When you watch the opening to case 4 it shows the gun being shot via shooters left hand

Yet then it cuts to edgeworth he is holding the gun in his right

Anyone else pick up on this soon as opening showed it as it made the contridiction in court alot easier :)

---

At the time I was already used to calling Nick an idiot for a lot of things. With this one scene, I became used to calling Edgeworth an idiot too. And then Nick had to get himself zapped. I could go on about this case and how brilliantly stupid everyone is.


But now that you remind me, someone should probably start up a general case thread. The other subforums have their game-specific ones, but I think we'd do better with a single thread to collect all these sorts of discussions.

---

I did not pick up on it on my first playthrough. But I did pick up on it on my second playthrough, and I had forgotten all about that "wrong hand" contradiction by then. (I am a pretty forgetful guy.)

---

[quote="Rubia Ryu the Royal"]At the time I was already used to calling Nick an idiot for a lot of things. With this one scene, I became used to calling Edgeworth an idiot too. And then Nick had to get himself zapped. I could go on about this case and how brilliantly stupid everyone is.


how is nick an idiot :P

---

Durr. Of course I did.

It's pretty freaking obvious to begin with and is made even easier with the amount of times they flash back to that damn gunshot and boat.

Plus, protip for Ace Attorney games: If any evidence somehow indicates which hand's prints are on a weapon you can BET you have proof that the other hand's prints should be on it but aren't.



Despite 1-4 being my favorite case, yeah, it's painfully dumb. Especially since we have to waste our time with Lotta, then have the annoyance of the boat keeper on the witness stand and Edgeworth has the idiocy to pick up a gun when even GUMSHOE knows to not pick up a gun that was just fired. (At least not without gloves)

C-A

---

Lotta and the boat keeper (before he got identified as Yanni Yogi) annoyed be, too. They both went on too long - the time for him to wake up after every question is (to me) the worst part of it, since it can't even be avoided by fast-forwarding.

I could excuse Edgeworth acting stupid because, speaking from experience, that's just what people tend to do when they panic and have no internalyzed routine to revert to.

What I found much more unbelievable (although not exactly out of place for an Ace Attorney game) was von Karma pretty much just giving up after Phoenix announces his intention to have the bullets compare. I'll admit that I'm not too familiar with Japanese or US law, but at least in the German version, that suggestion should get Phoenix little more than a condescending smile and a lecture about how we can't force surgery on another person, least of all within the same day. I would assume at least a few other countries have similiar laws.

He's our favorite idiot. ^3^

But more to the point, in case 3, when Maya suggests showing that photo of the Samurai to Oldbag, Nick tells her it's best not to reveal their hand to the enemy too soon. Good, sound advice. And then in this case, he first goes to Grossberg, who confirms the handwriting of the letter as VK's. Finally, he goes to meet VK in the Records Room when no one else happened to be around and actually expected to get away with accusing him of initiating a murder plan.

Sure, it's thanks to Maya that they were able to recover one piece of DL-6 evidence, but that's just dumb luck right there. Hmm, is he lucky because he's dumb or dumb because he's lucky? I can't figure it out.

* As for calling Edgeworth an idiot, I know he was panicked, so he gets an excuse. He was panicking throughout the entire case and didn't break until the last day of the trial, where he went drama-queen mode and declared himself guilty. Yeah, it was convenient since everyone who'd be on the case was already there, but he honestly believed by doing so, he'd discourage Nick away. Hahaha, who's the naive one now?


The US courts do have the same law. It'd be a direct violation of privacy - with the exception of a few cases where people were forced to undergo it because they were deemed incapable of making a rational choice. Perhaps Nick could have argued that lead poisoning had affected VK's mind for 15 years and thus he couldn't make rationalized judgements. :p

Nah, I doubt it, but it would have been funny.

In Japan, it's a little more complicated. I know they retain the same laws regarding patient rights, but it's not unheard of to hear of someone's rights being overruled in the context of the trial. It's certainly uncommon, even by discretion of the prosecuting party, but I think they have happened before. Once again, you could say it's Nick's dumb luck at work.

---