"Rindler Sigurd" <srindler@da2.so-net.ne.jp> wrote in message
news:3eeedca9$1_7@news.uncensored-news.com...

> If the place was a public road and she was illegally parking, the cop

Excuse me, I missed that you'd been saying "public road" on the other
comment. If it's a public road, then "Yes". You can call police and
maybe ask them to tow it away. But I think what they do mostly is just
putting a yellow sticker warning "illegal parking" to the windshield.

> > Hey you are missing one important point. The cop only had right to ask
> > her to answer his questioning VOLUNTARILY.
>
>
> Yes, but I have never heard a policeman us this keyword.

It's a good point, and that is one of our police's less fair thing.
Japanese police usually don't declare that kind of things
obligatorily. And it's often confusing since they always tend to make
it vague whether it's voluntary or not.

> Wow, that's very severe considering that killing your kid could get you as
> littel as 4 years!
> And how do we punish the police grabber? Half a year plus 20 slaps across
> the face a la Singaporean style...

In addition to my other comment, the charge of Taiho Kankin
Zai(illegal arrest and confinement) is not like illegal parking things
of minor traffic offence that only violate such Road Traffic Act..
It's a serious charge of
the criminal code and it's actually a kind of felony, so I think there
is no fine has been set for this kind of crime and only detention are
set for the penal regulation of this kind of crime.

The important point of this NZ woman's case is that she wasn't
violating any clause in the Road Traffic Act, neither any clause in
the criminal code. Her occupying of someone else's parking space is
merely a civil affair, so the cop never had any right to interfere
with her. Japanese police has no right to cut into any civil case. But
the cop had violated this very fundamental rule of "No intervention in
any civil case", and I guess his violation would be serious issue in
Japan.