diff --git a/docs/port/BLOCKED.md b/docs/port/BLOCKED.md
index 46ff767f..64fbf14b 100644
--- a/docs/port/BLOCKED.md
+++ b/docs/port/BLOCKED.md
@@ -811,7 +811,7 @@ detector could see? If the latter, what is the first-paint time? I am not
 authoring a delay to close this - a `2.13 s` authored delay in this same block
 was already refuted once by arithmetic.
 
-### A capture of the Japanese title (`GP_TITLE` build 7)
+### ~~A capture of the Japanese title (`GP_TITLE` build 7)~~ — DELIVERED 2026-08-30, and it went against the port
 
 **Derived from Decoder `daf8f47`.**
 
diff --git a/docs/port/DECISIONS.md b/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
index e0736608..decfde5a 100644
--- a/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
+++ b/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
@@ -8568,3 +8568,60 @@ Japanese title in the corpus, and this script's own header is explicit that
 agreement with the reference is not correctness and a `DIFFERS` is not
 automatically the port's fault. Guessing a direction here is precisely the move
 the mission forbids. Asked, not resolved.
+
+## The JP title capture adjudicates `title_jp` — and it goes against the port
+
+The Decoder captured the Japanese title at rest (`310bf86`) and deliberately did
+**not** compare it to either renderer, so that my diff and theirs stay
+independent. This is the oracle for the block I could not adjudicate.
+
+### Aligning it, because the last capture's geometry did not transfer
+
+Their submenu capture had the game surface at y=45 in a 1280×720 frame. I did not
+assume that here — I recovered the alignment by row/column profile correlation,
+with the English pair as a control:
+
+| | dy | dx |
+|---|---|---|
+| **control** — English capture (1279×675) vs port | **0** (r 0.994) | **0** (r 0.977) |
+| JP capture (1280×720) vs port | **−45** (r 0.927) | −1 |
+
+✅ The control lands on (0,0) as it must, and the JP offset comes out at their
+stated 45 **as a measurement rather than an inheritance**. My first look at the
+frame said "no letterbox, content spans all 720 rows" — true, and irrelevant: the
+surface is offset inside content that extends past it.
+
+### The instrument is fair, and then the verdict
+
+Comparing the capture against **both** renderers in the disputed 350×396 block at
+(405,74), and against a control strip where the two renderers agree:
+
+| region | vs port | vs reference | closer |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| **control strip** | r +0.9751 | r +0.9756 | tie — ✅ instrument is fair |
+| **disputed block** | r +0.7462 | **r +0.8727** | **REFERENCE** |
+
+🔴 **The port moved, and it moved away from the game.** The verdict is stable
+under gamma compensation at both measured title gammas (raw / 1.34 / 1.49 →
+reference every time), so it is not an artefact of the known capture gamma floor.
+The port puts light on **25.6 %** of the block that the capture does not have,
+against the reference's 15.9 % — it is drawing too much, not too little.
+
+⚠️ **This is the opposite of what I expected.** The Decoder's description — a
+crystalline burst behind the wordmark, the `ptlogo3a/b/c` + `ptlogo_back2eff*`
+stack that English holds transparent at rest — reads as confirmation that the
+port's extra layers are right. They are not: the burst is there, and the port
+draws *more* of it than the game does. **A qualitative match on "is the effect
+present" was about to stand in for a measurement of how much.**
+
+### What is not settled: which change did it
+
+Both renderers draw this screen at `rest`, t=10 units, so the settle-window logic
+is not in play — the two decoders disagree about the **rest pose of the JP effect
+stack itself**. Four commits this session touched that path (the forced-backdrop
+rule, per-instant coverage, the looping record, the sweep/hold work) and I have
+not bisected them. Naming one now would be a guess dressed as a cause.
+
+📌 What this does settle: `title_jp`'s `DIFFERS` is **the port's**, not the
+reference's. That reverses this script's usual presumption, and it is the first
+row in the baseline whose direction has ever been established against a capture.