Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
The first GAPING plot hole:
1) There is no way that Angell Starr could have seen the knife get plunged into Goodman's body because according to the map there was a TEN FOOT TALL BARRIER between where she was and where Lana stuck Edgeworth's knife into the body. This is why it was so important where Angell Starr was when she allegedly saw the body. But the game does not allow you to point this out.
2) The autopsy report stated that the victim died sometime between 4:00 and 5:30. Well if Goodman was stabbed in the abdomen and slowly bled to death then he couldn't have been dead yet when Angell Starr allegedly saw the murder taking place at 5:15 and given the huge time frame on the autopsy report then it was likely that Goodman was already dead when Lana stabbed him again as there is no way he instantly died at 5:15. if his cause of death was from the time that Lana stabbed him with a knife at 5:15 then Goodman should have still been alive when Angell Starr ran to arrest Lana who committed a crime that Angell Starr could have never seen taking place.
3) As soon as you find out that Goodman was also murdered in the police department you should have immediately been able to claim that Goodman had been murdered in the police department and then brought to the prosecutor's office in Edgeworth's car where Lana stabbed him with the knife to protect Gant. You should be able to present the screwdriver and autopsy report as evidence that Gant sent Edgeworth back to the prosecutor's office because Gant had put the body in the car and that was the real reason why he sent back the lone screwdriver with Edgeworth. You could then claim that Lana stabbed Goodman with the knife solely to make it look like she killed Goodman in the parking lot instead of just taking his dead body out of the car and that is why the she hadn't planned out the murder or had a murder weapon already.
Those are the three major plot holes which pop up on day one that make the first act of the case so frustrating. You the player can instantly see what is so super duper obvious but are not allowed to act on it and instead have to do things which have nothing to do with advancing the argument you know you should be allowed to make but can't.
Another huge set of plot holes revolves around the murder of Neil Marshall.
1) Before Lana got to her office and saw Neil Marshall IMPALED ON THE KNIGHT STATUE, she allegedly grabbed the broken fragments of the vase which had blood on them and smudged the blood. Why? Remember that Gant wrote EMA on the vase, smashed the vase and then grabbed the piece with part of the E and M on it. By the time Lana saw the vase it would have already been in pieces, had no M and would not have had anything on it that resembled letters or would make anyone think the vase ever had EMA written on it. So why did Lana grab the vase? And since by the time Lana got to the office Neil was already impaled, then why would Lana have ever associated the broken vase with Neil being shoved onto the statute? Wouldn't it be more likely that she would have assumed that Neil and Joe Darke struggled and the vase was broken during the struggle? Indeed Ema's picture testimony would corroborate that the vase was broken during the struggle between Joe Darke and Neil Marshall.
2) Lana assuming that Ema killed Neil Marshall. This made absolutely no freaking sense according to the above. When Lana got to the scene all she would have seen was Neil impaled, Joe Darke unconcious and Ema also unconcious along with the broken vase with blood on it. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that she would immediately conclude that her sister pushed Neil Marshall onto the knight's spear. Talking to her sister would lead her to conclude that Joe Darke pushed Neil onto the spear during a struggle between Joe Darke and Neil. The picture would be presented as evidence at court as to how Neil was impaled. There would have never been any faked evidence because the murder weapon would be Damon Gant's statue. The entire story falls apart because of this giant massive gaping plot hole orifice. There is no need to present any other plot hole because this one is so massive it renders all further plot holes irrelevent.
Although if i had to introduce another plot hole it would be the evidence list. Remember that Ema couldn't get the words out AT COURT. So she drew the picture AT COURT. This means that Edgeworth would have had the full list of evidence and brought all the evidence with him to court that day. The list would have only been torn in half AT COURT when it wouldn't have mattered since all the evidence was already AT COURT. Also that evidence list would have been produced BY EDGEWORTH ON HIS COMPUTER. He would have had a saved version of the document ON HIS COMPUTER.
If you cannot tell I hate this case because it is so freaking stupid and introduces characters made by people who don't know the meaning of the word restraint which ruin the case. There is a reason why Detective Gumshoe is wearing a trenchcoat and not some fancy costume. The person who created Gumshoe was smart knew that they had to exercise restraint. The person who created Jake Marhsall was an idiot who didn't know that they needed to exercise restraint and the story suffered because of stupid decisions like that.
Well it seems these holes can be explained.
Goodman's murder
1) If I remember well, Angell was at her boyfriend's office that is on the second floor and from which the crime scene can be seen very well. And that fact was clearly explained in game
2) Given that the gap is huge we can deduce that coroners were not quite sure when exactly Goodman died. And this is possible if the results of the autopsy were prompt, so they didnt't carry them out carefully. And the results of the autopsy were never revised. So for Wright autopsy results just appear to be useless and it's ok. Not all the evidence is decisive.
3) It was stated in game that murders were thought to be simultaneous according to the time. It was yet to proof that they actually weren't
Neil's murder
Well as Gant was the first to see the crime scene it could be him who then convinced Lana that it was Ema who killed Neil and showed all the evidence as the proof. This all sounds pretty plausible imo. And it was also stated that it was Goodman who asked Ema to draw the pictures during one of the questionings.
However
There was one thing that i was unable to make out. What was Gant's motive to kill Neil who was lying unconscious along with Darke and Ema when Gant entered the room? Anyone can explain?
Killing him and manipulating the crime scene makes Lana think Ema did the crime - so he gets to help her "cover it up" as "her accomplice" and can blackmail her about it. He becomes police chief by success, Lana becomes head of prosecutors, so he gets to control both facilities
It was said in court by Gant and confirmed by Edgeworth that Gant "was about to be promoted to the Chief of Police and closing the case just hastened the inevitable". Yet i don't deny what you say can be possible, but it sounds strange that a man in such a good position would execute such a crazy plan. Imo it could either be a desperate measure, when Gant for example killed Neil accidentally and this was first that he thought of to divert suspicion from himself, or a carefully thought through plan that would mean that Gant is an evil genius and terrible personality who could calculate all the outcome just there and kill his colleague who wouldn't have died yet...
Not planned at all, he just took the opportunity. The only planning he did was lock away some fake evidence as personal protection if this goes south some time in the future (what the end of the case is about)
Oh and rattle made a very good point above about some extra motive aside from the blackmail - but again, that wasn't planned either, it was a convenient happenstance that Neil and Ema were unconscious and he could kill two birds with one stone
Thank you, rattle. It slipped my mind that there wasn't decisive evidence against Darke. Now that all looks pretty plausible. Gant is just a person for whom the ends justify the means.
And thank you Uli Minati for your help too:)
WRONG!
Lana herself testified during trial day 3 that she thought she was the first one to arrive at the murder scene. That is why she took such pains to clean up the vase and move the corpse with Gant's help after he arrived second. As far as Lana was aware Gant arrived AFTER she did. So the first person Lana would believe would be her sister Ema. And considering that Joe Darke attacked police officers in his attempt to escape she absolutely would have believed that Joe Darke killed Neil by shoving him onto a statue during a fight so that he could escape when Neil tried to stop him from leaving the office.
That is also why Gant's killing Neil made no sense. Because once you conclude that it is impossible for Lana to have ever thought her sister killed Neil then Gant's actions made no sense as there is no way those actions could ever lead to him gaining control over Lana. Plus what would have happened if Lana wasn't appointed/elected to the position of Chief Prosecutor? The writer made too much of a leap and then tried to cover it all up by pretending that Lana magically thought her sister killed Neil for no reason and that Gant thought that by impaling Neil on the statue that he would be able to control Lana because she would think that her sister killed Neil. The plot hole around Neil's murder is so big that it causes the entire story to shatter and ruin any sense of suspension of disbelief because there were too many unbelievable impossible illogical things that were supposed to come out of that one scene.
The reason why people have trouble figuring out why Gant killed Neil is because deep down they know there is no way that Lana would have thought that her sister killed Neil and so there is no way that Gant would think that Lana would think that her sister killed Neil and so there is no reason why she would have turned to Gant to help her cover the whole thing up.
It's been two years. Given the right detergents, blood can be easily cleaned.
It’s not something that can just be placed back, it’s part of a sculpt. The cover up works assuming that Neil was at a disadvantage, getting someone to repair it when it’s common knowledge Neil won the award leaves open the knowledge that he had a knife.
The fact that she saw the jar proves at that time they were on Gant’s side of the office. And the jar was also moving horizontally at the time, not just flying up and down. That would have reduced the impact upon hitting the floor, letting it stay intact.
It’s the day of evidence transferal, and the day of the awards. The department is relatively empty for those events.
There are no footprints. That’s pointed out in court.
Gant was there. He could have easily cleared the tapes. Jake was slacking, it’s been stated he hasn’t taken the job seriously since being demoted.
Appointing him to the crime scene lets Gant keep tabs on him.
You, on the other hand, are just making ♥♥♥♥ up.
A ten foot barrier means nothing when you’re standing ~25 feet above ground in the security office.
An estimated time of death doesn’t indicate how long it takes for someone to die, it’s just an estimate of when they could have died.
No you can’t. They have on record that the incident in the evidence room happened at 5:15.
The fragment Gant took only had the M. Even without those fragments, it still clearly reads “EMA”. You literally see what it looks like during the trial. Now add that Lana would have had mere minutes before someone (Gant) would arrive and deduce the scene.
See above, but also Ema was traumatized and literally couldn’t speak about it.
She was questioned in the questioning room, she straight up says this in court. And it’s a written list. Most places keep confidential information physical as to avoid the possibility of hacking.
1. : Yes, that's an option but inevitable leads to the question what happened on Lana's side after she had long since moved to the prosecutor's office. How many people did Gant kill in that room?
2. : Ok, fair point, I didn't think that a professional actually had to repair it, but it does make sense.
3. : Possible, but imo kinda strange, Gant couldn't know exactly what Ema had seen and make his decision what to use as false evidence based on that, but he might just have used that vase (even if it would have been far easier to just use some spare paper, but hey, villains often tend to do the more dramatic thing).
4. : Again, possible, but a very high risk. If just one guy decided that he had forgotten his jacket or something Gant would have been in massive troubles.
5. : I'll take your word for it, I haven't played this case in over six months, I really can't remember that one (or what I thought about it) anymore
6. : Very good point, no arguments here.
7. : Possible, but seems like a big risk. One the other hand, Gant doesn't really try to play that safe, so I'll take it.
Again, thank you very much for your time and effort. I still don't like this case very much, but seeing as I have now played all six main games, I can say with confidence that there are far worse (in all aspects) cases out there. But that's just my opinion, and at least it's now less based on plot holes