Question from a reader:
What are your thoughts on why Nakai Masahiro is angry about his statements not being reflected in the report? According to lawyer Nishiwaki’s explanation, it seems that because he did not lift his confidentiality obligation, the hearing on the female side could not take place, and as a result, his testimony could not be included in the
Question from a Reader:
Is Nakai Masahiro hiring lawyers at a cost of millions or even tens of millions to ensure that everyone knows he hasn’t raised his hand or engaged in violent behavior? Or is he preparing to evade potential compensation claims? Also, did Johnny Kitagawa commit sexual abuse against hundreds of boys? I think everyone was unable to resist
Recently, there has been a lot of discussion surrounding Nakai Masahiro’s attempt to impose new confidentiality obligations on a female announcer. Honestly, I feel a mix of surprise and confusion regarding this issue. In this post, I’d like to share my thoughts on whether this proposal is reasonable from a legal perspective.
Recently, the issue of sexual harm related to Nakai Masahiro has garnered significant attention. Many people hold various opinions on this matter, and from a legal perspective, it is a very intriguing topic. As I contemplate this issue, I would like to organize a few key points.
Recently, Furuichi Nobutoshi’s comments defending Nakai Masahiro have become a hot topic. Honestly, when I first heard about this, I found myself a bit puzzled. He claims that Nakai proposed to lift the confidentiality obligation, but the committee did not accept it, so he didn’t proceed with the lifting. But does that really make
Recently, Furuichi Noritsugu’s remarks defending Nakai Masahiro have become a topic of discussion. His opinions are met with mixed reactions, but I’ve given some thought to this issue. Let’s delve into Furuichi’s comments a bit more. Furuichi emphasizes that Nakai proposed to lift the confidentiality obligation, but the committee rejected that
Recently, there have been various opinions circulating regarding the series of reports about Nakai Masahiro and the conclusions drawn by the third-party committee. I’ve also been contemplating this matter, particularly whether the committee’s designation of “sexual violence” was intended to criticize Fuji Television.
First of all, it appears to be
Recently, the issue of sexual misconduct involving Nakai Masahiro has become a major topic of discussion. This matter has prompted me to reflect deeply on various aspects, especially how changes in law and society influence these situations. Firstly, regarding the definition of sexual misconduct, it is significant that the third-party committee
Recently, Nakai Masahiro’s issue with Fuji TV has been a hot topic. As I watched the news, I found myself feeling quite conflicted. The opinions regarding the contradictions in his actions are certainly understandable. In particular, I found the interpretations surrounding his refusal to lift confidentiality obligations to be quite fascinating.
Question from a reader:
I heard that the interactions with Nakai Masahiro have been erased. Is Nakajima P the superior of the victimized woman, or is he a subordinate of Nakai Masahiro?
Recently, I came across news about the deletion of interactions with Nakai Masahiro. In this context, the actions of A, the head of programming
