Okay, so the Statute of limitations for DL-6 ends on December 28, however, von Karma is arrested on the 28th! Now, normally this wouldn't be an issue, but in this game, cases are normally not held until a day or 2 AFTER the defendant is arrested. Hence, von Karma is arrested on the 28th, his trial is set for... the 30th maybe, but the Statute of limitations ended on the 28th. Because of this, he can't be tried for DL-6 anymore, he gets away scott free!

SON OF A B****

---

I also wondered about that. I wish they had detailed Manfred's fate a little, because I'm a bit confused about what happened after Edgeworth's trial.

---

It's true that Manfred is responsible for Hammond's murder, and murder instigation is considered just as bad as murder. But since he took (and probably destroyed) the letter, there would be no way to prove it.

By the way, why would someone so "perfect" send a hand-written letter in such a situation? I know Yanni was supposed to burn it, but it's so careless to leave incriminating evidence like that. Has he never heard of computers or even typewriters?

First line from Wikipedia: "A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated."

---

Yeah, but in the game, it's portrayed as though they have to resolve everything by that date.

Which is weird, since they say that Edgeworth will get another trial in a month if you lose.

IRL, there's no statute of limitations for murder, and statutes of limitations are only the deadline for filing a case; in criminal law, pressing a charge. Still, if there WAS a statute of limitations and Phoenix hadn't found that bullet that day, Manfred would've gotten off, since they can't file a charge without probable cause. A grudge and a defense attorney saying "he did it" are not probable cause. Also, IRL, Manfred is guilty of murder against Robert Hammond. There is a difference between an accomplice who helps with the actual crime, and an accessory after the fact who only helps the criminal avoid prosecution. For example, , and probably April May and are full accomplices and could be charged with murder, and maybe even sentenced to death for it. On the other hand, was a mere accessory who could only be charged with something like accessory to murder, obstructing prosecution, or evidence tampering (in addition to perjury during their own trial and crimes committed in relation to a previous case).

If you want a REAL legal loophole that could get someone off the hook in that case, try Yogi using an entrapment defense. Entrapment means that someone can't be prosecuted for a crime that they only committed because law enforcement convinced them to. To clarify, an undercover cop buying drugs from a professional drug dealer is NOT entrapment, and the dealer CAN be prosecuted. However, if an undercover cop convinces someone who would never have turned to crime otherwise to become a drug dealer in the first place, THAT'S entrapment, and the new dealer CANNOT be prosecuted for doing what a cop convinced them to do. Manfred von Karma is a prosecutor; a member of law enforcement. If Yogi can prove that the only reason he killed someone is because a prosecutor induced him to do it, he can get off the hook.

---

I don't remember: does Phoenix ever say in court who it was who told Yogi to kill Hammond? If not, Yogi might not find out about it. Sympathetic though Yogi's story was, I doubt Phoenix would want to help a man who committed premeditated homicide against a defense attorney who saved his life, intentionally framed Edgeworth for it, and committed perjury get off scot-free. Yogi might be able to try to plead entrapment if he's charged with perjury too. Though, if it was real-life in the U.S., where more than 80% (almost 90%) of criminal charges in this country are resolved via plea bargain, Yogi would just use the THREAT of an entrapment defense, which might or might not succeed, to plea bargain down from life without parole for first-degree murder to 18 years with parole eligibility in 6 years for second-degree murder.

Tifforo, I really have no idea what you're trying to say.


Uh...... they had the trial for Edgeworth right then and there because why not? That was Manny's plan anyway. And Nick had to get the proof that Manny was the killer b/c, as you said, there wasn't enough evidence to file a charge without it.


Lemme repeat it for you: "A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated." It's okay for Edgey to have another trial in a month if you lose, b/c the legal proceedings had just been initiated.

---