WO235/1038
Dublin Core
Title
WO235/1038
Description
Committing a War Crime
In that he “at Hong Kong between the 14th May, 1943 and the 29th June, 1943, was in violation of the laws and usages of war, concerned in the illtreatment of prisoners in custody at Mongkok Kempeitai Station causing physical sufferings to Marcus A. da Silva and George van Bergen.”
In that he “at Hong Kong between the 14th May, 1943 and the 29th June, 1943, was in violation of the laws and usages of war, concerned in the illtreatment of prisoners in custody at Mongkok Kempeitai Station causing physical sufferings to Marcus A. da Silva and George van Bergen.”
Legal Case Item Type Metadata
Case No.
WO235/1038
Accused
Sergeant Ozawa Tomukuchi
Court
Military Court for the Trial of War Criminals No. 7
Charge
Committing a War Crime
In that he “at Hong Kong between the 14th May, 1943 and the 29th June, 1943, was in violation of the laws and usages of war, concerned in the illtreatment of prisoners in custody at Mongkok Kempeitai Station causing physical sufferings to Marcus A. da Silva and George van Bergen.”
In that he “at Hong Kong between the 14th May, 1943 and the 29th June, 1943, was in violation of the laws and usages of war, concerned in the illtreatment of prisoners in custody at Mongkok Kempeitai Station causing physical sufferings to Marcus A. da Silva and George van Bergen.”
Background
The Accused was attached to the Kowloon District Kempeitai, in the Special Intelligence Section.
Allegations
The two alleged victims - Marcus A. da Silva and George van Bergen - testified of the ill-treatment they received, between 14-22 May 1943, at the hands of the Accused or Chinese policemen acting under his instructions. This was done in the course of Kempeitai investigations into a railway sabotage case. The Prosecution alleged that the Accused was present, and also personally interrogated the two victims. He allegedly whipped and kicked them during interrogation.
Defence
The Defence produced evidence that during the time when the two victims alleged to have been tortured by the Accused, he was in hospital and did not go to Mongkok Kempeitai Station.
The Defence claimed that the Accused was never in charge of the station. After his discharge from hospital, he was put in charge of the detainees at the station. This was after the dates that they said they had been tortured. He inspected them but he received no complaints from them or any unusual reports from the Chinese policemen on guard. He gave no orders for them to be interrogated or torture them or allow or induce the interpreters or Chinese policemen to torture them. He did not commit the alleged crimes, and it was not within the scope of his work.
The Defence also claimed that the identification parade was unreliable. It was pointed out that at the identification parade, Mr Van Bergen made a mistake in pointing out a man who tortured him and only until this man spoke and said he was in Tokyo did he realize his mistake.
The Defence also pointed out some contradictions in the testimonies. Some documents were claimed to be unreliable.
The Defence claimed that the Accused was never in charge of the station. After his discharge from hospital, he was put in charge of the detainees at the station. This was after the dates that they said they had been tortured. He inspected them but he received no complaints from them or any unusual reports from the Chinese policemen on guard. He gave no orders for them to be interrogated or torture them or allow or induce the interpreters or Chinese policemen to torture them. He did not commit the alleged crimes, and it was not within the scope of his work.
The Defence also claimed that the identification parade was unreliable. It was pointed out that at the identification parade, Mr Van Bergen made a mistake in pointing out a man who tortured him and only until this man spoke and said he was in Tokyo did he realize his mistake.
The Defence also pointed out some contradictions in the testimonies. Some documents were claimed to be unreliable.
Prosecutor
Major R.C. Lai (Dept. of the JAG, India)
Defence Counsel
Mr Sakai Yusuke (Japanese Barrister)
Judges
President: Lt. Col N.G. Wait (Int. Corps.)
Members: Major A. Clayworth (R.A.), Capt. R.B.R. Gorely (K.R.R.C.)
Members: Major A. Clayworth (R.A.), Capt. R.B.R. Gorely (K.R.R.C.)
Advisory Officer
Capt. J.N. Whitehorn (Intelligence Corps)
Prosecution Witnesses
Kwok Po Man(Chief Clerk, War Crimes Investigation Team)
Marcus Alberto da Silva(Solicitor)
Major Shiozawa Kunio(Commander, Kowloon District Gendarmerie)
George van Bergen(Merchant)
Defence Witnesses
Ozawa Tomokuchi(Accused)
Sgt. Nagahara Masakichi(Kempei)
Trial Dates
1947-06-25
1947-06-26
1947-06-28
Judgement Date
1947-06-28
Judgement
Guilty
Petition
There is no record of a Petition.
According to the Judge Advocate reviewing the case [unidentified Brigadier, DJAG, Far East Land Forces, 22 August 1947]: “Of the two stories before it, the court preferred to believe the prosecution version and there is sufficient evidence on record to support the findings. I advise confirmation of the proceedings”.
According to the Judge Advocate reviewing the case [unidentified Brigadier, DJAG, Far East Land Forces, 22 August 1947]: “Of the two stories before it, the court preferred to believe the prosecution version and there is sufficient evidence on record to support the findings. I advise confirmation of the proceedings”.
Sentence Imposed
Imprisonment of 1 year.
Keywords
Hong Kong; Kempeitai; Gendarme/Gendarmes/Gendarmerie; Civilians; Place of Detention; "concerned in"; Committed; Torture; Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment; War Crimes; Violations of laws and customs of war; Interrogation; Civilians; Alibi; Mistaken Identity
Files
Collection
Citation
“WO235/1038,” Hong Kong's War Crimes Trials Collection, accessed April 19, 2024, https://hkwctc.lib.hku.hk/items/show/70.
Geolocation
Hello World, hello