| rdfs:comment
| - The courtroom proceedings in the low-level trials seen in the Ace Attorney world run on the initial trial system, which is based on the Japanese legal system. Essentially, when a person is accused of a crime, he or she is immediately given a bench trial presided by a judge, a prosecuting attorney from the state, and a defense attorney who must completely prove the accused innocent of the crime, usually by finding contradictions in witness testimonies, within three days, after which the case is consigned to a higher court. Turnabout Succession uses a jury trial instead, the result of a change in the Ace Attorney world's justice system.
|
| abstract
| - The courtroom proceedings in the low-level trials seen in the Ace Attorney world run on the initial trial system, which is based on the Japanese legal system. Essentially, when a person is accused of a crime, he or she is immediately given a bench trial presided by a judge, a prosecuting attorney from the state, and a defense attorney who must completely prove the accused innocent of the crime, usually by finding contradictions in witness testimonies, within three days, after which the case is consigned to a higher court. Turnabout Succession uses a jury trial instead, the result of a change in the Ace Attorney world's justice system. The courtroom procedure presented in the games is based on the inquisitive system of Japan and other civil law countries rather than the adversarial system of common law countries. In the inquisitive system, a judge acts as the inquisitor who determines the outcome of the trial. For this reason, the court proceedings much more closely resemble a debating contest. For example, in the Japanese version, the attorneys shout "Igiari!", which means "I disagree!", and this usually involves a display of evidence to counter the argument of the prosecutor. In the common law, adversarial system, an objection is generally used to prevent a witness from testifying or answering a question that the attorney believes prejudices the jury's judgment. An objection in the adversarial system can attack the question being asked of the witness if it disobeys a defined set of rules (for example, asking the witness to speculate, badgering, and asking a leading question are not allowed). Objections may also be used to refute evidence if it is not legally admissible. In the inquisitive system, the judge acts as the jury; therefore, there is no point in preventing witnesses from testifying or answering a question. This does not mean that illegally obtained evidence is allowed to determine the outcome; rather, the judge will exclude such evidence before arriving at the verdict. This is achieved in the inquisitive system by the judge not only in presenting the judgment but also in providing a written justification for the verdict. In the inquisitive system, the judge can ask any question to the defense, the accused, the prosecutors or any witness. Moreover, in the inquisitive system, there is no concept of plea, meaning that theoretically, the judge could declare a not guilty verdict even if the defendant had plead guilty, as in Rise from the Ashes.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)