protoshepherd: (pic#8860715)
Proto Badger ([personal profile] protoshepherd) wrote in [community profile] crybadger2015-10-18 06:01 am
Entry tags:

GAME 3 - Day 2 Trial

[ whatever you're doing, wherever you are, suddenly, you'll see proto badger on any reflective surface. ]

Trial begins now. Talk about who is guilty.

Tell me in mind when ready.



(( VOTE HERE!! ))
bewrightback: (sweating bullets)

[personal profile] bewrightback 2015-10-18 01:59 pm (UTC)(link)
I... don't have concrete evidence beyond the word of the prosecutor.

But at the least, that seems more solid than the actual supposed evidence we've had to work with so far...
cantread: http://ghosttrick.dreamwidth.org/icons (normal)

[personal profile] cantread 2015-10-18 02:03 pm (UTC)(link)
Words aren't always reliable, because people lie over the weirdest things sometimes, and it can muck up everything else.

So, knowing that, why do YOU trust her word? What has happened that makes you so sure that she is being completely truthful?
bewrightback: (grim hawk face)

[personal profile] bewrightback 2015-10-18 02:13 pm (UTC)(link)
I understand how destructive lies can be, Sissel. Unfortunately, evidence is capable of being manipulated into lies as well. That's why I'm trying so hard to bring about the truth.

I have heard the prosecutor's word personally, and I believe in it. The prosecutor investigated me on the first night, and we realized that we both were innocent. The proescutor then found out the Prosecutor Blackquill was guilty from last night's investigation.

I know that might not be substantial enough to believe, but how about this train of logic? If prosecutor was truly a fake, why didn't they try to manipulate the arguments yesterday? At that time, trying to sort through the planted evidence had us running in circles, and we needed someone new to point their fingers at. In fact, so many people ended up voting for no one at all.
cantread: http://ghosttrick.dreamwidth.org/icons (normal)

[personal profile] cantread 2015-10-18 02:30 pm (UTC)(link)
Well why didn't you just say that at first? That she checked you and that is why you believe her.

[Believing someone because they have helped you before, that is something Sissel can understand.]

And the clues didn't point at him yesterday anyway, they pointed at the other guy. The one with the white fluffy thing around his neck. So does that mean they're working together? Or that bird-guy framed him?
bewrightback: (oh boy i done goofed)

1/2

[personal profile] bewrightback 2015-10-18 02:46 pm (UTC)(link)
I meant to, but I must have glossed over that detail... Sorry! [Now I feel like one of my own witnesses!]</small?
bewrightback: (oh right I have a court record)

[personal profile] bewrightback 2015-10-18 02:51 pm (UTC)(link)
But if you're talking about Agent Lang, that's right. He was suspected yesterday, but it wasn't enough for the majority to find him guilty. He was seemingly the first on the crime scene, he was uncooperative in his testimonies, and there was evidence in his back pocket with his fingerprints on it. However, that evidence in itself was suspicious, as it must have been planted on his person and thus could have been tampered with. As for the first two points, they seem to stem naturally from Agent Lang's personality, so it's hard to find him fully suspicious.

At least we know that they're definitely not working together. According to the badger's reports, Prosecutor Blackquill was one of the ones who voted for Agent Lang yesterday. So if Blackquill is guilty, than Lang must be innocent. And he may very well have been the one to frame Lang... but it is hard for me to believe in Blackquill stooping to something like that.
cantread: http://ghosttrick.dreamwidth.org/icons (normal)

[personal profile] cantread 2015-10-18 03:20 pm (UTC)(link)
So if one is guilty, then the other must be innocent.

[See he has this 'deductive reasoning' down!]

So out of the two, who do you think it is?
bewrightback: (this my really really neutral face)

[personal profile] bewrightback 2015-10-18 03:22 pm (UTC)(link)
Well... as I said, I believe in the word of this game's prosecutor. So that would make Blackquill guilty, and Agent Lang innocent.
cantread: (not interested)

[personal profile] cantread 2015-10-18 03:25 pm (UTC)(link)
Hmm....

Is it possible for someone to claim to be something, if they aren't really that thing?
bewrightback: (Default)

[personal profile] bewrightback 2015-10-18 03:31 pm (UTC)(link)
It seems possible. But if not, then there has to be a 'real' prosecutor somewhere. And if there is, then they aren't communicating their findings in any way. So, with that and the belief that I already have in this prosecutor's honesty... I don't think that they're an impostor.
cantread: (the belly is a trap)

[personal profile] cantread 2015-10-18 04:31 pm (UTC)(link)
It seems like a real risk too, since if bird-guy is innocent then we'll find out right away.

[He seems satisfied with the answer, though.]
bewrightback: (this my really really neutral face)

[personal profile] bewrightback 2015-10-18 06:24 pm (UTC)(link)
There's no route we can take that comes without risk. If the vote is indecisive again, then the killer will he free to take another victim.
stagewright: art by <user name=392119 site=pixiv.com> (PLAN ► i've got one!)

[personal profile] stagewright 2015-10-18 06:48 pm (UTC)(link)
Well...for me, wouldn't it make more sense for Mr. Blackquill to be, anyway? He had a chance to plant the evidence on Mr. Lang the other day, right? I don't get why Mr. Lang would have kept the fan if he were guilty, so it makes way more sense if he isn't.