The Great Ace Attorney 2: Resolve/Episode 2: The Memoirs of the Clouded Kokoro/Trial, Part 2

Defendants' Antechamber

Funny enough, this starts out as a close up on Natsume's face pulled back before he starts blowing steam about his prospects of being innocent of this crime. And of course, he still has anomisty against Herlock Sholmes for giving him a hard time. Still, what's Shamspeare's goal? Find out throughout this trial.

Trial begins

After the formalities, Baron Von Ziek calls out Shamspeare to the stand to testify after Inspector Gregson reports that the tea in the soap contains no poison at all.

Shamspeare's Testimony: The Tea Inconsistency

William Shamspeare

William Shamspeare's Testimony

- The Tea Inconsistency -

1. The Japanese man did come to my chamber with tea brew'd in a pot.
2. 'Twas in my cup alone that the wicked miscreant secretly pour'd his wicked poison.
3. Whilst feigning distraction in our debate, ne'er did a drop of his own drink pass his lips.
4. When he departed by and by, I did use the tea that remain'd in his cup to make my coins of ice.
5. Thus 'tis no surprise that poison be not found in the tea I did pour into the moulds of soap.

The Tea Inconsistency: Cross Examination

Examine The Two Teacups. One teacup has a red ring while the other teacup is clean. Once it's updated, present the two teacups on statement three. Narahudo points out that one teacup didn't "pass Shamspear's lips" but Natsume drinks it all on his teacup while its hot. But von Zieks interrupts and is able to persuade the jurors to the verdict of guilty. So again, Ryunosuke demands a summation examination to turn the balance back to the center.

Judicial Findings: The Jurors' Contentions

Judicial Findings

- The Jurors' Contentions -

Juror No. 1: I'm a man of logic, me. And having considered all the evidence, the defendant must logically be guilty.
Juror No. 2: I do agree that gas is far too expensive. I can quite understand why the man would want to avoid paying.
Juror No. 3: The stuff explodes and it can poison you! It's absolutely lethal, gas is!
Juror No. 4: Gas doesn't come for free! It costs a fortune to deliver it around the city and maintain the pipes!
Juror No. 5: Truth be told, the tea my wife serves up for me is a little...sketchy at times.
Juror No. 6: If nothing else passed the victim's lips that night, there's no other explanation, is there?

Jury Examination: The Defence's Rebuttal

Press on Juror No.4 statement and she’ll talk about how her company is being stolen from by other companies and how they are investigating it, Juror No.3 will react during the testimony, ask him what is on his mind. He’ll talk about an incident where an Altamont employee blew too hard down a pipe and all of the lights and the stove in his house went out. Juror No.3 will amend his statement to include this.

Pit Jurors No.3 and No.6 against each other. If there was poison on the victims gas pipe something else could have passed his lips in a manner of speaking.

Present the Handprints on the Wall Photograph when asked for evidence.

Juror No.1 interrupts the argument. He thinks they can’t end the trial right now. Juror No.2 and No.6 agree. Only one Juror left to convince.

Press on Juror No.1’s statement. He says if Shamspeare was messing with the gas that night, you should present evidence proving it.

When giving the choice choose ‘I have supporting testimony’, Juror No.1 asks who the testimony is from.

Choose Soseki Nataume. From the beginning he’s been talking about the strange occurrences in his apartment.

Juror No.1 is convinced to continue the trial, leaving four Jurors not guilty and two Jurors guilty.

Choose Soseki Natsume again when asked who Shamspeare would have wanted to murder via the gas pipe. Von Ziek counters as to how Shamspeare collapsed on the table as that part hasn't been resolved.

When asked who the true culprit is choose Olive Green. The Judge orders Von Ziek to allow that witness to appear in court after a brief break.