Anonymous user
The Great Ace Attorney: Adventures/Episode 5: The Adventure of the Unspeakable Story/Trial, Part 3: Difference between revisions
From StrategyWiki, the video game walkthrough and strategy guide wiki
The Great Ace Attorney: Adventures/Episode 5: The Adventure of the Unspeakable Story/Trial, Part 3 (edit)
Revision as of 06:37, 7 March 2024
, 7 March→Courtroom
m (→The Disk: Cross Examination: Fixed unnecessary brackets.) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Courtroom== | ==Courtroom== | ||
While waiting for the mystery man, the Judge will tell you that, since | While waiting for the mystery man, the Judge will tell you that, since Sholmes's blood-testing method is yet "untried", he can't allow your blood samples to be used as evidence anymore. Thanks to Van Zieks convincing the judge that somehow Sholmes's method is unrevolutionary. | ||
Luckily, the guy you were waiting for will arrive just then. He introduces himself as Ashley Graydon, communications officer. He will then gladly and dramatically agree to tell the court what he knows. And he takes his hat off to you. Let's get started. | Luckily, the guy you were waiting for will arrive just then. He introduces himself as Ashley Graydon, communications officer. He will then gladly and dramatically agree to tell the court what he knows. And he takes his hat off to you. Let's get started. | ||
| Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
Before the cross examination starts, the whole court is astonished with McGilded's name being brought up by our current witness. Mr. Graydon even admits to being acquainted with the man. | Before the cross examination starts, the whole court is astonished with McGilded's name being brought up by our current witness. Mr. Graydon even admits to being acquainted with the man. | ||
First of all, '''press Statement 4''' and wait for your cue to '''pursue Inspector Gregson'''. How funny that he didn't even want to admit having seen Mr. Graydon earlier, right? For some reason the inspector still insists that Scotland Yard is investigating | First of all, '''press Statement 4''' and wait for your cue to '''pursue Inspector Gregson'''. How funny that he didn't even want to admit having seen Mr. Graydon earlier, right? For some reason the inspector still insists that Scotland Yard is investigating McGilded in secret. If we want to know exactly what Inspector Gregson is investigating, it seems we will need to ask Lord Stronghart first but that's out of the question for the time being. | ||
Back to our testimony, '''present the Pawnbroker's Ticket (Box) at Statement 5'''. Presenting the Pawnbroker's Ticket (Coat) will result in a penalty. You suspect Graydon broke into the pawnbrokery that night, with the help of the Skulkin brothers, in order to steal that "small box" the ticket talks about, since it belonged to McGilded too. However, Graydon will reply that, since the article was past its due date and was forfeited, he could have simply walked into the shop and bought it. Iris will come up with the idea that, for some reason, Graydon needed that box immediately, on that exact night, and couldn't wait until the next day to purchase it. | Back to our testimony, '''present the Pawnbroker's Ticket (Box) at Statement 5'''. Presenting the Pawnbroker's Ticket (Coat) will result in a penalty. You suspect Graydon broke into the pawnbrokery that night, with the help of the Skulkin brothers, in order to steal that "small box" the ticket talks about, since it belonged to McGilded too. However, Graydon will reply that, since the article was past its due date and was forfeited, he could have simply walked into the shop and bought it. Iris will come up with the idea that, for some reason, Graydon needed that box immediately, on that exact night, and couldn't wait until the next day to purchase it. | ||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
Meanwhile, both Van Zieks and Mr. Graydon will start questioning the defence and trying to make you doubt yourself and your line of reasoning. We can't even prove that McGilded's items have anything to do with the murder. Van Zieks most probably knows McGilded was wrongfully acquitted two months ago, and so he knows your arguments were flawed and only based on the false testimony of the girl you are trying to defend now. Seems like there's little choice here. | Meanwhile, both Van Zieks and Mr. Graydon will start questioning the defence and trying to make you doubt yourself and your line of reasoning. We can't even prove that McGilded's items have anything to do with the murder. Van Zieks most probably knows McGilded was wrongfully acquitted two months ago, and so he knows your arguments were flawed and only based on the false testimony of the girl you are trying to defend now. Seems like there's little choice here. | ||
You know how risky it is, but the right thing to do when prompted is to '''choose option 1''' | You know how risky it is, but the right thing to do when prompted is to '''choose option 1''' to "Have Gina testify", although it does happen anyway if you '''choose option 2'''. She's the only one who can prove the real importance of McGilded's items, even if it means both of you have to admit a few difficult things. The prosecution seems happy, though. Van Zieks is so looking forward to your defence falling apart. On the stand, Gina would be convinced again to tell the truth about what really happened two months ago. | ||
==Gina's Testimony: The Real Truth of the Omnibus Case== | ==Gina's Testimony: The Real Truth of the Omnibus Case== | ||
