Main Story 01-14: Difference between revisions
From Tears of Themis Wiki
imported>Harmonea m (Text replacement - "\(First-Time Cost\) \[\[File:AP icon.png\|28px\|link=\]\] AP x([0-9]+?)" to "28px|link= AP x$1 (First-Time Cost)") |
(+characters) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
}} | }} | ||
|summary=[[Luke Pearce|Luke]] and the [[Main Character|main character]] discuss the admissibility of the evidence they collected, with Luke revealing that he has the ability to formally approve evidence as admissible. After going over the strategy for the trial, the MC returns to [[Themis Law Firm]], where she becomes concerned about the fact that the [[Pax Group]], Themis' client, may be financially backing [[DeliCart]]. [[Artem Wing|Artem]] reassures her as [[Winnie Cooper]] arrives at the firm to deliver one final piece of evidence that [[Vernon Green]] would rather not see used if at all possible: footage that proves [[Pedro Brooks]]' guilt beyond doubt. | |summary=[[Luke Pearce|Luke]] and the [[Main Character|main character]] discuss the admissibility of the evidence they collected, with Luke revealing that he has the ability to formally approve evidence as admissible. After going over the strategy for the trial, the MC returns to [[Themis Law Firm]], where she becomes concerned about the fact that the [[Pax Group]], Themis' client, may be financially backing [[DeliCart]]. [[Artem Wing|Artem]] reassures her as [[Winnie Cooper]] arrives at the firm to deliver one final piece of evidence that [[Vernon Green]] would rather not see used if at all possible: footage that proves [[Pedro Brooks]]' guilt beyond doubt. | ||
|evidence= | |||
{{Evidence | |||
|name=Kitchen Surveillance Video | |||
|image=Front Door Surveillance Video icon.png | |||
|description=A surveillance video of the restaurant's kitchen that shows Pedro tampering with the water. | |||
|evidenceDescription=A surveillance video provided by Vernon, showing Pedro removing the dispenser at 7:32 AM and poisoning the water with Insecticide 330. | |||
}} | |||
|clues= | |||
{{Clue | |||
|title=Receipt Verification Results | |||
|description=It was Pedro who purchased Insecticide 330. However, the fingerprints found on the receipt that matches the one found in the smart lock still need to be verified. | |||
}} | |||
|locations= | |||
{{Background location|name=Antique Shop|location=Time's Antiquities|image=Time's Antiquities - Shop.png}} | |||
{{Background location|name=Themis Law Firm|location=Themis Law Firm|image=Themis Law Firm - Office (Day).png}} | |||
|characters= | |||
{{Character|name=Luke Pearce|image=Luke character icon 1.png}} | |||
{{Character|name=Artem Wing|image=Artem character icon 1.png}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:43, 13 November 2023
Overview
- Stage Cost:
AP x10 (First-Time Cost) - First Clear Rewards:
S-Chip x40
Guide
- Hover to view spoiler content.
Analysis
Pedro's motive must be established first before he can be considered as a suspect...
- Failed Hard-Sell
- Pedro's Performance Pressure
Evidence updated: Audio Recording of Pedro's Confession "Theory 1" added
Could Pedro have contaminated the water in the established time frame?
- Vernon's Testimony - Water Delivery
- Pedro - Entry/Exit Times
Evidence updated: Front Door Surveillance Video "Theory 1" added
How to prove Pedro was in possession of Insecticide 330, which was used for the crime?
- Receipt - Purchaser Info
- Records of Financial Support for Pedro
Evidence updated: Insecticide 330 Receipt "Theory 1" added
Evidence obtained: "Kitchen Surveillance Video"Summary
Location(s)
Time's Antiquities
Antique Shop
Antique Shop
Themis Law Firm
Character(s)
Evidence
Kitchen Surveillance Video
Evidence Description (Spoilers)
A surveillance video of the restaurant's kitchen that shows Pedro tampering with the water.
A surveillance video provided by Vernon, showing Pedro removing the dispenser at 7:32 AM and poisoning the water with Insecticide 330.
Clue(s)
Receipt Verification Results
- It was Pedro who purchased Insecticide 330. However, the fingerprints found on the receipt that matches the one found in the smart lock still need to be verified.
