The animation studio Kyoto Animation was the victim of one of the most horrific accidents in Japan’s history. The prosecution alleges that on July 18, 2019, around 10:30 a.m., the defendant Shinji Aoba poured gasoline on the first studio of Kyoto Animation, where about 70 people worked for the company. This terrible act caused a fire that killed 36 people and injured another 32, some seriously.
Users debate whether Shinji Aoba Author of Kyoto Animation bombing deserves death penalty
This tragic event has recently come back into the spotlight because of the possibility that Shinji Aoba might be released. The defense argues that, although Aoba acknowledges the charges against him, he does not have full criminal responsibility or, if he does, it is limited. In other words, the question is whether Shinji’s actions should have significant criminal consequences or whether they should be minimal. On the other hand, the prosecution maintains that Aoba is fully responsible for his actions and must face the corresponding consequences.
To understand the motivation behind this tragic act, it is essential to analyze Shinji Aoba’s statements. The defendant claimed that he carried out the attack because he accused Kyoto Animation of stealing the idea of a novel that he had sent them to turn into their own project. The company, for its part, has strongly denied these accusations. Aoba argues that he had no other choice but to carry out his attack, although he also admits that he never imagined that it would result in the death of so many people and that, in hindsight, he recognizes that his actions were excessive and out of control.
The debate on Shinji Aoba’s sentence has taken a particular prominence on the popular blog Yaraon Blog. Users have expressed a wide range of opinions and perspectives on whether the author of the attack deserves the death penalty.
Arguments against the death penalty:
Inhumanity: Many users condemn the death penalty, arguing that it is an inhuman act. They believe that the penal system should seek rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders into society instead of resorting to revenge.
Impossibility of compensation: Some argue that Aoba’s death cannot compensate for the lives lost in Kyoto Animation studio nor repair the damage caused10. They prefer a measure that allows Aoba to contribute in some way to society and pay for his acts.
Special mental conditions: There is a group that defends that someone with possible special mental conditions should not be executed, since he was not fully aware of his acts at the time of the attack.
Arguments in favor of the death penalty:
Retributive justice: Some users approve the death penalty as the appropriate punishment for someone who took away the lives of other people from Kyoto Animation studio. They see this as an act of retributive justice.
Prevention of future acts: Others argue that as long as Aoba is alive, there is a possibility that he will repeat his actions in the future. They consider that eliminating that risk is essential.
Economy of resources: Finally, some users see the death penalty as the best option because they consider that keeping murderers alive in prison represents a waste of economic resources that could be used for other purposes.
This debate reflects the complexity of justice and ethics in cases as sensitive as Kyoto Animation attack. As society seeks answers and solutions, opinions vary widely, and the legal process will ultimately determine Shinji Aoba’s fate and the degree of justice that is considered appropriate in this case.