Subetenomono no Naku Koro Ni (Voting Time!)

[kwando1313]

Umineko was written with the intent of having 8 episodes.

In addition, when I said all clues must be presented, there is no evidence of Maya losing her phone. As well, she would mention something along those lines if that were true... Otherwise, it would be quite out of character for her.

[enigma]

Her phone is never seen again after 1-2! The reason being that she lost it is plausible enough considering it never is heard ringing, Maya is ditzy and phones are very commonly used items yet we never see her use it!

[kwando1313]

Her phone is never seen again after 1-2! The reason being that she lost it is plausible enough considering it never is heard ringing, Maya is ditzy and phones are very commonly used items yet we never see her use it!

What colour is that? THAT'S NOT MY REGULAR™ BLUE! D:

Anywho, let's continue on.

Then you can suggest that she lost it at ANY time between 1-2 and 2-4. Therefore, the non-existence of her phone cannot be used as proof that she used it AND lost it during the events of 2-4.

[enigma]

It's the faded blue of a veteran witch's/sorceror's blue truth. However it's dulled also, because it's theory is dying slowly.

[kwando1313]

Ah, I see then.

Sigh, but let's go and make a legitimate theory now, shall we?

The instance of spirit channeling in 1-2 can be explained like this: Phoenix Wright is our detective. Therefore, his view is objective. However, when circumstances that affect his objectiveness occur, we can no longer trust his viewpoint. In 1-2, we do not see Mia until Phoenix Wright faints. This fainting can be used to show that Phoenix Wright is not an objective viewer since he may have ingested something which causes him to see things. In fact, one can go on to claim that the entire trial, and maybe even series, post-Nick fainting is a fantasy painted by Nick and that he never actually woke up and that this is all one giant dream for him.

[enigma]

So, the coma theory?

Okay, then. I have one word for you.

Godot.

Diego Armando is a real person. Mia knew him before she met Phoenix, and he was put into a coma before she met Phoenix.

In that case, how does Phoenix Wright "meet" Godot?

My slightly adapted version of your theory.

Phoenix Wright has a stroke or a tumor of some kind and that's why he faints. Mia is just a hallucination his brain throws up to try and help him when he's close to giving up based on his dead mentor. In fact, his stroke/tumor/whatever is triggered by the stress and shock of Mia's death. I am also going to go with a bit of Rune's theory if he doesn't mind, the locks are semi-metaphors/semi-hallucinations. Channeled!Mia in either form is, as DWaM's theory states, just Phoenix's belief in channeling and maybe even his unwillingness to let go of Mia's memory and accept her death. Franziska's photo, ala Eightbit, is a forgery made by our young Franziska in a desperate attempt to try and explain the other photo. "Dahlia" the ghost... What if Maya Fey did murder Misty? Reason: Because she was a threat to Maya's ascension to master of Kurain. Godot was just the fall guy who was desperate to keep the only remaining thing of Mia alive. Phoenix senses that something's wrong with Maya/ realizes that she's the killer. Dahlia's ghost is just a hallucination/explanation that Phoenix and Maya both use to explain the Murderer!Maya. Phoenix uses his old murderous girlfriend as a scapegoat for the "evil" that Maya has done and at the last second he believes it and hallucinates Dahlia's ghost coming out of Maya. Maya on the other hand gives into the mental fatigue and stress and goes nuts (thanks again, DWaM) creating an Evil!Maya persona that Phoenix dubs "Dahlia". Maya takes the name and acts her part as the killer. Of course, when Nick creates the Godot theory (which Godot was already setting up secretly), Maya kills off her evil side. The whole Ace Attorney series is just a mixture between two disturbed minds and their delusions!!!

(Just like Umineko)

[kwando1313]

Mia tells Nick about him before she dies. Nick forgets about Diego consciously, but remembers him subconsciously, but the details are fuzzy, hence his return as a masked figure with incorrect colored hair. However, he slowly dredges up details, which leads us to 3-5 where he remembers Diego correctly.

[enigma]

Alright, if it's all Nick's delusions explain:
AAI
3-5 Edgeworth's part

Phoenix Wright exists in the AAI world. He is seen in both AAI games.
Edgeworth recognizes Phoenix Wright as conscious and as having done the roles he has supposedly "imagined", well, at the very least his role in 3-5.

[kwando1313]

3-5 can still be explained as part of Nick's coma. AAI can be Nick waking up after the coma. In fact, this explains why Gumshoe is so arrogant to him and why he's so inept in his final trial: because he doesn't have too much skill.

[enigma]

He imagined that he was Edgeworth....?

Well, how do you explain the references to him and the things he did when he was supposedly in a "coma" in AAI?

Also, could you have a go at taking on my theory I want to see what it's weak-points are.

[kwando1313]

Jealous of Edgeworth, he imagined he was Edgeworth. Don't you wonder why we never see Nick interact with him during 3-5? Also, there aren't any hard references to Nick in AAI. There's vague stuff like "that man", but that does not necessarily mean that it is Phoenix Wright we're talking about.

And as for your theory... Hmm...

Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented. We are not given any indication that the photo is forged. In addition, there is no case of forged evidence presenting itself in a case that Phoenix Wright is present in.
Knox's 10th: It is forbidden for a character to disguise themselves as another without any clues. Witnesses saw and acknowledged Dahlia's presence.
Dine's 5th: The culprit must be determined by logical deductions — not by accident or coincidence or unmotivated confession. Your culprit in this case does not confess... But let's go even beyond that. It is not logical to presume that Maya would want to kill her mother, considering all the death she has already faced in her family.
Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented. Knox's 4th: It is forbidden for unknown drugs or hard to understand scientific devices to be used. Granted, hallucinations aren't hard to understand, but there are no clues that could lead us to that conclusion.
Knox's 1st: The criminal must be someone mentioned in the early part of the story, but must not be anyone whose thoughts the reader has been allowed to follow. We're allowed to follow Maya's thoughts in JFA, case 2-4. Therefore, it is impossible for Maya to be the culprit.

Uh, that's all I found for now. Looking more in depth would take EFFORT.

[enigma]

Jealous of Edgeworth, he imagined he was Edgeworth. Don't you wonder why we never see Nick interact with him during 3-5? Also, there aren't any hard references to Nick in AAI. There's vague stuff like "that man", but that does not necessarily mean that it is Phoenix Wright we're talking about.

What about reference to VonKarma's removal? Ema Skye's case and Ema herself? And the minor references to the PW cases? Oh, and Missile himself?

And as for your theory... Hmm...

Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented. We are not given any indication that the photo is forged. In addition, there is no case of forged evidence presenting itself in a case that Phoenix Wright is present in.
We are given that the premise for this discussion is that we're explaining the supernatural in AA. If it's not a real channeling, then that photo must have been faked in some way. Therefore, it's forged evidence.
Knox's 10th: It is forbidden for a character to disguise themselves as another without any clues. Witnesses saw and acknowledged Dahlia's presence.
The witnesses for Evil!Maya/Dahlia!Maya only witnessed Maya acting psychotic and evil. Dahlia's ghost was only witnessed by Mia (who is a hallucination) and Phoenix (who is the person hallucinating it.)
Dine's 5th: The culprit must be determined by logical deductions — not by accident or coincidence or unmotivated confession. Your culprit in this case does not confess... But let's go even beyond that. It is not logical to presume that Maya would want to kill her mother, considering all the death she has already faced in her family.
I have already provided a motive for Maya, and considering the amount of prestige of the master and the fact that we have seen other members of her family willing to kill for it before it isn't too much of a long shot to say that she accepted that the "anything for the result" mentality became infused in her in some way.
Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented. Knox's 4th: It is forbidden for unknown drugs or hard to understand scientific devices to be used. Granted, hallucinations aren't hard to understand, but there are no clues that could lead us to that conclusion.
Phoenix starts seeing Mia right after he faints which could be considered a clue that he's hallucinating, Phoenix witnesses giant locks appearing out of nowhere and the ghost of his mentor who, surprisingly, no one else in the court ever seems to notice is anything but Maya Fey as she is normally. We also know that Phoenix has gone through a lot of things that put him under pressure and may have caused him to snap. He was disbelieveing of channeling and ghosts at first which means that it's not a normal thing to see them in his society so wouldn't someone else have noticed these ghosts before? There's plenty of foreshadowing and logic that can lead to the Hallucinating!Phoenix conclusion.
Knox's 1st: The criminal must be someone mentioned in the early part of the story, but must not be anyone whose thoughts the reader has been allowed to follow. We're allowed to follow Maya's thoughts in JFA, case 2-4. Therefore, it is impossible for Maya to be the culprit.
Maya is only the culprit in my hypothetical 3-5. Since we never follow her thoughts in that case, or even that game, she's technically an eligible culprit.

Uh, that's all I found for now. Looking more in depth would take EFFORT.

[kwando1313]

Jealous of Edgeworth, he imagined he was Edgeworth. Don't you wonder why we never see Nick interact with him during 3-5? Also, there aren't any hard references to Nick in AAI. There's vague stuff like "that man", but that does not necessarily mean that it is Phoenix Wright we're talking about.

What about reference to VonKarma's removal? Ema Skye's case and Ema herself? And the minor references to the PW cases? Oh, and Missile himself?
All of those cases could be handled by another attorney. So long as "Mr. Wright" is not mentioned, that remains a distinct plausibility.

And as for your theory... Hmm...

Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented. We are not given any indication that the photo is forged. In addition, there is no case of forged evidence presenting itself in a case that Phoenix Wright is present in.
We are given that the premise for this discussion is that we're explaining the supernatural in AA. If it's not a real channeling, then that photo must have been faked in some way. Therefore, it's forged evidence.
The photo being faked does not equate to forged evidence. For example, if I took a picture of a person dressed up as someone else, does that photo become fake?
Knox's 10th: It is forbidden for a character to disguise themselves as another without any clues. Witnesses saw and acknowledged Dahlia's presence.
The witnesses for Evil!Maya/Dahlia!Maya only witnessed Maya acting psychotic and evil. Dahlia's ghost was only witnessed by Mia (who is a hallucination) and Phoenix (who is the person hallucinating it.)
Both Godot and Udgey acknowledge that it is Dahlia Hawthorne on the stand during 3-5.
Dine's 5th: The culprit must be determined by logical deductions — not by accident or coincidence or unmotivated confession. Your culprit in this case does not confess... But let's go even beyond that. It is not logical to presume that Maya would want to kill her mother, considering all the death she has already faced in her family.
I have already provided a motive for Maya, and considering the amount of prestige of the master and the fact that we have seen other members of her family willing to kill for it before it isn't too much of a long shot to say that she accepted that the "anything for the result" mentality became infused in her in some way.
Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented.: Maya has stated many times before that she wants to avoid the bloodshed of previous family rivalries. Her actions to kill Misty Fey would not follow this premise.

Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented. Knox's 4th: It is forbidden for unknown drugs or hard to understand scientific devices to be used. Granted, hallucinations aren't hard to understand, but there are no clues that could lead us to that conclusion.
Phoenix starts seeing Mia right after he faints which could be considered a clue that he's hallucinating, Phoenix witnesses giant locks appearing out of nowhere and the ghost of his mentor who, surprisingly, no one else in the court ever seems to notice is anything but Maya Fey as she is normally. We also know that Phoenix has gone through a lot of things that put him under pressure and may have caused him to snap. He was disbelieveing of channeling and ghosts at first which means that it's not a normal thing to see them in his society so wouldn't someone else have noticed these ghosts before? There's plenty of foreshadowing and logic that can lead to the Hallucinating!Phoenix conclusion.
I.. actually can't counter this one. Because in each of the games, Nick has something that can affect him. :/
Knox's 1st: The criminal must be someone mentioned in the early part of the story, but must not be anyone whose thoughts the reader has been allowed to follow. We're allowed to follow Maya's thoughts in JFA, case 2-4. Therefore, it is impossible for Maya to be the culprit.
Maya is only the culprit in my hypothetical 3-5. Since we never follow her thoughts in that case, or even that game, she's technically an eligible culprit.
Nothing to state here again~

Uh, that's all I found for now. Looking more in depth would take EFFORT.

[enigma]

I assume having nothing to sate there means that it is accepted?

Jealous of Edgeworth, he imagined he was Edgeworth. Don't you wonder why we never see Nick interact with him during 3-5? Also, there aren't any hard references to Nick in AAI. There's vague stuff like "that man", but that does not necessarily mean that it is Phoenix Wright we're talking about.

What about reference to VonKarma's removal? Ema Skye's case and Ema herself? And the minor references to the PW cases? Oh, and Missile himself?

All of those cases could be handled by another attorney. So long as "Mr. Wright" is not mentioned, that remains a distinct plausibility.

...For all of Phoenix's "coma predictions" to come true in reality (albeit with a different DA) is highly implausible. Do you have an explanation for that?

And as for your theory... Hmm...

Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented. We are not given any indication that the photo is forged. In addition, there is no case of forged evidence presenting itself in a case that Phoenix Wright is present in.
We are given that the premise for this discussion is that we're explaining the supernatural in AA. If it's not a real channeling, then that photo must have been faked in some way. Therefore, it's forged evidence.
The photo being faked does not equate to forged evidence. For example, if I took a picture of a person dressed up as someone else, does that photo become fake?

Very well, then. It is a fake photo. My theory still stands. Franziska used fake evidence with that photo. That is all.

Knox's 10th: It is forbidden for a character to disguise themselves as another without any clues. Witnesses saw and acknowledged Dahlia's presence.
The witnesses for Evil!Maya/Dahlia!Maya only witnessed Maya acting psychotic and evil. Dahlia's ghost was only witnessed by Mia (who is a hallucination) and Phoenix (who is the person hallucinating it.)
Both Godot and Udgey acknowledge that it is Dahlia Hawthorne on the stand during 3-5.
Why wouldn't they? Phoenix and Evil!Maya were calling her that. Udgey is senile and shown to be completely open to these things, and Godot was also on the "Maya can't be the killer!" set of disbelief logic so he might have taken that view for a while but reverted back to his original plan after Phoenix "defeated" Dahlia.

Dine's 5th: The culprit must be determined by logical deductions — not by accident or coincidence or unmotivated confession. Your culprit in this case does not confess... But let's go even beyond that. It is not logical to presume that Maya would want to kill her mother, considering all the death she has already faced in her family.
I have already provided a motive for Maya, and considering the amount of prestige of the master and the fact that we have seen other members of her family willing to kill for it before it isn't too much of a long shot to say that she accepted that the "anything for the result" mentality became infused in her in some way.
Knox's 8th: It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented.: Maya has stated many times before that she wants to avoid the bloodshed of previous family rivalries. Her actions to kill Misty Fey would not follow this premise.
Alright, how's this?
EVIDENCE LIST:

• -Maya's lack of emotion in 1-2
  -Maya's complete return to normal after cases which involve her family
  -Besides Morgan's plan, we don't see very much of this "bloodshed and rivalries"

Maya is lying. She has already accepted that killing is just a part of the Kurain way. Or, alternatively, she just made that up as a lie to hide her motive (remember motive is a very big thing in AA). Also, I'm pretty sure she said that after Misty Fey's murder. Maybe she meant it in the sense of "I regret the murder. I just want to live a peaceful life without all this killing and hate from now on."

[enigma]

Voting Time!

Alright, if you've read through the thread you should know there are quite a number of theories. So, before I choose the next subject, let's take a vote on what was the best/most convincing theory. This will last for just this week and then the new topic and the winning theory will be revealed. Please do not vote for your own theory. Theories that break any of the five rules in the OP will not be counted.