The Kagoshima District Court sentenced a 19-year-old man to 18 years in prison on Nov. 9 for killing a 55-year-old nursery teacher in her home in Isen, Kagoshima Prefecture, in November 2024, when he was 17 — rejecting protective measures and ruling he be punished as a criminal.
The court had to decide whether to impose criminal punishment or 保護処分 (hogo shobun), protective measures aimed at rehabilitating a minor through education rather than prison. Prosecutors had sought 22 years.
The killing
According to the ruling, the man entered a house in the Sobei district of Isen through a window carrying a kitchen knife. He stabbed Fusako Kikuchi, a nursery teacher who lived there, multiple times in the chest and elsewhere, killing her.
He admitted to the charges at his first hearing, leaving the choice between punishment and protective measures as the central issue.
Arguments over planning and culpability
Prosecutors said the man had entered the victim's home with a knife twice before the killing. They also noted he returned to the scene afterward to check whether she had died.
Citing the planning and malice in the crime, they argued he should be punished and requested 22 years.
The defense said the man has autism spectrum disorder, which makes social communication difficult. It also cited his lack of schooling because he did not attend school, and argued he needed education and support at a juvenile training school.
The ruling
Presiding Judge Mariko Koizumi described the crime as "planned and extremely malicious," noting that he bought the knife in advance and wore rubber gloves.
The court placed weight on the gloves, worn to avoid leaving fingerprints. It also found that discarding the weapon in a place out of public view amounted to an attempt to cover up the crime.
The court accepted that the developmental disorder had some effect, saying delusions of persecution triggered by it were "one factor in his motive." But it found the disorder diagnosed in a psychiatric evaluation to be "minor and limited," with a limited effect on the crime.
It rejected the defense argument, finding "no special circumstances warranting protective measures," and handed down the 18-year prison term.
The defense said it would decide whether to appeal after speaking with the defendant.