Chapter 50 Section 16

Next, let's talk about the two missing fishplates. I dare say they are "missing".According to Akama's statement, the fishplate was only "removed in one place", and the prosecutors have always insisted on this statement.However, probably because the inspection site found that it would be difficult to overturn the train by removing only one piece, and the defense team also pursued this point, so in the second instance, the prosecutor took out two pieces of fish tail again. Come to the board, it is said that I forgot to take it out due to negligence. But as already pointed out, the two boards are bent, and the place where the fishplate was removed is straight, where the fishplate should also be straight.Therefore, the defender pointed out that these two boards were probably fake—that is to say, the procuratorate probably had no choice but to take two boards from other places to prevaricate.

I can't tell which side is right.Here, let us first consider the argument that the fishplate is a false physical evidence insisted by the defender.So the two actually used fishplates are gone and hidden somewhere.If they did exist, the procuratorial authorities must have presented such material evidence that was convincing to the defense team from the very beginning.Conversely, it can also be considered that because there was only one fishplate left on the scene, the authorities instigated the defendant Akama to say that only one fishplate was removed during the sabotage work. "About hiding fishplates—?

"Prosecutor Yamamoto said that because he didn't know there was such a fishplate, he didn't bring it to the court of the original trial. He himself said that it was 'ridiculous' not to know about it. Of course it was 'ridiculous'. Yamamoto himself was not Have you ever received any investigation reports on fishplates in October of the 24th Showa era? "In order to insist on the 'authenticity' of the confession, the prosecutor even unreasonably induced interrogation of the witness in court, and made an investigation report afterwards. Therefore, of course, they refused to produce fishtails that were obviously different from the confession. Board. The prosecutor hid the fishplate, rather it was out of ordinary human nature.” (Defender Gang Lin’s debate gist)

So it was impossible to imagine anyone but the prisoner taking the fishplate.Why did the prisoner take away only two fishplates? Since the criminals deliberately left the pretended used crowbar and the monkey wrench in the field near the scene as "physical evidence", why did they transport away the two fishplates that would naturally raise questions afterwards? This is reminiscent of the "downhill incident".Some things were missing from the body of the downhill president, namely glasses, tie and lighter.At that time, even the nearby grass was searched all over, but they couldn't find it in the end. Now it has become a hidden mystery.I want to equate the meaning of losing these things down the mountain with the missing of the two fishplates.

In other words, they are all "trophies" of the real murderer.Perhaps this statement will make the listener feel very strange.But on the battlefield, soldiers often snatched some things carried by the defeated as "memorials" and quietly kept them as their own. This is what Japanese soldiers once did in mainland China.As for foreign soldiers, this tendency is even stronger.Downhill lighters, ties and glasses are all great trophies, so of course they're impossible to find.I'm so pedantic that I didn't notice this when I wrote "The Downhill Incident".This time I wrote the "Matsukawa Incident" by hand, and then I came back to think of it.

I think that the murderers probably took the two fishplates away as "trophies" half-jokingly without thinking about the consequences. However, the situation this time is different from the lighter, tie, and glasses that went down the mountain.What you strip from your downhill body can fit in your pocket.The fishplate is big and heavy, and it is not easy to move.But the prisoner has a car like a Jeep.I would like to explain the mystery of the fishplate in this way. This incident leads us to another contradiction.Now back to the crowbar and wrench that were left at the scene - neither had fingerprints on them.Mr. Hirotsu said something to the effect that it is very suspicious that the criminal deliberately left such things on the scene as if he was afraid that others would not see them.This is probably what anyone would have imagined.

But there is another contradiction here.If you want to leave physical evidence on the scene, why leave the kind of physical evidence that is not convincing enough to doubt whether it has been used afterwards?Since it is kept, why not leave evidence that can convince everyone?As for the live wrench, there is still a lot of debate in terms of identification.Why not keep a murder weapon that can be confirmed at once without going through such cumbersome procedures?Doing that, the effect is much better. There is a reason, however, that the tools used were clearly not available on the part of SNR.Hammers were probably also used during the sabotage work, but none survived.Only the marks of hammering on the fishplate and bolt caps.

There were no fingerprints left on the crowbar and the monkey wrench. It is presumed that the criminal's intentions were thorough, but for the working class, this is at least common sense.Working with gloves is far more in line with their habits than working without gloves. However, when the prisoners evacuate the scene after completing the sabotage work, they may notice that some "evidence of sabotage work" must be left behind.So, the fake physical evidence crowbar and monkey wrench played a role.But they took away the fishplate that should have been left.This inconsistency makes one feel that the plot of the crime does not fit together.

At the scene of the rollover, a rail was moved thirteen meters from the line.Although the reason is not clear, but the gist of Ganglin's debate is that judging from the fact that the rails are neither bent nor crooked, it makes one think that more than ten strong and strong men moved it half-jokingly. The word "half-jokingly" suggests the character of the prisoner who actually did the work of sabotage, and further suggests the image of the prisoner and the nature of the sabotage plot.