A

Why do you think Mr. Mochizuki was chosen as the interpreter?
Isn't it because he had permanent residency in the States?
A Green Card, I mean. He has an American Green Card and I

DUYW10 DU044u La Cunud LAURI Wilcno state

O

Department. o so, is it through connections that these appointments are

made? A I think so. O Do you think the Prosecutor selected him? A I wonder, I don't know. o How much explanation about the background and the problems

rolated to this case did you receiva? À I didn't get any explanation at all?

None at all. But I myself raised that question sometimes
to him. What exactly is happening here? Or something to
that extent.
From 1981 to 1982 when you gave your testimony up till today,
was there any occasion in which your evaluation of the
Interpreter changed?
Do you mean the evaluation of Mr. Mochizuki?
Yes.
It's been the same. Although he was capable as an Interpreter,
he added superfluous words or omitted words, although
omissions can': be helped, it's not that he wanted to make
them. . But to add unnecessary things by his own interpreta -
tion, this, he should not have done. My concern is whether
he interpreted, taking notes or not. I: he took notes I
could say that he did his best. However, if he did not take
any notes at all, that was a shortcoming on his part.
I want to ask you again, Didn't you express at one time
that Mr. Mochizuki appeared to have done a very credible
job as a simultaneous translator?
In the United States ?
Yes,

Maybe I did.
Q If you did, what was the reason?
A Well, partially, perhaps because he was doing a relatively

accurate job. If I did say so, I think it was in that sense.
However, this interpretation was not simultaneous. So,
there is no apparent reason that I would have to make such
an evaluation. It's hard to say.
Noli, perhaps you didn't like to speak ill of the Interpreter

because he is also a Japanese? A No, I don't think so; I don't mind criticizing others.

You wanted to say that small mistakes cannot be helped
because simultaneous translation is a very rapid job?
Yes, 16 it were simultaneous interpreting, it can't be
helped that there were sono awkward parts.
Well, the meaning has to be conveyed at the same time the
speakor finishes, so it can't be helped.
But, this isn't simultaneous translation or anything. There's
no reason to use that expression.

So, there was no reason.
A None, and I don't think it was used.

Is that so?
A I'm not certain.

A

I suppose we'll have to read your Grand Jury testimony.

Yes, 1. that were available, it would be clear.
O Is there anything else? Oh, yes, concerning the Oath,

have you ever indicated the difference between the oficial
Oath and the abbreviated one (used for Mr. Kamiyama) to
MI. Flumenbaum?
I was writing out all of the Japanese and translating 10
directly, so Flumenbaum should have known, if he had
studied it.
And the word, 'swear' was not in (the translation)?
The word 'swear' never appeared in Mr. Mochizuk:'o

translation of the English Oath. Q How about 'to take an oath' Ichikaul?

The word meaning 'to take an oath' was not there. o Flumenbaum did know that the regular Oath administered in

American courts was not used, didn't he? Flumenba um should have known that. But take for instance this translation - "So help you God" translated as "May God help you" 18 a mistake. I don't think that's what it means. "Respectfully swoar" for "solemnly swear" is awkward also. How would you translate it, Mr. Sa sagawa? Well, if I were to do it reading this, there would be many possibilities, but if I were put on the spot, it would probably be something like "Do you swear to state the truth?" Of course if I did it several times, the set phrase would come immediately. But "May God nosp you" doesn't make any sense in Japanese, and I think it is certain that that is not what it means. This is to confirm a point, you mentioned that parts of the

translation could be "problematic 1: taken up by themselves." A Yes, like that part about the airplane and so on.

Yes, what did you mean by that? A Well, in any case this Interpreter translates with roundabou:

expressions adding on his own unnecessary interpretations, making errors in translation, and because of this, Mo. Flumonbaum', questions go around in circles many times. Listening to the tapes, I felt frustrated several times. I did toll Flumenbaum about this. To what extent Mr. Kamiyama know English, whether he understood but pretended not to understand, or really did not understand and was confused by the Interpreter, this we can only find out from he himselt.

This Interpreter has the ability, but I think he didn't do as much as he could, well, he was a little too relaxed. I could testify to this fact. I don't know about Mr. Kamiyama, but as regards the performance of this Interpretez, I can definitely say that it was not his bast.

Had the Interpretor been a little more competent... A Well, this man is capable, but I wish he would have done a

better job. o if he had done a good job, such a problem would not have

occurred.

À well, :.: would have been up to the Grand Jury, but if he

! betta: jcb...that is a great regret. About that,

at ...::::25e:'3 job was not the best possible : to cha s:::23 and custify to, certainly.

:.:2 Proj20::07, while nearing your various opinions, ... jagawa, sti:! went ahead with the prosecution... A Yes, I wrote many things in the report but I don't know

whether he ignored, studied, showed to others or did what
with it; however, I can testi'y that I wrote out a detailed
report with comments and did the translations, and submitted
10 to the Prosecutor.
Well, Mr. Sasagawa, thank you for taking so much time out
today. As to what you have told us today, you did tell us
the truth?
Yes, as far as I know, everything is the truth.
Then, will you please swear that it is the truth?
Yes.
i am sorry to put you to trouble, but will you please say
what you have also writton in your letter and statement,
that you swear that your statements are true, and 1. 10,
will you kindly say that out loud?
Concerning this content?

Yes, what we have recorded on tape today.
A Al: right. I swear that the convorsation hold up to this

time is true as far as I remember.
Thank you very much.

O

I swear that the foregoing questions and answers which ! reviewed here are true and correct to the best o: my knowledge as long as they conform to the tapes, without compulsion from anyone.

September 12, 1984
Tokyo Japan

allelt (Eisyke Sasagawa1

ON THE GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION OF MR. KAMI YAMA'S
CONDUCT IN CONNECTION WITH SUSPECTED VIOLATION OF

TAX LAWS

Japan and the United States are neighboring nations separated by the great Pacific Ocean from each other. In spite of this distance, these two nations have greatly strengthened their mutual ties over the years.

They maintain close political, economic, and social relations. However, in spite of the fact

that these two nations are free, democratic, highly

industrialized, and wealthy societies, i.e., in

spite of these obvious similarities, they have had

distinctively different historical pasts, giving

rise to two sets of behavioral patterns, as well as

two sets of emotions toward what constitutes justice.

Separating these two nations, therefore, is not only

the Pacific Ocean, but also the socio-cultural

peculiarities such as linguistic difference, which

separates them apart sometimes even more than the ocean.

Particularly in the historical respect, needless

to say, the system and procedures governing
criminal trials are also differently developed
in accordance with each nation's particular history,
social customs, politics, economy, and culture, and
as such they bear the marks of the country in which

they evolved.

Thus, we have today two significantly

different trial systems in Japan and the United States.

In fact, the comparison of the two will show a

contrasting difference as to the underlying principles and the prevailing structures.

This case involving Mr. Kamiyama is one salient example of such difference.