~通、甲 and 乙 in a criminal case judgment

[b_john...@yahoo.com]

Hi all ! I have been given a judgment in a criminal case to translate
and was wondering if any of you could help me with the following
terms. I have translated a number of cases before but this is the
first criminal case I have translated.

After a statement about the facts of the case there is the heading:
「被告人Ａ，同Ｂ、同Ｃの当公判廷における供述」

Then, there is a list of names followed by 「（２通、乙４５－４６）の検査官調書」.

Below this is the heading:
「分離前の相被告人Ａ，同Ｂ、当公判廷における供述」
「（名前）（２通、甲５０，５１）の検査官調書」

Could anyone tell me what the　「２通、乙４５－４６」 and 「２通、甲５０，５１」 means?

Thanks in advance,

Brian Johnson

[Herman]

The terms 甲 and 乙 are categories of evidence, as explained below:
(From http://www.jiyugaoka-law.com/techterm.html)
刑事裁判の甲号証、乙号証はいずれも、一方当事者である検察官の提出する証拠
です。甲号証は、検察官によって提出される証拠のうち客観的な証拠や被害者や
第三者の供述にもとづく証拠、乙号証は、検察官によって提出される証拠のうち
被告人の供述に基づく証拠が主です。

通 is used to count copies of documents and the like, and would indicate
here that the evidence was submitted in duplicate.

I doubt there is an exact equivalent in English. A possible translation
may be "(in duplicate, Exhibits B 45-46)", etc.

Herman Kahn

[美山誠]

Hello Yakkers,

A Japanese government body has been putting out 法令用語日英標準対訳辞書
(Subtitled in English: "Standard Legal Terms Dictionary") for a few
years now. However it doesn't list 甲 and 乙 (although I recognised them
as counters, I didn't know what they meant in this context). Are they
considered too fundamental to put in such a dictionary?

Makoto Miyama

[Fred Uleman]

Do not understand why documents (evidence) would be submitted in duplicate -- or how this understanding is derived from the snippet. Seems more likely to non-legal me that there are different documents with different numbers. Especially with

> 「分離前の相被告人Ａ，同Ｂ、当公判廷における供述」
> 「（名前）（２通、甲５０，５１）の検査官調書」

where 50 would be A's and 51 B's.

- -- --- ---- ----- ---- --- -- -
Fred Uleman

[Herman]

On 11/16/2011 19:44, Fred Uleman wrote:
> Do not understand why documents (evidence) would be submitted in
> duplicate -- or how this understanding is derived from the snippet.
> Seems more likely to non-legal me that there are different documents
> with different numbers. Especially with
> > 「分離前の相被告人Ａ，同Ｂ、当公判廷における供述」
> > 「（名前）（２通、甲５０，５１）の検査官調書」
> where 50 would be A's and 51 B's.

I think your understanding is correct. "2 documents" would be a proper
translation here.

Herman Kahn

[b_john...@yahoo.com]

Thank you so much Herman and Fred for your time !

So any ideas about rendering 甲 and 乙 or just Romanize it ?

Brian Johnson

[Herman]

> So any ideas about rendering 甲 and 乙 or just Romanize it ?

I think in this case romanizing would be best, because it would
eliminate any possible confusion as to what was being referred to, for
instance if an excerpt of the translation had to be translated into
Japanese again.

Herman Kahn

[Mark Spahn]

> So any ideas about rendering 甲 and 乙 or just Romanize it ?

Romanize 甲 and 乙? How? As "Koh" and "Otsu"? Heh.
Or as "A" and "B"? Another choice would be to
replace 甲 and 乙 by their role in the contract or
legal writing, such as Lessor and Lessee (being sure to
capitalize).

To answer Makoto Miyama's question about whether
甲 , 乙, 丙 should be listed in Japanese-English legal
dictionaries, my answer is "Certainly yes!", because the
user will need to know how to express these "place-holders"
in English. (In old-fashioned legalese, they might be
"Party of the First Part", "Party of the Second Part", etc.)
Must -通 be listed in such a dictionary?
In my opinion, not so much, because -通 is just
a counter (助数詞), like -本 for cylindrical objects,
-冊 for books, etc.
That is, -通 is not particularly a legal term.
-- Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)

[b_john...@yahoo.com]

> Romanize 甲 and 乙?  How?  As "Koh" and "Otsu"?  Heh.
> Or as "A" and "B"?  Another choice would be to
> replace 甲 and 乙 by their role in the contract or
> legal writing, such as Lessor and Lessee (being sure to
> capitalize).
>

> -- Mark Spahn  (West Seneca, NY)

The problem here it that there is the prosecution and a number of
defendants and even more co-conspirators (who have provided statements
but dont seem to have been prosecuted in this case for some reason).

If I am not mistaken, it seems there are five defendants in total but
two of the three have been tried separately because they played a
larger role in the crime.
Thus, 「分離前の相被告人Ａ，同Ｂ、当公判廷における供述」

「（名前）（２通、甲５０，５１）の検査官調書」

「乙」only appears under the first heading for the three defendants and
「甲」only appears under the second heading for the other two defendants
but 「乙」 also appears here once after the name of one of the 「相被告人」.

So, I am still not sure how to proceed.

A and B seems a bit simple and "Party of the First Part" seems a bit
long for parenthesis.

Brain Johnson

[Mark Spahn]

> If I am not mistaken, it seems there are five defendants in total but
> two of the three have been tried separately because they played a
> larger role in the crime.
> Thus, 「分離前の相被告人Ａ，同Ｂ、当公判廷における供述」
> 「（名前）（２通、甲５０，５１）の検査官調書」
>
> 「乙」only appears under the first heading for the three defendants and
> 「甲」only appears under the second heading for the other two defendants
> but 「乙」 also appears here once after the name of one of the 「相被告人」.
>
>
> So, I am still not sure how to proceed.
>
> A and B seems a bit simple and "Party of the First Part" seems a bit
> long for parenthesis.
>
> Brain Johnson

You probably already have adopted a practice like translating 甲 as
something unique, like the word AAA, to be globally replaced later by
whatever you decide upon. And in the right context 甲 and 乙 can stand for
Plaintiff and Defendant.
For what it's worth, a University of Washington legal glossary gives
甲第[X]号証 = Plaintiff's Exhibit [X]
乙第[X]号証 = Defendant's Exhibit [X] (usu.,
but depends on number of parties)

[Herman]

On 11/17/2011 01:16, Mark Spahn wrote:
>> So any ideas about rendering 甲 and 乙 or just Romanize it ?
>
> Romanize 甲 and 乙? How? As "Koh" and "Otsu"? Heh.
> Or as "A" and "B"?

The choice of "Ko" and "Otsu" would be preferable here, because it would
eliminate ambiguities about exactly what document is being referenced.

Herman Kahn

[b_john...@yahoo.com]

> You probably already have adopted a practice like translating 甲 as
> something unique, like the word AAA, to be globally replaced later by
> whatever you decide upon. And in the right context 甲 and 乙 can stand for
> Plaintiff and Defendant.
> For what it's worth, a University of Washington legal glossary gives
> 甲第[X]号証 = Plaintiff's Exhibit [X]
> 乙第[X]号証 = Defendant's Exhibit [X] (usu.,
> but depends on number of parties)
> -- Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)

Yes, that would apply in a civil case, but here there is no plaintiff.
There is the prosecution and the defendants and all the documents seem
to be submitted by the defendants. I thought there maybe some standard
expression that someone here uses in criminal cases, but perhaps A and
B would suffice as you mentioned earlier.

Brian Johnson

[Keith Wilkinson]

Surely the pair corresponding to Plaintiff and Defendant would be
Prosecution and Defence in a criminal case. And "two copies" could
well be stating the obvious --
any statements or paper evidence produced by either
P or D, and numbered with counters 甲 or 乙 respectively,
would be produced in triplicate: the party submitting them
would keep one copy and would hand over two copies:
one for the court, and one for the other party's head lawyer.

Keith Wilkinson

[b_john...@yahoo.com]

Thank you everyone for taking the time to answer my questions.
All your input was much appreciated !

Brian Johnson

[Dwight Van Winkle]

These website define 甲号証 and 乙号証 as documents submitted by the
prosecution. Both documents in your text are titled 検査官調書, which
seems consistent with these definitions.

http://www.jiyugaoka-law.com/techterm.html

※これは民事裁判の話で、刑事裁判では甲、乙の意味が民事とは異なります。刑事裁判において訴える側は常に検察官です。刑事裁判の甲号証、乙号証はいず

れも、一方当事者である検察官の提出する証拠です。甲号証は、検察官によって提出される証拠のうち客観的な証拠や被害者や第三者の供述にもとづく証拠、
乙号証は、検察官によって提出される証拠のうち被告人の供述に基づく証拠が主です。

http://keiji-bengo.com/basic/criminal_trial.html

５.刑事裁判における証拠
刑事裁判の証拠には甲第○号証、乙第○号証、弁第○号証などと番号が付けられます。検察官が刑事裁判において提出する証拠には、被害者の供述調書や犯行
現場の実況見分調書、鑑定書などの甲号証と、被告人の供述調書や前科調書等の乙号証に分けて番号が付けられます。刑事裁判においては被告人の供述調書や
前科調書等以外の証拠である甲号証から先に取り調べることに。弁護士が刑事裁判において提出する証拠には弁第１号証、弁第２号証と番号が付けられます

On Nov 17, 11:23 am, "b_johnson8...@yahoo.com"

[Dwight Van Winkle]

I now see Herman already provided this information in the first
reply. Sorry for the duplication.