initially denied the allegations due to fear of social stigma, anxiety about disappointing their family, or concern about the legal consequences. Over time, through reflection or perhaps discussion with legal counsel or family, they may come to terms with these concerns and find the resolve to confess. Investigators are expected to document this internal resolution process, capturing the suspect's emotional and psychological journey towards confession.

A sudden shift from denial to confession without a documented, plausible explanation can be highly problematic. In court, this could lead the defense to argue that the confession was not voluntary but was instead the result of coercion, improper inducements, or threats by investigators.

Addressing Other Types of Statement Changes

The principle of documenting reasons for change extends beyond the denial-to-confession scenario:

• Memory Refreshment or Correction (記憶が喚起された - Kioku ga Kanki Sareta):
  A witness or even a suspect might initially provide an inaccurate or incomplete account due to a simple lapse in memory. Later, their memory might be refreshed – perhaps by being asked a specific question that triggers a recollection, being shown a photograph or a document, or mentally revisiting the scene. When this occurs, the chosho should record what prompted the memory change (e.g., "After the investigator showed me that map, I remembered the exact route I took").
• Correction of Previous Falsehoods or Omissions (一部嘘をついていたり隠していた部分があった - Ichibu Uso o Tsuiteitari Kakushiteita Bubun ga Atta):
  A declarant might voluntarily admit to having previously lied about certain details or having intentionally omitted information. In such cases, it's important to document not only the corrected information but also the reasons for the initial falsehood or omission (e.g., fear, confusion, an attempt to minimize their role or protect someone else) and, equally importantly, the reason for now choosing to provide the truthful or complete account.

A rational explanation for why a statement has evolved lends credibility to the final version.

Procedural Handling of Changed Testimonies in Documentation

The documentation of these changes is handled with procedural care:

1. Creation of New Statement Records (Kyojutsu Chosho): Typically, when a significant change in testimony occurs, the reasons for this change, along with the new or revised statement itself, are recorded in a fresh kyojutsu chosho. This new document will often reference the prior statement and explicitly detail the alterations and the rationale behind them.
2. Separate Records for Reasons of Change: In specific circumstances, particularly if a suspect makes a full confession after a period of denial, investigators might consider creating a distinct, separate written record focused solely on detailing the reasons for this shift. This is strategically important because, in some trials, the prosecution might choose not to submit the earlier denial-stage chosho as evidence, relying instead on the more comprehensive confession. A separate record detailing the voluntary reasons for the confession ensures this crucial context is preserved and available, even if the earlier statements are not formally part of the court record.
3. Investigator's Duty to Ensure Clarity and Plausibility: The investigator has a responsibility to ensure that the declarant's explanation for the change is rational, detailed, and convincing to an objective observer – described in Japanese guidance as being "in a way that everyone can understand" (dare mo ga nattoku suru yō ni). The explanation should not be a superficial or coached response but a genuine articulation of the declarant's reasons.

Legal Significance: Ensuring Voluntariness, Credibility, and Preventing Miscarriages of Justice

The meticulous documentation of reasons for testimonial changes serves several critical legal purposes:

• Countering Claims of Coercion or Improper Inducement: A well-documented, plausible, and internally motivated reason for a shift from denial to confession significantly undermines any subsequent claims by the defense that the confession was forced, obtained through improper promises (e.g., of leniency), or made under duress. If a confession appears suddenly and without a clear, voluntary explanation, it creates an opening for such challenges.
• Bolstering Credibility (Shin'yōsei) of the Statement: A rational and internally consistent explanation for why a statement has changed enhances the overall credibility of the final, revised account. It can demonstrate a process of genuine memory correction, a decision to be truthful after initial hesitation, or a development in the declarant's understanding or emotional state.
• Supporting Admissibility of Confessions: Japanese law, under Article 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, deems involuntary confessions inadmissible as evidence. These include confessions obtained through coercion, torture, threats, after unduly prolonged arrest or detention, or any confession suspected of not being made voluntarily. By thoroughly documenting the voluntary reasons a suspect provides for their confession, particularly after a denial, investigators build a stronger case for its admissibility.
• Strengthening the Evidentiary Value of Confessions: While the Japanese Constitution (Article 38, Paragraph 3) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (Article 319, Paragraph 2) uphold the "corroboration rule" (hokyō hōsoku)—stating that a defendant cannot be convicted if their confession is the only proof against them—a credible confession is nonetheless a powerful piece of evidence. A confession that is supported by a clear and convincing explanation for any prior denials is more likely to be given significant weight by the court when considered alongside other corroborating evidence.
• Preventing Miscarriages of Justice: Ultimately, the focus on understanding why statements change is about ensuring the reliability of the evidence that forms the basis of a criminal conviction. It aims to filter out statements that might be the product of confusion, pressure, or manipulation, and to highlight those that represent a declarant's most accurate and voluntary account. This contributes to the broader goal of preventing false confessions and wrongful convictions.

The Role of Interrogation Recordings (Kashika)

The increasing adoption of audio and video recording for interrogations in Japan, known as kashika (可視化) or "visualization," is playing an increasingly important role in this context. Such recordings can provide an objective, contemporaneous record of the entire interrogation session, including the interactions that lead to a change in testimony. This allows for later review by prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges to verify the circumstances surrounding the change and to assess whether the declarant's stated reasons are genuine or if there are indications of undue pressure or improper influence by investigators. Recorded interrogations can, therefore, either corroborate the documented reasons for a testimonial shift or provide grounds for challenging them.

Conclusion

Changes in testimony, particularly the shift from denial to confession, are complex yet common occurrences in criminal investigations across all jurisdictions. The Japanese criminal justice system distinguishes itself by placing a profound emphasis on not just noting such changes but on diligently understanding and documenting the underlying reasons for them. This meticulous practice is crucial for evaluating the voluntariness and overall credibility of statements, especially confessions, which often play a central role in legal proceedings. By requiring a rational and convincing explanation for why a narrative has evolved, the system aims to ensure that the evidence presented in court is as reliable as possible, thereby upholding the principles of fair trial and striving to prevent miscarriages of justice based on tainted or misunderstood testimony. It is a testament to the system's effort to look beyond the words themselves and understand the human process that leads to their utterance.