The documentary Black Box Diaries has taken the world by storm. It is the story of journalist Shiori Ito, who directed the film. In 2015, the young journalist was raped by Noriyuki Yamaguchi, a powerful media figure with close ties to then-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Even more disturbing was how the police had initially pursued the case, obtaining an arrest warrant for Yamaguchi, only to have the arrest suddenly quashed by a high-ranking government official. Then a political lackey of the Prime Minister scuttled the case, and the prosecutors dropped the ball. It was a blatant example of political interference in law enforcement, the kind of cover-up that reeked of abuse of power.
The documentary which uses footage from the hotel, recordings from eyewitnesses and other materials to tell the story, has been met with widespread critical acclaim and has even received nominations at the Oscars and BAFTAs.
But in filmmaker Shiori Ito’s home country of Japan, the film is facing yet another uphill battle.
Domestic press coverage could easily be about the merits of the film or consternation that the film has yet to be released in Japan. Coverage could, and should, also include the injustices in Shiori Ito’s life since 2015 when she was raped by Shinzo Abe’s personal biographer Noriyuki Yamaguchi. Civil courts determined Yamaguchi was a rapist, but the criminal investigation was curiously dropped moments before his arrest. Our editor in chief previously posted an explainer on this story, which is worth a read if you’d like more context.
Instead, the film is currently embroiled in a different kind of national discussion — a hair-splitting spat about how journalists are allowed to use video and audio footage, initiated by Ito’s former legal representatives.
The video footage in question is a CCTV recording obtained from the Sheraton Miyako Hotel Tokyo. The clip used in the documentary is a disturbing sequence of Ito’s limp body being dragged out of a taxi by Yamaguchi, everything in frame blurred except Ito herself.
The hotel first disclosed this footage to Ito and accompanying investigating detectives on April 15, 2015. While the police acquired the footage as evidence, Ito made a separate inquiry to get the footage herself after this initial visit. The hotel should be commended for fully cooperating with the police investigation.
Ito’s former lawyer and representatives take issue with the fact that she didn’t get permission from the hotel to use this footage outside of the courtroom. The hotel has been owned by hotel conglomerate Marriott International since 2016, after the incident occurred.
“The use of unauthorised images and sounds is legally and ethically problematic,” insists Yoko Nishihiro, Ito’s former counsel.
It is true that Ito and her legal team at the time had a written agreement to use the footage in the courtroom exclusively. However, we reached out to Marriott International, and they have refused to oppose or endorse the use of this footage in the documentary. We appreciate their efforts to respond to our question.
The following is a complete summary of our correspondences.
Unauthorized footage leakage:
Q: Many commend the hotel’s cooperation in assisting Shiori Ito during her case. However, there is confusion regarding the leak of footage showing her leaving the hotel appearing untroubled. Do you have any information on how this footage was released?
A: Marriott International has been made aware of this incident. The incident occurred at a hotel operated by a third party franchisee under a brand, which at the time of the incident was not yet under Marriott International’s portfolio of brands, as the incident occurred prior to Marriott International’s acquisition of the brand relating to this hotel.
Q. There is confusion regarding the leak of footage showing her leaving the hotel appearing untroubled. Do you have any information on how this footage was released?
A: No answer
Position on the Film’s Release in Japan:
Q: Are you opposed to the release of “Black Box Diaries” in Japan? If so, could you please explain your reasons?
A: No answer
Policy on Reporting Sexual Assaults:
Q: If an incident of sexual assault were to occur on Marriott premises, would your hotel share that information with the police? Could you elaborate on your protocol for handling such situations?
A: Marriott International is fully committed to the safety and well-being of our guests. We are committed to complying with all local laws and strive to maintaining the highest ethical standards. When we are made aware of reported incidents, we will work closely with the local authorities to facilitate any investigation to the extent permitted under laws, including providing information required by laws.
Q: Are you opposed to the release of the film in Japan? If so or if not, why? This could be due to the footage, the subject material, the persons involved, or other reasons which you may be able to explain.
A: No answer
Q: Finally, is it correct that Marriott International acquired the brand to which the Sheraton Miyako Hotel Tokyo belongs in 2016?
A:Thank you for the additional question. Yes, Marriott International acquired the Sheraton brand in 2016.
Marriott subsidiary Sheraton Miyako, the brand directly operating the Sheraton Miyako Hotel Tokyo, has yet to comment. These are all the answers we have as of 10pm February 19th 2025 (JST)>
The hotel has set a precedent of not addressing unauthorized use of footage. In particular, the hotel did not take action regarding the leak of CCTV footage showing Ito leaving the hotel the next morning, which was widely circulated years prior with the intention to discredit and libel Ito. In short: they seem to not care. They also have the power recognise that the use of the film is in the public interest. According to the producers of the film, the hotel chain was notified and shown how the footage was used in the documentary before it was released.
It is unusual for the victim’s former counsel to be raising these concerns rather than the parties supposedly affected.
Nishihiro argues that unauthorized use of footage could lead to businesses being more reluctant to cooperate with investigations, causing future harm to future victims. I
t’s hard to imagine how much more uncooperative they could be. The hotel reportedly provided the footage to Ito for use in her court case at a whopping fee of 400,000 yen ($3000). Holding this video evidence ransom is akin to price gouging for a victim of a violent crime, company policy or not.
It is difficult to say for certain whether such unauthorized use could affect future relationships between establishments and victims of crimes on their premises. It’s questionable now as to whether you can even call it “unauthorized” at this point. In some senses, in line with their policies, they same have given the use of the footage tacit approval. But it is questionable that businesses already profit from the evidence they hold, even taking into account the high privacy standards in Japan. It’s yet another mechanism that protects assailants, not victims.