A 37-year-old man was apprehended on suspicion of attempting to carry out an arson attack on the Japanese embassy in Seoul, presumably in anger over historical disputes between the two countries, police said Thursday and Yonhap News reported.
The suspect, identified only by his surname Jang, planned to set fire to the embassy and take embassy staff hostage, according to police.
Investigators said Jang hoped to hold a press conference criticizing Japan's policies on Dokdo, a set of South Korean-controlled islets that Japan claims as part of its territory, and Japanese history textbooks that whitewash wartime atrocities during the country's colonial rule over the Korean Peninsula.
Jang was carrying a lighter and a press statement when he was caught, authorities added.
In Korean, with video, here from YTN.
16 comments:
When I first read the title of this post, I thought they had arrested him in the embassy, while he was (belatedly?) formulating his arson/hostage plan.
I hope the media will realize that this is the predictable result of Tokto zealotry.
You've got to be pretty unstable to try to break into the embassy. I took a couple pictures of it when I was in Seoul a couple weekends ago, and from the looks of it it's the second-most fortified embassy in the city, behind the US Embassy.
"Jang was carrying a lighter and a press statement when he was caught, authorities added."
A simple lighter can be a potent weapon!
Rather fitting for the 5th of november
Anyone remember the idiot that lit his car on fire and then tried to drive his burning car through the doors of Korea's parliament?
WTF is up with pissed off Koreans trying to torch things?
There was the guy who burned down Namdaemoon and he previously tried to burn down another gate.
There was the guy who burned down a tower at the Suwon fortress.
There was the guy who tried to torch the Seoul subway by lighting a bunch of papers on a car.
Was the Daegu subway fire started by an arsonist?
Yes, the Taegu fire was started by an arsonist.
The Taegu subway system is cursed.
Well, this story certainly didn't make the headlines.
"Investigators were looking into his medical records to determine whether there is any history of psychiatric treatment, police said."
As true as it might be that he's a bit off, this seems to be a common excuse offered when a foreigner is attacked in Korea specifically for being foreign (and the media bothers to report on it).
As for Daegu, a Korean friend suggested that the city's woes are due to it being where Chun Doo-hwan was from, and is thus its run of bad luck is a cosmic balancing of the scales for Kwangju's experience under his command in 1980.
matt wrote:
As true as it might be that he's a bit off, this seems to be a common excuse offered when a foreigner is attacked in Korea specifically for being foreign (and the media bothers to report on it).
I don't know if it's "an excuse," but it is typically something that gets brought into an investigation. But to be fair, it's often a factor in crimes committed by Korean against Koreans as well. And much like drunkenness, potential mental instability sometimes used as a mitigating factor when people are sentenced, or when the cops decide whether to pursue a case.
Very disturbing. I like to think that most of the Dokdo stuff stems more from nationalistic bravado than from genuine hatred of the Japanese. And I'm sure that this guy is indeed unstable. But still, I wish that the Dokdo-preachers would reflect on the rhetoric they're spewing, and on how counter-productive it is. The country, and the vast majority of the people in it, are better than that.
"But to be fair, it's often a factor in crimes committed by Korean against Koreans as well."
In a criminal matter we call that "motive." It is what leads the prosecution to convict... not the defense to acquit.
Mike wrote:
In a criminal matter we call that "motive." It is what leads the prosecution to convict... not the defense to acquit.
Medical records revealing any history of psychiatric treatment is "motive"? It might point law enforcement to the suspect or make his/her guilt more likely, but having had psychiatric treatment is not motive, unless the psychiatric treatment somehow precipitated the violent act.
And mental incapacity is frequently used in many countries as a mitigating factor, not just Korea.
Now one could argue that is or is not a good idea (in the US, we tend to pooh-pooh such defenses whenever defense lawyers try a Twinkie Defense or some such), but my point was only that they are used in cases where Koreans, not just foreigners, are the victims of an attack.
Yes. All that is true. I guess I misinterpreted what you were saying. Based on Matt's original comment about it being "a common excuse offered when a foreigner is attacked in Korea specifically for being foreign," I thought you were defending the mitigation of racist attacks based on "potential mental instability" and not on actual medical illness.
When there is intent to cause damage or harm the reason behind that intent is called motive. He had a press release and it didn't say things like "the Japanese voices in my head..." or "they're after me with their secret microwaves."
And with a glare at investigators: what exactly constitutes mental instability in Korea? Depression? Alcoholism?
Fair enough about the misunderstanding, Mike. I wouldn't defend such a mitigation of racist attacks, except possibly to say someone belongs in a secure mental facility instead of jail, but for the same length of time. But I might say that about a lot of crimes that aren't hate crimes, as well.
Mike wrote:
And with a glare at investigators: what exactly constitutes mental instability in Korea? Depression? Alcoholism?
That's a good question. It seems the US and the ROK are on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to punishment (I use the US not just because I'm a US citizen but also because, in the "free world," it represents the epitome of tough-on-crime philosophy.
Painting this in broad strokes, the US sometimes seems to look for excuses to throw people in jail, while the ROK seems to look for excuses to keep people out. Maybe the latter is a reflection of the pendulum swinging far from the bad-old-days of Japanese occupation followed by military rule.
There are indeed many mitigating circumstances, such as inebriation (enjoy story #5), mental impairment, poor economic circumstances, etc., etc. People are let out of jail, fined instead of jailed, never put on trial, or let go with a warning for what sometimes seem the flimsiest of excuses.
When we have cases like poor Nayŏng, or repeat sex offenders in schools, etc., etc., it's clear that the magnanimous attitude of giving people a second chance needs to be tweaked so that recidivists and repeat offenders don't keep evading punishment and remain a menace.
But a lot of people will look at the US case, where knee-jerk incarceration, one could argue, actually causes widespread socioeconomic erosion of families and whole communities, and think that's just too far in the other direction.
Where is the happy medium?
Post a Comment