Tokyo District Court "Patter Sound" Incident – Part 3 (Final)

Introduction

This article is a continuation of "Tokyo District Court 'Patter Sound' Incident – Part 2."
In this final part, I will examine from multiple perspectives the “patter” sound I heard in the courtroom, including possible technologies behind it and the intent behind its use.

Considerations

Connection to Psychological Sabotage Using Sound and Light

As described in Part 1, although the type of sound differed, the “patter” sound I heard reminded me strongly of the very first suspicious sound I heard on the morning of March 5, 2018, when I was subjected to psychological sabotage using sound and light at a Sotetsu Group hotel (formerly Hotel Sunroute Takadanobaba) and a nearby Lawson store.

The Technology Used to Generate the Sound

I clearly heard an unusual “patter” sound that moved back and forth across the ceiling of the courtroom.
I understand that this occurred in a closed room and therefore cannot be asserted as an objective fact. Still, it was clearly artificial, and such a sound could not have been produced without some form of device.

From a commonsense perspective, it is hard to believe that such a device would be permanently installed in a courtroom.

Also, from a layperson’s point of view, I believe such a device, while perhaps not large, would still be of a certain size—certainly too large to fit in a coat pocket or small bag.

Accordingly, it is likely that someone bypassed metal detection and brought the device into the courthouse.

The Technology That May Have Been Used

Next, I will consider what kind of technology may have been used to produce the suspicious sound.

While I remained deliberately calm in response to the abnormal sound, none of the three attorneys or the court clerk in the room showed any signs of surprise.
Two explanations can be considered:

1. The other four individuals had been informed in advance that the sound would occur and were instructed to remain composed.

2. The sound was only audible to me.

If the first case is true, it is possible that an advanced version of audio technology, such as that used in cinemas, was employed.

If the second case is true, then a highly sophisticated technology similar to so-called Voice-to-Skull (V2K) may have been used.
In that case, it would have been necessary to direct the signal selectively toward me.

On Why I Believe I Was the Target

Given that I perceived the suspicious sound while the other four in the courtroom showed no reaction,

that the sound strongly reminded me of the first auditory trigger during the psychological sabotage I experienced on March 5, 2018,

and that I have experienced numerous suspicious incidents involving police, media, and other institutions,

it is only natural to conclude that I was the target.

If so, the user of the device must have known in advance when I entered the courtroom.
Two possible methods for this are:

1. Someone notified the device operator that I had entered.

2. I was automatically detected using infrared or millimeter-wave sensors, with the assumption that I would sit at the defendant’s table.

Why Was the Sound Directed at Me?

Two likely motives for emitting this sound just before the first hearing began:

• Reason 1: To inflict psychological damage on me

• Reason 2: To demonstrate that the human experimentation group has control even over the courts

Regarding reason 1, if I had been in a more mentally vulnerable state, the sound might have triggered flashbacks to the March 5, 2018 incident and left me too shaken to respond coherently in court.

This could have damaged the judge’s impression of me and undermined the credibility of my claims.

Furthermore, both reasons likely had the broader purpose of forcing me to submit once again to the experimentation group and to deprive me of the willpower to continue resisting and speaking out publicly.

Summary

I have visually summarized the above considerations in the illustration below.

That such measures would be taken to interfere with the court proceedings of an anonymous defendant suggests the presence of a highly serious underlying issue.

I continue to assert that I have been subjected to unimaginable human rights violations over an extended period.

I also point out that these violations appear to be connected to the development of remote technologies designed to monitor and manipulate human brain activity.

Moreover, the symptoms I experience show clear similarities with those reported by victims of Anomalous Health Incidents (AHIs), indicating that similar technologies may also be behind those incidents.

In considering why the other three people in the courtroom showed no reaction to the patter sound, I examined the possibility that I alone could hear it and proposed the involvement of advanced technology resembling V2K.

However, it seems unlikely that a technology like V2K could produce the illusion of a sound moving across the ceiling from end to end.
V2K-induced perceptions are typically localized within or near the skull—such as whispers or ringing sounds—not sounds that seem to echo across a room.

The sound I heard clearly seemed to originate from the ceiling above.
Therefore, I believe the three attorneys and the court clerk must have heard it as well.

Consequently, I cannot help but harbor suspicions toward all four of them.
As a victim, this is a natural response.

As for the court clerk, there were also other suspicious behaviors that I observed. I plan to address those in a future post.

In this article, I have shared my thoughts on the suspicious sound I heard just before the first oral hearing, including its possible purpose, the technologies that might have been used, and the possibility that even parts of the judiciary are under the localized control of a human experimentation organization.