The strong Japanese outcry over the killing led to a jurisdictional dispute between the Japanese authorities and the U.S. Army. The Army maintained that Girard had acted while on duty and was thus under the jurisdiction of U.S. military courts, while the Japanese government held that Girard's actions had taken place during a period of rest, making him subject to Japanese law.[1] Girard had been assigned to guard a machine gun at the firing range in between sessions of target practice; the Japanese contention was that since Girard had not fired a weapon during exercises, he could not be considered as actively on duty.