Defendants' Antechamber[edit]
You, playing as Ryunosuke, discuss the coming trial with Soseki and Susato. Susato notes that it looks like Sholmes won't be arriving for the trial, but you think that this is probably for the best. If Sholmes was present, you believe he would have been tempted to turn to him for assistance, something that Barok van Zieks may view as a sign of weakness. More than anything, you want to prove that a Japanese lawyer is perfectly capable of succeeding in a British court. It's now time to be put to the test.
Trial begins[edit]
You again notice Van Zieks showing animosity for the Japanese, but he puts that aside to focus on the trial. Van Zieks then calls two witnesses to the stand in order to explain the crime: Inspector Gregson and the accused himself, Soseki Natsume. Gregson goes over the timeline of the crime, and presents a photograph of the scene as the police found it to the court. The Crime Scene Photograph is added to the Court Record. Soseki then describes why he believes his lodgings are haunted, and provides his version of events. This leads into the formal testimony.
Soseki and Gregson's Testimony: The Catastrophic Night[edit]
- Soseki: It was around nine o'clock that evening when I visited my neighbour, and I took some tea with me as a gift.
- Soseki: We had a heated literary debate over a nice, hot drink. After which I went back to my room, at around eleven.
- Soseki: Argh! My tea was completely harmless! He couldn't have locked the door behind me otherwise, could he?
- Gregson: Strychnine takes some time to have an effect on the body. People don't keel over immediately after takin' it.
- Gregson: The victim would have been perfectly able to lock the door after his guest left. The argument still stands.
The Catastrophic Night: Cross Examination[edit]
Press on statement 4 to get the Victim’s Medical Report. Present the Victim’s Medical Report on statement 2 or statement 5. You point out that if the strychnine takes effect half an hour after consumption, why did the victim collapse three hours after Natsume poured the tea? But van Zieks counters the claim and calls a new witness: William Shamspeare!
William Shamspeare can be very over the top in terms of his dialogue and the way he acts, along with his Shakespeare references. Not to mention his costume! The yellow clothed curious character that you've seen in a flashback also makes his appearance for the first time. You're going to have to listen to his colorful testimony to figure out what's going on. If you remember from "The Adventure of the Clouded Kokoro" in which he made his cameo appearance, you can learn more of his character points here.
Shamspeare and Metermann's Testimony: The Wintry Night of My Discontent[edit]
- Shamspeare: The snow lay about. My neighbour did cometh in the evening, bearing a gift of tea.
- Shamspeare: But marry! Bitter was his drink! And when he left, I did fall prostrate on my table!
- Shamspeare: 'Twas the tea alone did pass my lips that late hour. Nought else.
- Metermann: I was outside this bloke's window in the freezin' cold all night, keepin' an eye on his room.
- Metermann: No one else visited his room but that short little round-backed Eastern fella.
The Wintry Night of My Discontent: Cross Examination[edit]
Press every statement and Juror No. 1 will interrupt afterwards. After all the jurors vote Natsume guilty, you exercise your right to examine their argument. It’s time for the summation examination!
Tutorial note: Summation examination is pitting jurors against each other. It's really a matter of conflicting info and lots of convincing to change his or her mind. Sometimes, you need evidence to convince the juror if the person needs their question answered in order to move forward. Others is just pressing them to change their statement so the conflict between two jurors might work. It might start off simple now but watch out as things might get complicated! If you still don't get it, talk to Susato before you really start!
Judicial Findings: The Jurors' Contentions[edit]
Judicial Findings
- The Jurors' Contentions -
Juror No. 1: The victim may not be well off, but he's a noble man and straight up! There's no reason to doubt the man.
Juror No. 2: Well, I do declare the good gentleman has no reason to lie. In fact...I think he's rather splendid.
Juror No. 3: Just look at the accused by comparison! He's Japanese, stoops all the while, and has a moustache! Very fishy...
Juror No. 4: There's no evidence to suggest the gangling actor is a fraudsman. ...For now, at least.
Juror No. 5: Agh! I really don't care, like! I just need this trial to end quickly!
Juror No. 6: Three hours of 'missing time' is nothing when you reach my age, you know. Nothing at all.
Jury Examination: The Defence's Rebuttal[edit]
Press on Juror No. 1’s statement. He says if you can prove that Shamspeare is a liar, he’ll change his verdict. Press on Juror No. 4’s statement. She has a suspicion that Shamspeare is stealing their gas. Pit these two against each other and Juror No. 1 will change his verdict and convince Juror No. 3, No. 4 and No. 6 to do so as well.
Metermann will testify again but with Juror No. 4 joining in as well since she works with the gas company.
Metermann and Altamont's Testimony: The Altamont Gas Company's Investigation[edit]
- Metermann: I'm proud to be the company's East End branch investigator and meter money collection agent.
- Metermann: Altamont gas meters accept thruppenny bits, each coin givin' customers about two hours of gorgeous gas!
- Altamont: And yet, the meter in Mr Shamspeare's room didn't have a single coin in it!
- Altamont: The meter doesn't appear to have been tampered with, though, and the collection agent has the only key.
- Metermann: Somehow, he's usin' all the flamin' gas he wants without payin' a penny! If that's not thievin', what is?!
The Altamont Gas Company's Investigation: Cross Examination[edit]
Press on statement 3 and the Gas Meter will be added to the court record.
Inspect the bottom of the Gas Meter and you’ll find a small hole on the bottom of the coin box. The gas meter will be updated. Present the updated Gas Meter on statement 4. Ask how the gas meter differentiates between different coins and Altamont will amend her statement.
- Altamont: The meter is designed for coins the exact diameter and thickness of a thrupenny bit. Nothing else will fit.
Inspect the Bar of Soap and you’ll find the red disk has disappeared, leaving a depression that is exactly the same size as a thrupenny coin. The bar of soap will be updated.
Present the updated Bar of Soap on statement 4 and when asked, point out the circular depression on the bottom.
When asked to show what could be used to make the fake coin disappear, point to the hole at the bottom of the gas meter. Shamspeare has been freezing disks of water the exact shape of a coin to put into the meter and when they melt, they drain through the hole.
Altamont asks for evidence that this method was used. Present the Crime Scene Photograph, which shows a puddle of water underneath the gas meter.
When given the chance, raise an objection and point out that the poison might not have been in the tea. Present the Bar of Soap. Shamspeare had no tap water to use that night, because the water remains froze over. So he made the fake coins out of the tea instead.
You demand the police check the soap bars for frozen tea so they can test it for poison. The judge agrees, and adjourns court for the day to give the police time to do so.