Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Headscratchers / AceAttorneyInvestigationsMilesEdgeworth

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Edgeworth actually specifically states to Mr. Doe that a simple blood test will prove that he wore the raincoat, which is what leads him to concede that fact.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* About the SS-5 incident, [[spoiler:why in the world did Blaise help the body double? I know Patricia was bribed, but Blaise, as I know, wasn’t. So, why? This is a pretty big deal, and as far as I know it isn’t explained. I read the wiki and it didn’t say why.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* In the Grand Turnabout, [[spoiler:if Simon kidnapped John in order to get a guilty verdict for Patricia Roland, why didn't he let Courtney know that?]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

**Through reading body language. Within the Logic Chess sessions, he's hyper-focused on the person he's up against and so is better able to read their body language and how guarded they are being at the time.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Answering a headscratcher

Added DiffLines:

**The problem with the first point is that Penny Nichols was there at the time. If the body had already been moved from the suit, she would've seen it (remember the conversation about her eyesight hadn't happened yet so Lang couldn't have use that as an out for why she didn't see the body). As for the second point...that's actually a really good one. My best guess is that Lang either assumed that John had somehow temporarily moved the body behind some equipment for the photo shoot and moved it back afterwards or that he assumed that there was a second, unmentioned costume (which to be fair, film sets generally have multiples of costumes in case something happens to one). Either that or everyone simple forgot the timeframe of the photo because I sure did until right now.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:


* I-5. It is established that [[spoiler:Coachen's]] body [[spoiler:was moved via the connected pool pipe, where Yew had to jump into the water at one point to receive the cart and swim back out as the water was rising]]. The Iron Infant [[spoiler:was discovered soaked, the petal from the murder weapon too]]. And yet, the body itself was never mentioned to be [[spoiler:wet, not even damp]]. [[spoiler:Coachen's]] clothes were evidently left untouched to expose the wound and the blood and all, so it's unlikely he was re-dressed. How come apparently everything else [[spoiler:that took a dive into the pool was soaked]] except the most important thing?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** The problem is that Simon killed the president. Simon hired De Killer to kill him, but when he failed, Simon went and did it himself - he basically no longer trusted De Killer's capabilities. Is it petty? Well... yes, but in-character for him.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Color is back now.


*** '''''HOLD IT!''''' That isn't the point - at the end of the case [[spoiler:the Amanos are]] immediately arrested and carted off, so why isn't [[spoiler:she]] immediately arrested as well?
*** '''''Not so fast!''''' Certainly, [[spoiler:the Amanos]] are arrested and carted off while [[spoiler:Lauren isn't arrested until later, if she's arrested at all]]. After all, [[spoiler:Lance is the one who committed murder]], and while merely obstructing the investigation, it allowed for [[spoiler:Ernest to be brought in for his involvement in the smuggling ring]] - much more important to Interpol than [[spoiler:staging a kidnapping]]!
*** '''''OBJECTION!''''': In the ending, she reveals that she was, in fact, put on trial and imprisoned for her part in the fake kidnapping.

to:

*** '''''HOLD IT!''''' '''''[[red:HOLD IT!]]''''' That isn't the point - at the end of the case [[spoiler:the Amanos are]] immediately arrested and carted off, so why isn't [[spoiler:she]] immediately arrested as well?
*** '''''Not '''''[[red:Not so fast!''''' fast!]]''''' Certainly, [[spoiler:the Amanos]] are arrested and carted off while [[spoiler:Lauren isn't arrested until later, if she's arrested at all]]. After all, [[spoiler:Lance is the one who committed murder]], and while merely obstructing the investigation, it allowed for [[spoiler:Ernest to be brought in for his involvement in the smuggling ring]] - much more important to Interpol than [[spoiler:staging a kidnapping]]!
*** '''''OBJECTION!''''': '''''[[red:OBJECTION!]]''''': In the ending, she reveals that she was, in fact, put on trial and imprisoned for her part in the fake kidnapping.



*** '''''OBJECTION!''''' ::desk slam:: It's clearly stated that [[spoiler:the mirror breaking was the start of the struggle - immediately after Edgeworth hangs up on the phone - and the gunshot was, obviously, at the end]]! Ergo... ::[[GivingSomeoneThePointerFinger points]]:: the [[spoiler:gunshot]] happened '''after''' the [[spoiler:mirror broke]], clearly contradicting your theory! Besides, the order is irrelevant - what matters is the relative volume of the events, and any [[spoiler:gunshot]] is going to be a lot louder than [[spoiler:a mirror breaking]] - such a loud noise is going to be very easy to hear over any [[spoiler:ambient sound]], even if it is meant to sound like [[spoiler:a gunshot]]!
*** '''OBJECTION!''' The order of the events is indeed irrelevant! Indeed, the [[spoiler:mirror was broken in the struggle, and not by the gunshot]], but this does not significantly contradict my previous testimony! As for the blending, could not the [[spoiler:gun]] have been equipped with a [[spoiler:silencer]]? ::lawyerspace closeup:: There is no proof that the sound of [[spoiler:a gunshot]] was ever actually produced in the first place, as ''nobody'' heard the sound!

to:

*** '''''OBJECTION!''''' '''''[[red:OBJECTION!]]''''' ::desk slam:: It's clearly stated that [[spoiler:the mirror breaking was the start of the struggle - immediately after Edgeworth hangs up on the phone - and the gunshot was, obviously, at the end]]! Ergo... ::[[GivingSomeoneThePointerFinger points]]:: the [[spoiler:gunshot]] happened '''after''' the [[spoiler:mirror broke]], clearly contradicting your theory! Besides, the order is irrelevant - what matters is the relative volume of the events, and any [[spoiler:gunshot]] is going to be a lot louder than [[spoiler:a mirror breaking]] - such a loud noise is going to be very easy to hear over any [[spoiler:ambient sound]], even if it is meant to sound like [[spoiler:a gunshot]]!
*** '''OBJECTION!''' '''[[red:OBJECTION!]]''' The order of the events is indeed irrelevant! Indeed, the [[spoiler:mirror was broken in the struggle, and not by the gunshot]], but this does not significantly contradict my previous testimony! As for the blending, could not the [[spoiler:gun]] have been equipped with a [[spoiler:silencer]]? ::lawyerspace closeup:: There is no proof that the sound of [[spoiler:a gunshot]] was ever actually produced in the first place, as ''nobody'' heard the sound!
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Judges being biased towards the prosecution is par for the course in the Ace Attorney universe; Defense Attorneys assisting in investigations is ALSO normal in this universe, as Justine doesn't bat an eye at Raymond doing his own investigation, and Miles continues his investigation under Raymond (not to mention the hundreds of investigations that Phoenix and company do regularly). The only issue is that the defendant framed one of his previous clients, but that probably isn't enough to prevent him from doing his job impartially. All of that aside, the questionable bias of all sides was probably intentional to [[ShowDontTell show (not tell)]] the player that the current court system is completely corrupt and due for major change. Chronologically, Apollo Justice is going to happen next, and out of universe, Dual Destinies was the next (canon) game to be released. Both of whom tackle the theme of corrupt courts.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
It's a "lazy game" because it didn't do a specific thing you wanted it to do? Leave your retarded opinions out of it


** Ultimately, this is done for the purposes of gameplay. Having to go through the investigation where you clearly prove that X is the killer and then having to go through the courtroom session where you prove that X is the killer would be redundant and boring. The game could have done something clever, like separate investigation into days where you fight against the lawyer and then continue the investigation to ultimately narrow down the real suspect, but AAI is a very lazy game.

to:

** Ultimately, this is done for the purposes of gameplay. Having to go through the investigation where you clearly prove that X is the killer and then having to go through the courtroom session where you prove that X is the killer would be redundant and boring. The game could have done something clever, like separate investigation into days where you fight against the lawyer and then continue the investigation to ultimately narrow down the real suspect, but AAI is a very lazy game.\n
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** [[spoiler:All good points, but it's important to note that the claim of self-defense is a specific legal justification for murder, since murder is also a specific legal term. Given that The Big Bad is not a lawyer, he probably wouldn't think of it straight away, especially given the stigma that a verdict of self-defense has in Los Tokyo Angeles, and the fact that the final confrontation ended once de Killer appeared on the scene. But the Big Bad's defense attorney could probably make a reasonable case for self-defense, or at least claim that the prosecution can't prove it was murder, all of which would come out during the trial. In fact this troper believes that the president was killed in a combination of self-defense and the Big Bad realizing how to make use a coincidence. Also there was no hole in the basket, since bullet was still embedded in the basket when Edgeworth and co. examined it.]]

to:

*** [[spoiler:All good points, but it's important to note that the claim of self-defense is a specific legal justification for murder, since murder is also a specific legal term. Given that The Big Bad is not a lawyer, he probably wouldn't think of it straight away, especially given the stigma that a verdict of self-defense has in Los Tokyo Angeles, and the fact that the final confrontation ended once de Killer appeared on the scene. But the Big Bad's defense attorney could probably make a reasonable case for self-defense, or at least claim that the prosecution can't prove it was murder, all of which would come out during the trial. In fact this troper believes that the president was killed in a combination of self-defense and the Big Bad realizing how to make use a coincidence. Also there was no hole in the basket, since bullet was still embedded in the basket when Edgeworth and co. examined it.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

***[[spoiler: De Killer's client didn't kill the actual president, his client had known that the president was killed before the hit was ordered and that the president was a fake all along. De Killer is angry at the client for lying to him about that detail as de Killer believed he was ordered to kill the president, not a fake.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

[[foldercontrol]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** [[spoiler:Maybe he doesn't have millions of dollars, but Simon has been planning his revenge for 12 years, not just the 1-2 that he worked at the circus. He could easily have saved up enough money over that time, and he needed some way to make money during the ten years he wasn't working at the circus. Also, it is never made clear how much de Killer charges to assassinate someone.]]~TheKayOne

to:

*** [[spoiler:Maybe he doesn't have millions of dollars, but Simon has been planning his revenge for 12 years, not just the 1-2 that he worked at the circus. He could easily have saved up enough money over that time, and he needed some way to make money during the ten years he wasn't working at the circus. Also, it is never made clear how much de Killer charges to assassinate someone.]]~TheKayOne]]



*** [[spoiler: This troper agrees that not telling de Killer about the fake president was a breach of trust, but there is a difference between the breach of trust that his client showed, which would result in punishment, and actively double-crossing him, which would cause de Killer to kill his client as punishment (as per JFA). And since de Killer determined that the president was a fake by himself, it appeared to this troper that the reason de Killer was searching for his client (or at least the reason while he talks to Edgeworth and co. on the rooftop) was to confirm his client knew about the fake president. After all, if his client didn't know that the president was a fake, then there is no breach of trust and de Killer has no reason to punish his client. What this troper noted was that there is an even bigger breach of de Killer's trust that his client was forced into committing: namely, his client hired de Killer to kill the president, then went and killed the president himself, which meant that his client actively prevent de Killer from completing the hit, and not just passively preventing it by not disclosing the target's true identity, and would thus warrant de Killer to kill his client as revenge. In fact, de Killer only starts trying to kill his client ''after'' it's revealed that his client is the true culprit, even though de Killer had to be present during all of the final show down to know that his client knew that the president was a fake, which he clearly knew when he spoke to Edgeworth and co. in the circus tent.]] ~TheKayOne

to:

*** [[spoiler: This troper agrees that not telling de Killer about the fake president was a breach of trust, but there is a difference between the breach of trust that his client showed, which would result in punishment, and actively double-crossing him, which would cause de Killer to kill his client as punishment (as per JFA). And since de Killer determined that the president was a fake by himself, it appeared to this troper that the reason de Killer was searching for his client (or at least the reason while he talks to Edgeworth and co. on the rooftop) was to confirm his client knew about the fake president. After all, if his client didn't know that the president was a fake, then there is no breach of trust and de Killer has no reason to punish his client. What this troper noted was that there is an even bigger breach of de Killer's trust that his client was forced into committing: namely, his client hired de Killer to kill the president, then went and killed the president himself, which meant that his client actively prevent de Killer from completing the hit, and not just passively preventing it by not disclosing the target's true identity, and would thus warrant de Killer to kill his client as revenge. In fact, de Killer only starts trying to kill his client ''after'' it's revealed that his client is the true culprit, even though de Killer had to be present during all of the final show down to know that his client knew that the president was a fake, which he clearly knew when he spoke to Edgeworth and co. in the circus tent.]] ~TheKayOne]]



*** [[spoiler:All good points, but it's important to note that the claim of self-defense is a specific legal justification for murder, since murder is also a specific legal term. Given that The Big Bad is not a lawyer, he probably wouldn't think of it straight away, especially given the stigma that a verdict of self-defense has in Los Tokyo Angeles, and the fact that the final confrontation ended once de Killer appeared on the scene. But the Big Bad's defense attorney could probably make a reasonable case for self-defense, or at least claim that the prosecution can't prove it was murder, all of which would come out during the trial. In fact this troper believes that the president was killed in a combination of self-defense and the Big Bad realizing how to make use a coincidence. Also there was no hole in the basket, since bullet was still embedded in the basket when Edgeworth and co. examined it.]]~TheKayOne

to:

*** [[spoiler:All good points, but it's important to note that the claim of self-defense is a specific legal justification for murder, since murder is also a specific legal term. Given that The Big Bad is not a lawyer, he probably wouldn't think of it straight away, especially given the stigma that a verdict of self-defense has in Los Tokyo Angeles, and the fact that the final confrontation ended once de Killer appeared on the scene. But the Big Bad's defense attorney could probably make a reasonable case for self-defense, or at least claim that the prosecution can't prove it was murder, all of which would come out during the trial. In fact this troper believes that the president was killed in a combination of self-defense and the Big Bad realizing how to make use a coincidence. Also there was no hole in the basket, since bullet was still embedded in the basket when Edgeworth and co. examined it.]]~TheKayOne]]



*** [[spoiler: Considering that the art work depicting the balloon incident shows the basket and balloon are tied together by simple rope, then all Simon needs to do is untie the knots and the basket suddenly has no upward momentum anymore and crushes the president almost instantly, giving him almost no time to react. And regarding the other point, this troper doesn't know if a regular wicker basket might take damage from a fall like that, but there is no way that Simon's balloon is just a regular wicker basket. Given that as part of the prison's Animal Show, the balloon needs to carry an elephant and a tiger, which would weigh over a ton in addition to the 800 pounds of a regular deflated hot air balloon, and most likely break a regular wicker basket. such a trick would require the balloon to be reinforced, which would explain why the bullets the president fired didn't pass straight through the balloon, and the metal casing of the basket that is present when the balloon is examined, ''and'' the clanging noise that was recorded on Nicole's tape, ''and and'' why there were no signs of damage on the balloon.]]~TheKayOne

to:

*** [[spoiler: Considering that the art work depicting the balloon incident shows the basket and balloon are tied together by simple rope, then all Simon needs to do is untie the knots and the basket suddenly has no upward momentum anymore and crushes the president almost instantly, giving him almost no time to react. And regarding the other point, this troper doesn't know if a regular wicker basket might take damage from a fall like that, but there is no way that Simon's balloon is just a regular wicker basket. Given that as part of the prison's Animal Show, the balloon needs to carry an elephant and a tiger, which would weigh over a ton in addition to the 800 pounds of a regular deflated hot air balloon, and most likely break a regular wicker basket. such a trick would require the balloon to be reinforced, which would explain why the bullets the president fired didn't pass straight through the balloon, and the metal casing of the basket that is present when the balloon is examined, ''and'' the clanging noise that was recorded on Nicole's tape, ''and and'' why there were no signs of damage on the balloon.]]~TheKayOne]]



*** [[spoiler:While a prosecutor taking finger prints might be normal in Los Tokyo Angeles, during case 5, Edgeworth isn't actually a prosecutor, he's a civilian and will probably justify his involvement in the investigation as consultant work. But since they were looking for his own fingerprints, he shouldn't have been allowed any involvement in the forensics investigation, and was probably only allowed to do because Ema Skye was the forensics expert present, who is also a big fan of Edgeworth. His involvement is just an opening for the defense to accuse him of evidence tampering. But like the previous posted noted, he does have a large number of witnesses who can claim never touched the truck when he was at the circus, and Ema isn't an idiot; she would certainly have enough gloves to allow Edgeworth to wear some as well, and if Edgeworth was wearing gloves while searching the truck for prints, then he couldn't get his prints on there during the investigation. In short, Edgeworth investigating the balloon was in violation of protocol and shouldn't be permissible in court, but even to an outside observer it would be impossible to Edgeworth to have faked the prints.]]~TheKayOne

to:

*** [[spoiler:While a prosecutor taking finger prints might be normal in Los Tokyo Angeles, during case 5, Edgeworth isn't actually a prosecutor, he's a civilian and will probably justify his involvement in the investigation as consultant work. But since they were looking for his own fingerprints, he shouldn't have been allowed any involvement in the forensics investigation, and was probably only allowed to do because Ema Skye was the forensics expert present, who is also a big fan of Edgeworth. His involvement is just an opening for the defense to accuse him of evidence tampering. But like the previous posted noted, he does have a large number of witnesses who can claim never touched the truck when he was at the circus, and Ema isn't an idiot; she would certainly have enough gloves to allow Edgeworth to wear some as well, and if Edgeworth was wearing gloves while searching the truck for prints, then he couldn't get his prints on there during the investigation. In short, Edgeworth investigating the balloon was in violation of protocol and shouldn't be permissible in court, but even to an outside observer it would be impossible to Edgeworth to have faked the prints.]]~TheKayOne]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Courtney just wasn't able to bring herself to feel fine with handing down a verdict until they could be sure that John was safe. Rationally speaking, it's true that you could consider it fine to stop stalling as soon as they found out that John wasn't kidnapped by Blaise, but a worried mother is hardly going to think "rationally". She was still panicked that something would happen if she gave a guilty verdict, even if the kidnapper was someone else entirely.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* In Case 5, [[spoiler:Franziska, Ray, and Courtney try to stall Patricia's trial for as long as possible because Blaise supposedly is holding John hostage to force a Not Guilty verdict, so Edgeworth is going to go rescue him. Except he finds out that Blaise's dumbass henchmen grabbed Sebastian instead. The one who actually took John was Simon, who wanted to force a ''Guilty'' verdict. Which is the verdict she deserves and the one Edgeworth and Co. want her to get. Why then, once Sebastian is rescued and Edgeworth receives the phone call from Simon revealing that he's the one who has John and why he took him, do they ''still keep stalling the trial''? I guess it's possible they assumed the mysterious shadowy evil mastermind wasn't going to keep true to his word and would have killed John regardless of the verdict, but this was never explained]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** It wasn't the same day. Case 2 begins in the early morning and is resolved that afternoon, which is when Edgeworth asks for a ride. Case 3 begins the following morning, and Case 1 follows in the late evening of the same day.

Added: 323

Changed: 2

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Here's something that's bugged me about I-4. During a logic segment near the end of the case where [[spoiler:Edgeworth deduces that the missing KG-8 tape is in the video player hooked up to the TV, he deduces that the tape must be in the TV because the only things that could pass through the bars are incorporeal things. Assuming the tape in question is about the same dimensions of a typical VHS tape, what's stopping the criminal from just chucking it out the window and recovering it later? Edgeworth should have at least addressed this possibility.

to:

* Here's something that's bugged me about I-4. During a logic segment near the end of the case where [[spoiler:Edgeworth deduces that the missing KG-8 tape is in the video player hooked up to the TV, he deduces that the tape must be in the TV because the only things that could pass through the bars are incorporeal things. Assuming the tape in question is about the same dimensions of a typical VHS tape, what's stopping the criminal from just chucking it out the window and recovering it later? Edgeworth should have at least addressed this possibility.
possibility.]]


Added DiffLines:

**On a purely meta/game design standpoint, the player doesn't know this because the events that would give the accused an alibi have not happened yet before the player. As for an in-universe explanation... I got nothing. Maybe someone would suspect Edgeworth of making up a convenient alibi for that person to protect them?

Added: 384

Changed: 2

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Here's something that's bugged me about I-4. During a logic segment near the end of the case where [[spoiler:Edgeworth deduces that the missing KG-8 tape is in the video player hooked up to the TV, he deduces that the tape must be in the TV because the only things that could pass through the bars are incorporeal things. Assuming the tape in question is about the same dimensions of a typical VHS tape, what's stopping the criminal from just chucking it out the window and recovering it later? Edgeworth should have at least addressed this possibility.]]

to:

* Here's something that's bugged me about I-4. During a logic segment near the end of the case where [[spoiler:Edgeworth deduces that the missing KG-8 tape is in the video player hooked up to the TV, he deduces that the tape must be in the TV because the only things that could pass through the bars are incorporeal things. Assuming the tape in question is about the same dimensions of a typical VHS tape, what's stopping the criminal from just chucking it out the window and recovering it later? Edgeworth should have at least addressed this possibility.]]possibility.

* Case 1. [[spoiler:Gumshoe]] gets accused of the murder. But then the end of Case 2 gives him a pretty solid alibi: [[spoiler:Edgeworth directly asks him to drive him to the office, and up until that point, he was with Edgeworth and Franziska investigating the plane!]] Why does Edgeworth never mention in the defense that it wasn't physically possible for them to commit the crime??
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:


*Here's something that's bugged me about I-4. During a logic segment near the end of the case where [[spoiler:Edgeworth deduces that the missing KG-8 tape is in the video player hooked up to the TV, he deduces that the tape must be in the TV because the only things that could pass through the bars are incorporeal things. Assuming the tape in question is about the same dimensions of a typical VHS tape, what's stopping the criminal from just chucking it out the window and recovering it later? Edgeworth should have at least addressed this possibility.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* When Edgeworth is playing Logic Chess, how does he know how strong a defense (i.e. how many pieces) his opponent is putting up? With the magatama, the strength of the opposition is at least somewhat explained: a magatama lets you see into a person's soul; the more he/she wants to hide a secret, the more locks are over it. But with Logic Chess, there's no obvious way for Edgeworth to read the board, as it were. How does he know how hard the other person is going to try to fight to conceal information?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:


* Case 3: It's nice that the game [[SubvertedTrope subverts]] the expectations that certain GenreSavvy players of Trials and Tribulations might have. (If that's being too generous, they at least avoid getting stale and predictable by obviously re-using the same character types [[spoiler: with the same genders]] in the same plot.) However, it still makes Edgeworth seem forgetful and maybe even naive that he is so unwilling to believe that [[spoiler: a flirty 19-year old girl who can make sad eyes who was involved in a kidnapping/extortion plot and apparently betrayed her boyfriend would be capable of killing a member of her own family]].

to:

* Case 3: It's nice that the game [[SubvertedTrope subverts]] the expectations that certain GenreSavvy players of Trials and Tribulations might have. (If that's being too generous, they at least avoid getting stale and predictable by obviously re-using the same character types [[spoiler: with the same genders]] in the same plot.) However, it still makes Edgeworth seem forgetful and maybe even naive that he is so unwilling to believe that [[spoiler: a flirty 19-year old girl who can make sad eyes who was involved in a kidnapping/extortion plot and apparently betrayed her boyfriend would be capable of killing a member of her own family]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** All of you HAVE played JFA right? Cases 2-2 and 2-4 make it crystal clear that a defence attorney doesn't have to actively try and prove their client's complete innocence. Franziska tries to get Nick to say Maya WAS the killer, but in self-defence. He'd just have to prove it was self-defence, but let it stand that Maya was, in fact, the murderer. In 2-4, Nick can flat-out say he wants his client to get the Guilty verdict and the Judge won't bat an eye, and the Prosecution can rest its case even if the defendant is definitely very guilty (the Judge does note that one, but because of the weirdness of the trial more than anything). Ray's presence, when the evidence proves Roland's guilt beyond a doubt and multiple people heard her confession, is likely just a formality. The trial itself was probably mostly a formality to get her officially charged with Knightley's murder (seeing as she'd had multiple people be witness to her confession, and her guilt was proven during investigation). It's likely that Knightley's own trial would have gone the same way. Keep in mind the legal system at the time is on the verge of the Dark Age of the Law, and has repeatedly been noted and proven to be deeply, deeply flawed. Remember that Maggey in 3-3 was convicted despite not having a proper defence who, it was noted, _was trying to prove Maggey's guilt_, and she was still put in jail for it. Defence attorneys don't have to try and prove innocence when guilt has been established. It's part of what makes the system so corrupted. Nick, remember, is the odd one out of attorneys, until Apollo and Athena come along.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** [[spoiler:Simon might be in an Engarde dilemma. When Dogen pleaded for the Simon's life, one of the conditions was "please permit this young acolyte to recieve his proper punishment in prison". And so De Killer relunctantly settled for a less severe punishment, and only then because of his respect for a fellow assassin. But that's way different from outright sparing Simon; there's absolutely no way De Killer would accept Simon just walking off scot-free like that.]]

to:

*** [[spoiler:Simon might be in an Engarde dilemma. When Dogen pleaded for the Simon's life, one of the conditions was "please permit this young acolyte to recieve his proper punishment in prison". And so De Killer relunctantly settled for a less severe punishment, and only then because of his respect for a fellow assassin. But that's way different from outright sparing Simon; there's absolutely no way De Killer would accept Simon just walking off mostly scot-free like that.on a self-defense plea.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

*** [[spoiler:Simon might be in an Engarde dilemma. When Dogen pleaded for the Simon's life, one of the conditions was "please permit this young acolyte to recieve his proper punishment in prison". And so De Killer relunctantly settled for a less severe punishment, and only then because of his respect for a fellow assassin. But that's way different from outright sparing Simon; there's absolutely no way De Killer would accept Simon just walking off scot-free like that.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

** It was the person spoilered above. She ran in while baiting Kay, locked the door, and set the stash of counterfeit currency on fire to keep anyone from coming in before she could use the secret exit to get to the next room. Palaeno unlocked the door but couldn't get in or even see inside because of all the flames, and by the time Kay got there, the flames had burned out.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

*** Conflict of interest wasn't always really taken into account in the series. Or at least not for prosecutors. Say, for instance, 4-3. [[spoiler:Lamiroir accuses Daryan of killing [=LeTouse=], then he's immediately replaced by Ema as the case's detective]]... but then you have cases like 3-5, [[spoiler:where Godot is accused by Phoenix of killing Misty and ''has no alibi whatsoever'' (Unlike, say, Manfred von Karma until the very end of 1-4) yet is allowed to keep prosecuting the case. Or 4-3 again, where Klavier, as lead member of the band that was in the very concert the murder took place in ''and'' bandmate of the by-then suspicious Daryan, is allowed to prosecute]].

Added: 473

Changed: 898

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** He also revises his opinion several times as the investigation goes on -- he's seldom "right" on the first try. Take "Kidnapped Turnabout" for an example. If it were played as a regular Ace Attorney case, Edgeworth would be prosecuting Lauren Paups, saying the facts point to her murdering her father (unknowingly) in self-defense. Phoenix would be the one to point out all the reasons it couldn't be her, and when Edgeworth was convinced, he'd see that suspicion naturally falls on Lance Amano, whereupon both of them would team up to nail the twerp. In these games, he doesn't have Phoenix for his partner, so he has to prosecute the one he thinks is guilty (who usually has a defender) and defend the ones he thinks are innocent (who always have accusers), until he finally works it all through and finds the truth.

to:

*** He also revises his opinion several times as the investigation goes on -- he's seldom "right" on the first try. Take "Kidnapped Turnabout" for an example. If it were played as a regular Ace Attorney ''Ace Attorney'' case, Edgeworth would be prosecuting Lauren Paups, saying the facts point to her murdering her father (unknowingly) in self-defense. Phoenix would be the one to point out all the reasons it couldn't be her, and when Edgeworth was convinced, he'd see that suspicion naturally falls on Lance Amano, whereupon both of them would team up to nail the twerp. In these games, he doesn't have Phoenix for his partner, so he has to prosecute the one he thinks is guilty (who usually has a defender) and defend the ones he thinks are innocent (who always have accusers), until he finally works it all through and finds the truth.



** Could just be nerves about meeting such an important detective. He's 19 years old, talking to a guy so badass he could put Chuck Norris to shame, and said badass suddenly reaches into his coat where a gun would normally be holstered on a detective...I could see where he was coming from.

to:

** Could just be nerves about meeting such an important detective. He's 19 years old, talking to a guy so badass he could put Chuck Norris to shame, there are two corpses in the room right next to him, and and ''then'' said badass suddenly reaches into his coat where a gun would normally be holstered on a detective...be...I could see where he was coming from.



*** He also has a reason to dislike Edgeworth in 1-3: he probably suspected from the start that Ernest Amano would be covering for his son and had hired a pet prosecutor to make sure guilt falls on the "right" person (Lauren). So Lang sidelines Edgeworth as much as he can (probably would have left him locked in that room the whole time to keep him out of the way) until Edgeworth reveals that he isn't Amano's stooge and that he has no agenda except to find out what really happened. When he and Kay prove instrumental to bringing Amano down, Lang starts to respect his methods a bit more, but in 1-5 he still thinks Edgeworth won't be able to use the law to take down someone above the law (and he may be right about that).

to:

*** He also has a reason to dislike Edgeworth in 1-3: I-3: he probably suspected from the start that Ernest Amano would be covering for his son and had hired a pet prosecutor to make sure guilt falls on the "right" person (Lauren). So Lang sidelines Edgeworth as much as he can (probably would have left him locked in that room the whole time to keep him out of the way) until Edgeworth reveals that he isn't Amano's stooge and that he has no agenda except to find out what really happened. When he and Kay prove instrumental to bringing Amano down, Lang starts to respect his methods a bit more, but in 1-5 I-5 he still thinks doubts Edgeworth won't will be able to use the law to take down someone above the law (and he may be right about that).




* The murder weapon in 1-5 is a decorative knife with an Allebahst flower motif on its pommel. One of the gold petals is missing and the petal itself is found on the Babahl side of the embassy, calling attention to the fact that the body was moved (and giving a clue as to how). It's implied that the petal came off during the transportation of the body, but the knife is visible in a pre-murder photograph where it is tucked into a bouquet -- the petal is already missing!

to:

\n** Of course they could have got a warrant, but in the minutes or hours it would have taken, Amano could have cleaned up every bit of evidence in the Haunted House and/or planted new evidence. At any rate, no one would be able to be certain the Haunted House looked exactly the same then as it did at the time.

* The murder weapon in 1-5 I-5 is a decorative knife with an Allebahst flower motif on its pommel. One of the gold petals is missing and the petal itself is found on the Babahl side of the embassy, calling attention to the fact that the body was moved (and giving a clue as to how). It's implied that the petal came off during the transportation of the body, but the knife is visible in a pre-murder photograph where it is tucked into a bouquet -- the petal is already missing!

Added: 728

Changed: 41

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** He also revises his opinion several times as the investigation goes on. Take "Kidnapped Turnabout" for an example. If it were played as a regular Ace Attorney case, Edgeworth would be prosecuting Lauren Paups, saying the facts point to her murdering her father (unknowingly) in self-defense. Phoenix would be the one to point out all the reasons it couldn't be her, and when Edgeworth was convinced, he'd see that suspicion naturally falls on Lance Amano, whereupon both of them would team up to nail the twerp. In these games, he doesn't have Phoenix for his partner, so he has to prosecute the one he thinks is guilty (who usually has a defender) and defend the ones he thinks are innocent (who always have accusers), until he finally works it all through and finds the truth.

to:

** *** He also revises his opinion several times as the investigation goes on.on -- he's seldom "right" on the first try. Take "Kidnapped Turnabout" for an example. If it were played as a regular Ace Attorney case, Edgeworth would be prosecuting Lauren Paups, saying the facts point to her murdering her father (unknowingly) in self-defense. Phoenix would be the one to point out all the reasons it couldn't be her, and when Edgeworth was convinced, he'd see that suspicion naturally falls on Lance Amano, whereupon both of them would team up to nail the twerp. In these games, he doesn't have Phoenix for his partner, so he has to prosecute the one he thinks is guilty (who usually has a defender) and defend the ones he thinks are innocent (who always have accusers), until he finally works it all through and finds the truth.


Added DiffLines:

*** He also has a reason to dislike Edgeworth in 1-3: he probably suspected from the start that Ernest Amano would be covering for his son and had hired a pet prosecutor to make sure guilt falls on the "right" person (Lauren). So Lang sidelines Edgeworth as much as he can (probably would have left him locked in that room the whole time to keep him out of the way) until Edgeworth reveals that he isn't Amano's stooge and that he has no agenda except to find out what really happened. When he and Kay prove instrumental to bringing Amano down, Lang starts to respect his methods a bit more, but in 1-5 he still thinks Edgeworth won't be able to use the law to take down someone above the law (and he may be right about that).

Added: 783

Changed: 2

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** He also revises his opinion several times as the investigation goes on. Take "Kidnapped Turnabout" for an example. If it were played as a regular Ace Attorney case, Edgeworth would be prosecuting Lauren Paups, saying the facts point to her murdering her father (unknowingly) in self-defense. Phoenix would be the one to point out all the reasons it couldn't be her, and when Edgeworth was convinced, he'd see that suspicion naturally falls on Lance Amano, whereupon both of them would team up to nail the twerp. In these games, he doesn't have Phoenix for his partner, so he has to prosecute the one he thinks is guilty (who usually has a defender) and defend the ones he thinks are innocent (who always have accusers), until he finally works it all through and finds the truth.



** This is easily explained. In Phoenix's and Apollo's cases, the prosecution doesn't want to find the truth per se but to rather just arrest all people who could be the killer. The whole point of These cases is that they are seem from ONE viewpoint, the polices, however Phoenix/Apollo change the viewpoint to see it from their eyes. Edgeworth (in AAI)wants the truth and thinks through things from his own viewpoint. Not to mention that the WHOLE POLICE FORCE is a little bit different from just one single prosecutor who happens to find the truth.

to:

** This is easily explained. In Phoenix's and Apollo's cases, the prosecution doesn't want to find the truth per se but to rather just arrest all people who could be the killer. The whole point of These these cases is that they are seem from ONE viewpoint, the polices, however Phoenix/Apollo change the viewpoint to see it from their eyes. Edgeworth (in AAI)wants the truth and thinks through things from his own viewpoint. Not to mention that the WHOLE POLICE FORCE is a little bit different from just one single prosecutor who happens to find the truth.

Top