3

甲斐:地検に告発を。

幸村:その前に本人と話す。

甲斐:それが正しい対応ですか。

幸村:弁明の機会を与える。私のやり方よ。

甲斐:すべきじゃない。

幸村:私が犯人だったとしても?(pause)

幸村:上杉先生とは共に戦ってきたの。(end of scene)

Two lawyers are talking about another person suspected of embezzlement in 『スーツ』. For reference, the entire scene can be found here.

私が犯人だったとしても-- even if I were a culprit

But I am not sure what 幸村 means exactly here. I see two possibilities:

  1. She is using herself as an unlikely example to rebut 甲斐's すべきじゃない, implying 甲斐 would react quite differently: "Would you also report me, were I ever a culprit?"

  2. She is saying: Are you doubting me? Are you suspecting I might be complicit in this?

#2 doesn't seem very likely, because if it is #2, I don't what is omitted after としても.

4
  • One possibility would be "Are you still going to stop me were I ever a culprit?" (i.e. "If you are doubting me, isn't this a good chance for you to find something on me?"), but with this context alone, I may be totally wrong.
    – naruto
    Nov 2 at 1:06
  • @naruto Thanks. I updated the question to include one more line and I've pretty much transcribed the entire scene... I have also put up a link to the actual scene, for context...
    – Eddie Kal
    Nov 2 at 1:46
  • I’m struggling to understand why you thought #2 might be the case. Is your question more about whether 犯人 refers to a culprit in general (#1) or one, or the one, in this particular case of embezzlement (#2)?
    – aguijonazo
    Nov 2 at 2:31
  • @aguijonazo My first thought was #1: 幸村 is essentially saying, "You'd give me a second chance, so I should give 上杉 one too." But the subtitles (unofficial translation) gave, "Are you suspecting my involvement?" That's how my possibility #2 came about... Also as you say, whether 犯人 is a general or specific reference also seems vague... I am not sure if she is trying to say, "If I ever did something like this..." or "Are you suspecting I have been involved with 上杉 in the embezzlement?"
    – Eddie Kal
    Nov 2 at 2:50
6

I haven't watched the show at all so it's possible that I'm totally wrong, but given the background:

  • 甲斐 and 幸村 are new partners
  • 幸村 and 上杉 were old partners

in other words, 幸村 : 上杉 = 甲斐 : 幸村

And what the previous two lines say, without omission, are:

  • (私[幸村]は上杉に)弁明の機会を与える。
  • (あなた[幸村]は上杉に)す(=弁明の機会を与える)べきじゃない。

Then this line is possibly intended to be:

私[幸村]が犯人だったとしても(あなた[甲斐]は私[幸村]に弁明の機会を与えないのか)?

1

One possibility I can think of is that she is presenting the hypothesis that she is the sole culprit, in which case Uesugi would not be part of it and therefore deserve a chance to explain himself. She could be asking if he would still stop her from giving Uesugi that chance.

For #1 to be plausible, the two at the scene must be in such a relationship that (she knows that he knows that) he would likely give her such a chance if she were in Uesugi’s shoes. I have never watched the series and don’t know if they are.

But poor acting…

1

From the text can tell that 甲斐's way of doing thing is "地検に告発を" without informing the culprit before(その前に本人と話さない). But 幸村 thinks culprit should be informed before(その前に本人と話す) to have a chance to explain him/herself(弁明の機会を与える), and this is 幸村's way of doing things(私のやり方よ). 甲斐 don't agree with 幸村's way. So what 幸村 assumes(私が犯人だったとしても?) is: if I were the culprit, will you directly "地検に告発を" without informing me before as well? (I didn't see the scene, but I guess they two are friends or have a close relationship?)

1
  • Here 幸村' s assumption is questioning 甲斐's way of doing things. Apparently. 幸村 is not agree with that.
    – chapayev
    Nov 2 at 3:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.