The Instigator
Logical-Master
Pro (for)
Losing
38 Points
The Contender
beem0r
Con (against)
Winning
40 Points

Miles Edgeworth was actually a better lawyer than Phoenix Wright.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/11/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 7,824 times Debate No: 2550
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (23)
Votes (20)

 

Logical-Master

Pro

Assuming you are willing to accept this challenge, I thank you for taking the time to debate.

In today's debate, I intend to prove beyond the notion of a doubt that the main protagonist of the Phoenix Wright series was not actually the best lawyer in the games.

For those not familiar with the series, you're free to check it out here: http://en.wikipedia.org...

I'll make my opening argument brief by listing the advantages Edgeworth has over Wright.

Experience: Edgeworth became a prosecutor at the age of 20 and had managed to have a flawless winning streak up until his first case against Phoenix. In the third game of the series, we find out that he travels across the world becoming familiar with at least 5 different legal systems as well as 5 different languages (not to mention that he mastered both).

Intelligence: He was considered a prodigy even before first entering the court room at a young age. And whenever in court, he manages to make his opponent look like a complete idiot in front of the Judge. In fact, during the final trial of Justice For All, he went up against Phoenix and had several opportunities to end the trial and get the defendant a guilty verdict, but insisted that the trial continue so that he could leave no doubts that his case was correct.

Skill: His mastery of the court room was so impressive, that he even managed take Phoenix's place in the 3rd game and act as the defense attorney during an extremely difficult trial for the defense. Not to mention that he went up against none other than Franzika Von Karma (who is also regarded as prodigy prosecutor) and easily managed to win without the help of a defense aid (which Phoenix has had to rely on in most of his cases just to keep from getting a guilty verdict). And there was not one point where his opponent reduced him to abnormally sweating. He kept his cool the entire time, despite that he had never acted as a defense attorney.

Clearly, Edgeworth is superior to Phoenix Wright. :D
beem0r

Con

T'would have been ironic if you challenged me to this if you still had your Phoenix Wright avatar, L-M.

Miles Edgeworth was in fact not a better lawyer than Phoenix Wright.

First I'll address the so-called advantages of Miles Edgeworth, which supposedly make him better than Phoenix Wright.

First, my opponent brings up experience. It's true that experience is often used to denote skill; however, this is a faulty assumption. It may be more likely that a person with experience is more skilled, but this is not necessarily the case. Take Winston Payne for example. He had _way_ more experience than Phoenix, but it's quite clear that he was quite inferior. Thus, I will argue that Phoenix was a better lawyer than Miles _in spite of_ his lesser experience.

Next up is intelligence. My opponent supposes that Miles Edgeworth is smarter than Phoenix Wright. To support this, my opponent makes two statements.

The first is that Miles is capable of making his opponent look like an idiot in court. He does this not by superior intellect, but by taking advantage of the fact that defense attorneys usually have less information at their disposal than prosecutors. This is because prosecutors are in on the police investigations, but defense attorneys are not (at least in the game, not sure about IRL). While Phoenix has to find out all the information himself, Edgeworth has a team of specialized detectives doing the work for him. Also, Phoenix is sometimes not given access to crime scenes and such.

The second support for this is that Miles had several opportunities to get his guilty verdict in the last case of Justice For All, but instead waited until both sides were certain that the defendant was guilty. However, I fail to see how this is intelligence.

However, it may show another positive lawyerly attribute: seeking the truth. I will speak of this later.

The last thing my opponent brings up to show that Edgeworth is superior to Wright is his skill. My opponent brings up that Edgeworth was able to successfully act as a defense attorney in Trials And Tribulations. He was able to defeat von Karma the younger, and without breaking out in abnormal amounts of sweat. I hold that this shows nothing: Phoenix, too, had been able to defeat von Karma. While it may be true that Phoenix got a lot more nervous, it is because Phoenix deeply cares if his client gets a guilty verdict. Also, Edgeworth is better at keeping his nervousness inside, which I hold is neither a positive nor negative quality for a lawyer.

Now, even though I need not prove that Wright is actually better than Edgeworth, I will attempt to do just that.

First, let us consider the track record of the two lawyers: Phoenix Wright has never gotten a judge to give the wrong verdict. Edgeworth, on the other hand, has done so many a time. This is because for some time, Edgeworth was uninterested in the truth. He was simply interested in getting guilty verdicts. Edgeworth himself has even said that he does not seek to find the truth of a case, he simply seeks to get a guilty verdict, lest a criminal be allowed to remain free. However, our legal system has opposite values: we would rather let ten guilty men go free than to wrongly imprison one man. It is far more unjust to get a guilty verdict for an innocent man than it is to get a not guilty verdict for a guilty man. However, Phoenix Wright did neither of these; he has always fought for great justice. Edgeworth only sought to send the defendants on the way to destruction.

Courtroom ethics are a big part of being a lawyer, and while Edgeworth may have cleaned up his act later on, this does not change the facts of the past.

And with that, it's back to ye, L-M.
Debate Round No. 1
Logical-Master

Pro

My opponent starts off his case by countering my experience point. He advocates that Winston has more experience than Phoenix Wright but was still made known as being rather inferior. First, I believe that a combination of the three attributes I listed can determine the skill level of a lawyer. Second, I believe that Winston Payne is an exception and I'll explain why.

Winston Payne was a man with psychological issues. In the past, he was regarded as a great prosecutor. However, it was the defeat Mia Fey handed him that mentally scarred him for the rest of his career. During that case, he grew so frustrated that his hair literally escaped his head. Payne was regarded as the Rookie Crusher. No doubt is a Rookie Crusher losing to a rookie the epitome of humiliation.

Now I can already predict my opponent's response to this, so I will further clarify. The only reason Mia Fey defeated him was because she had the help of a veteran defense aid, had undisclosed background knowledge of the actual murderer (she even had access to past evidence), and was merely fortunate that the murderer was dumb enough to leave crucial evidence (poisoned cough drops) at the crime scene.

My opponent suggests that Edgeworth had the Police investigating to do all of the work for him, but this is false. Edgeworth would be the one conducting the investigation. The police force would handle things which he couldn't (autopsy report, blood analysis, etc). Besides, the Police Force in the Phoenix Wright universe is hardly credible / reliable. Evidence of this is the fact that they were fooled by a Phoenix Wright impersonator with a CARDBOARD badge during the 3rd Turnabout during "Trials and Tribulations." At any rate, during investigations, you'll usually run into the main prosecutor of the game, so this is proof that they investigate just as much (if not, then more) as the defense attorneys.

I'll give my opponent the point that Phoenix doesn't always have access to the crime scenes immediately, but he certainly has an unfair advantage during his investigations. Not only can Phoenix have Maya summon his mentor (veteran attorney by the way) at any time through use of spirit channeling, but he can also use the magatama. With this tool, he is able to peer into anyone's mind and get the information he wants. This certainly more than makes up for not having access to the crime scene 24/7.

Also, Detective Gumshoe usually provides Phoenix with the prosecutor's information from the investigation anyway.

So with the playing field of information being nearly equivalent (although Phoenix having access to the magatama may tip the info in his favor), it's his uncanny intellect which Edgeworth is shown utilizing in the court room.

As for Miles having had several opportunities to get a guilty verdict, this does indeed show his intellectual superiority to Phoenix. Edgeworth persuading the judge to continue the trial when he clearly won multiple times is basically Edgeworth giving Phoenix several handicaps; it wasn't Phoenix who could persuade the judge to continue, but rather Edgeworth.

Plus, other things should be kept in mind. Edgeworth had no real evidence to suggest that the defendant was actually the one to commit the crime. This is proven later on when we find out that the defendant wasn't even in the room where the murder took place. Phoenix not only had more information than Edgeworth, but there is the fact that Edgeworth had signed up to be the prosecutor of this trial at the very last minute. Originally, Von Karma was going to be Phoenix's opponent. Edgeworth had no way of knowing that she would get shot, thus, we can conclude that his preparation time was extremely limited. In other words, the amount of time he had to prepare for the case was one hour at best; his case was extemporaneous for the most part.

As for skill, my opponent points out that Phoenix has also defeated Von Karma, but he has never done this without his mentor's (Mia Fey's) help. In fact, without his mentor always arriving at the last minute, he would have surely been defeated based on the actions of the Judge. As for Phoenix caring about his client getting a guilty victory, this is hardly a relevant objection to the fact that his confidence often dwindles in the face of a seemingly impenetrable argument. There wasn't one point where Edgeworth grew nervous or presented himself poorly. My opponent holds that this is neither a positive or negative for a lawyer, but I insist that is. In any argument, presentation is very crucial. If your audience sees you doubting your arguments, they might start doubting your arguments as well.

Expansion of the skill argument: There's also the fact that Edgeworth skilfully sets "traps" in all of his cases. Mia points this out in the 4th Turnabout in Justice For All and Diego/Godot points this out during the 4th Turnabout in Trial and Tribulations. This is done for the purpose of making the defense seem ignorant when it confidently makes a seemingly valid objection. Again, this is the importance of presentation at work.

Since presentation is the main aspect of skill, Edgeworth surely has Phoenix beat.

Now lets address my opponent's points:

Regardless of Edgeworth's intentions, the fact is that he did his job, which was to prove beyond the notion of a doubt that the defendant was guilty. Even in the real world legal system, this is upheld, as justice depends on the capabilities of both lawyers. It is not Edgeworth's fault that the defense could not keep up with him. Besides, in regards to our legal system, I would say that Phoenix was at fault during the end of Justice For All as he was not providing the defendant a fair trial due to the fact that he actually worked against him.

My opponent advocates that Phoenix has always fought for Justice, but this isn't necessarily the case. Allow me to elaborate.

The game makes it clear that there is no clear path to what being a lawyer is about. My evidence for this is the end of the 4th turnabout in Justice For All. In that trial, there came a point when the judge had decided that there was no reason to continue and that he would pass his verdict. The judge told Phoenix to answer whether or not his client was guilty. Phoenix knew his client was guilty, but also knew that his assistant's life would be in peril if he answered honestly. You (as the player) are then given the option to choose. After the trial ends, Mia Fey will tell you that your choice was what being a lawyer was all about. She tells you this regardless of the answer you pick. Thus, in relation to PW, "doing your job as a lawyer" or "revealing the truth no matter what" are both acceptable paths. We don't know the choice Phoenix canonically chose, so we can consider both as alternatives when referring to canon. In any case, Phoenix not urging to get his client a fair trial or Phoenix getting a guilty man innocent while getting someone else a guilty verdict at the same time make Phoenix no better than Edgeworth in regards to the past.

Finally, even if you aren't willing to buy that, Edgeworth's past isn't relevant considering that he ended up changing his ways; the Edgeworth shown in the 2nd and 3rd game is not the same Edgeworth shown in the first game. Now if I had said "Miles Edgeworth was ALWAYS a better lawyer than Phoenix Wright", things would be different.

Back to you, beem0r! :D
beem0r

Con

With regards to experience, I will say this: experience is likely to improve a person's skill. That's it. And since skill is a point on its own, experience need not be. If it is shown that Phoenix's skill is superior or equal to Edgeworth's, then Edgeworth's additional experience is meaningless. It is a cause that affects a person's abilities, it is not a reflection of ability itself.

Also, before we continue, I would like to state that I may be at a disadvantage, since I still haven't finished Trials and Tribs (I'm only on the second case). With that said, I disagree that the prosecutors investigate more than the defense. However, since investigation skill is irrelevant to lawyerly ability, I will not linger on that. I will simply point out that throughout the game the prosecution ends up with more information than the defense, regardless of the cause of this. They are constantly adding evidence to the court record during a trial (evidence Phoenix has never seen) and they almost always know about all (or at least the overwhelming majority) of the defense's evidence. The fact that Edgeworth himself investigates does not show anything about his value as a lawyer. Perhaps it makes him a better detective, or helps make him better overall, but not a better lawyer.

The fact is, even with Phoenix's investigations and his advantage with the Magatama, he ends up with less information than the prosecution in court. He's constantly being surprised by testimony he's never heard and evidence he's never seen. This cannot be said for the prosecution. Ergo, it is not Edgeworth's skill he uses to make his opponent appear foolish, but rather his increased knowledge of the case beforehand, be it by his own investigations or those of detectives. Since this is the duty of detectives, not lawyers, it does not reflect his skill as a lawyer.

And when it comes to Edgeworth having several opportunities to get a guilty verdict, it is simply because the truth was on his side. In any of the cases where Phoenix was right (no pun intended), he too could have delayed the trial after the judge was ready to pass a not guilty verdict. However, this is a meaningless exercise, ergo Phoenix is not in the habit of doing it.
Also, Edgeworth was not able to obtain a guilty verdict until a point after Wright had already became aware of Engarde's guilt. Here's a quote from Wright before a guilty verdict was ever about to be handed down: "if I were to get Engarde an acquittal... That... That isn't a proper defense at all!"
And it isn't. At least I hold that it isn't, since it's a matter of opinion.

Also, my opponent brings up how Edgeworth didn't even have much evidence on his side. However, he forgets the very nature of the justice system in PW; the Judge always shows an extreme favor for the prosecution; while the defense is always required to back up any claim with evidence, simple testimony is enough to condemn a person to guilty for murder. All the prosecution has to do is find someone to say "he did it, I saw him!" The defense is actually required to figure out what actually happened, present evidence to back it up, etc. Also, Edgeworth kept himself quite informed about the trial, so while he may not have been planning on being prosecutor, he already had quite a bit of information.

My opponent holds that good presentation is in fact required for a good lawyer. However, all that truly matters is the verdict. Phoenix has always been able to attain a verdict that has reflected the truth.

Next, my opponent says that the game does not clearly show whether lawyers are better off fighting for justice (finding the truth) or doing their job (obtaining a guilty/not guilty verdict regardless of whether it's appropriate). However, I don't need a game to tell me which is better. And Phoenix is much more effective when it comes to upholding justice in this way, since he has not strong-armed his way into getting false verdicts.

Also, if you intend to play word games, so can I. Miles Edgeworth was not a better lawyer then Phoenix Wright, since neither of them ever existed. Because they never existed, one was certainly not better than the other. However, I am aware that most people, myself included, tend to ignore word games unless they were left too wide open that they should have been expected. If you're one of those people, ignore this paragraph.

Also, just to add something, Phoenix was able to solve a case Edgeworth was unable to solve for 15 years: DL-6. This case was of the utmost importance to Miles, since it was the case of his father's murder. After 15 years, Edgeworth had no clue who had killed his father, but Phoenix Wright, through his uber lawyerly skills, was able to expose the truth in a matter of days.

Also, Phoenix has a much better pointing stance than Miles. This is a very important quality for a lawyer to have, at least in the Phoenix Wright universe.
Debate Round No. 2
Logical-Master

Pro

Re Experience: I don't have enough space to address this in detail so I'm just going to agree that it influences skill and is not an ability itself. Me conceding this holds no bearing on this debate's outcome.

Re Evidence from Investigation: My opponent insist that the Prosecution constantly ends up with more evidence than the defense, but I assure you that this is merely an illusion manifested from the sheer talent of the prosecution. For instance, let's look back to Winston Payne's case against Phoenix at the beginning of Justice for All. The only evidence Payne personally brought up were two photos containing the victim's hand writing, a photo of the crime, a witness testimony, and an autopsy report. Phoenix had detailed information of the witness beforehand, knowledge of the murder scene (which is equivalent to the photo's), and had evidence that the witness had poor eye sight. The only reason Phoenix even had a hard time in this case was because he had lost his memory shortly before the trial had begun. Clearly, the defense had the advantage when it came to the results from the investigations. From this example, we can go about concluding that investigation results depend on the abilities of the lawyers (in the PW universe alone of course). Thus, the ability to research should be considered when evaluating the skills of the two lawyers in question. With that being the case, the information the Prosecutor presents during the trial is reflective on his/her abilities.

Again, the only evidence Phoenix doesn't' have access to are Blood tests, finger print examinations, and occasionally items which were difficult to find at the crime scene. However, I still insists that Phoenix has the advantage due to having information which is truthfully decisive (which is the info the magatama produces).

As for Phoenix being surprised by testimonies, this is typically due to the fact that the Prosecution has prepped his/her witness enough to present a testimony that seemingly has no contradictions. Therefore, this point actually works in my favor, as it reflects Phoenix's lack of skill when it comes to exposing contradictions. Although very skilled, he is just not skilled enough to the point where he can recognize contradictions immediately or without Mia's/Maya's help. On the other hand, Edgeworth can deliver his points instantly, without help, and without merely bluffing (another fault of Phoenix by the way).

Re Delaying the trial: My opponent insist that the truth was on Edgeworth's side during Case #4 of Justice For All, but as I've previously pointed out, Edgeworth was relying on faulty evidence as Engarde did not physically commit a homicide (contrary to Edgeworth's theory).

The only case where Phoenix ever had the opportunity to delay the trial was during Case #4. If my opponent is referring to this case, his point is moot considering that it was because of Edgeworth's help (in delaying the trial multiple times beforehand) that he even had an opportunity to do this. In every other trial, the prosecution would always find a flaw (which was usually a lack of evidence, lack of motivation for the accused, etc) in Phoenix's argument before he had the opportunity to get the judge to end the trial.

As for Edgeworth not being able to obtain a guilty verdict, my point was that he could have done so earlier. It's true that right came close to getting the judge to hand down a guilty verdict as my opponent points out, but this was due to Edgeworth's help (in doing the same beforehand).

My opponent suggests that the Judge always has an extreme favor of the prosecution, but this isn't the case. This again boils down to which lawyer is more persuasive. In most cases, Edgeworth cites evidence and logically explains how the evidence suggest that the defendant is guilty. Phoenix is required to back up his claims with evidence due to the fact that he is the one making these claims. In other words, this is a matter of the burden of proof. In every trial, Phoenix attempts to point who the real murderer is. Naturally, one can't just do this without presenting any evidence. Besides, the concept of "burden of proof" certainly exists within the PW universe. In Case #4 of Justice for All, Phoenix points out that the suicide note mentioned as part of Edgeworth's evidence could have been a forgery. Edgeworth challenges Phoenix to prove this and Phoenix points out that the burden of proof requires Edgeworth to prove this. The judge agrees with Phoenix's objection.

Furthermore, the fact that it was Phoenix who the judge was mostly in favor of during the second half of trial #4 is more evidence for my assertion that persuasion is what the Judge is focused on; being on the defense or prosecution position is not relevant in the eyes of the judge.

As for Edgeworth keeping himself informed about the trial, this is possible, although the main thing to keep in mind was that he did not have ample time to prep his witnesses or personally conduct an investigation (these two tasks are always crucial to a prosecutor's case).

I agree with my opponent in that sense that the verdict is most important, but the presentation of the lawyers is what can manipulate the verdict.

Re Lawyerly Path: My opponent states that he does not need a game to tell him which lawyer path is better, but I believed he has missed my point. My point concerned what Phoenix believed. And based on what Phoenix believes, my opponent surely could not advocate that Phoenix has always pursued justice (without conflicting his own view of justice) when taking into account the implications of the two decisions which you're given in the game. As I've explained in the previous round, Phoenix fails to uphold some form of Justice either way (not getting his client a fair trial or getting an innocent man guilty). Getting false verdicts was not Edgeworth's intention. His goal was do his job to its best potential. I don't justify the means which he did this nor do I accept this as being part of the evaluation in the debate due to the fact that Edgeworth had changed.

Re Word games: I have no intention of playing any. My main reason for urging the dismissal of Edgeworth's past is that is that it does not reflect on his final results as a lawyer (which we see in Trials and Tribulations) since he acted as a different kind of lawyer in the end (the type that doesn't solely value getting a guilty verdict). However, even if I were to go about the route of playing "word games", my opponent's argument would be invalid as both Edgeworth and Phoenix Wright exist as observable ideas in our perception of reality. Basically, even if they don't exist, we can still evaluate both and still go about determining who is superior.

Phoenix did solve a case which Edgeworth was unable to, but what my opponent is forgetting is that he had the aid of Maya in doing this. Without Maya, he wouldn't even have gotten past one of the first witnesses in trial and would have lost the case on the spot. In fact, if not for Mia, he would have never been able to prove that Von Karma was even involved in the DL6 incident.

Re Gestures: Phoenix may have a good pointing stance, but Edgeworth can do a one handed desk slam when making his points, whereas Phoenix needs both of his hands. Edgeworth also bows whenever he makes a good point. Lets not forget the pose Edgeworth is making in my opponent's Avatar. Clearly, Edgeworth has superior quality when it comes to gestures.

Main point to vote on: In each of Phoenix's trials, he has had the aid of someone else and has usually gotten out of his client being declared guilty thanks to the help he has been provided with (usually help from a veteran defense attorney). When facing Edgeworth, it has always been this help which has gotten Phoenix out of tight spots. Without even considering the other attributes I have brought up, Phoenix is still inferior because of this.

Thank you. :D
beem0r

Con

Experience:
I accept your concession (how surprising!)

Evidence in court:
My opponent holds that the prosecution only appears to have more evidence due to their better lawyerly skills. I will simply disagree: Phoenix has to do all his investigations himself, whereas the prosecutors get their information largely from the detectives. Sure, phoenix might get an autopsy report here and there from hem too, but that's about it. He's always ignorant of much of the evidence brought up in court, something the prosecution doesn't have a problem with. I also will assert that detective abilities are not the measure of a lawyer's ability, since it's not a lawyer's job. Even in the PW universe, detectives exist.
Also, my opponent has stated that Phoenix has an upper hand by knowing a lot about the defendant beforehand; however, the prosecutors thoroughly know their witnesses, and Edgeworth himself is known to prep his witnesses - telling them not to release certain info unless specifically asked. A good lawyer would not have to conceal facts in this matter, yet Edgeworth does.

Delaying the trial:
I can't say I recall any delaying of a guilty verdict until after both lawyers knew De Killer was... the direct culprit. However, I suppose it would not surprise me if I was wrong here. Why? Not because Phoenix is a poor lawyer, but because the judge is visibly and blatantly biased in favor of the prosecution, regardless of the prosecutor. This is evident in his blatant disregard for the basic principles of law: he is ready to give a guilty verdict whether there is reasonable doubt or not. In some cases, he'll give a guilty verdict after it's been shown that the defendant almost certainly didn't do it. This may give the illusion that the prosecution is skilled, but it is just that: an illusion. The judge never accepts the defendant's claims unless they are backed to the brim with solid, conclusive evidence. All the prosecution needs is some random person to accuse the defendant, regardless of how reliable the testimony is. In a land where you're guilty until proven innocent, it's no wonder the prosecution is able to appear to do so much better.

Also, I don't see why Phoenix couldn't have delayed any of the trials he won. He simply didn't have a reason to, so he didn't. I assume by delaying a trial my opponent means stopping a verdict from passing in favor of hearing more testimony or having some other deliberation.

And about burden of proof: fortunately for the prosecution, this doesn't apply to claims made by random, often untrustworthy witnesses. This is the fatal flaw in the PW universe's legal system, and it is what makes it seem as though Edgeworth is more skilled than Phoenix.

Also, the reason the Judge was on Phoenix's side for the greater part of trial 4 in JFA was because Edgeworth was not fighting for the Judge's favor at the time, in order to delay the case. This does not mean that the Judge is neutral wen it comes to defense vs. prosecution, but simply that he won't favor the prosecution in a one-sided fight. He's biased, but not THAT biased.

Verdict:
My opponent agrees that the verdict is what counts, and that presentation is simply a means to achieve said verdict, but Phoenix has always gotten the correct verdict. True, he has had some help along the way, and some cases have looked rough at times, but he always comes through by making the judge give out the correct verdict. The same cannot be said of Edgeworth.

Rogue or No:
It seems to have come up a lot from my opposition, so I will discuss it here: Edgeworth acts alone, while Phoenix also relies on others around him. Does this make Edgeworth better? Certainly not. If anything, it makes him worse. Phoenix has gone about getting ties to people who can vastly help him, while Edgeworth has not. Which is the better decision? Which would you prefer your lawyer to do? While Phoenix is making a wise decision that could help him win cases, Edgeworth is stroking his ego despite the difficulties that brings. Which one makes the better lawyer? You decide, I suppose.

Gestures:
While he could theoretically point and slam the desk at the same time, Edgeworth does not have an animation for this, ergo that point is moot. Also, while we're on the topic of slamming the desk, Phoenix does it much better. In this case, two hands are better than one; it gives the gesture more feeling to it.
Also, my opponent says not to forget the animation Edgeworth is making in my avatar. Please, accept this advice - for it is the best animation Edgeworth has to offer.
Also, my opponent brought up the bowing gesture of Edgeworth's. While it is a good gesture, it cannot make up for the other downfalls of Edgeworth's gestures.

My point to vote on:
Relying on others does not make one a bad lawyer, nor does relying only on oneself make one a good lawyer. My opponent wants you to vote on the individual wits of each lawyer, even though Phoenix is smart enough not to simply rely on his individual wits in court. Even so, it is obvious that the Judge is far too easily swayed by the prosecution's witnesses, which is what gives the illusion that Edgeworth is himself a better lawyer than Phoenix. Regardless, in Phoenix's cases, justice always prevails, while the same cannot be said for Edgeworth. If I was wrongly accused of a crime, I would much rather Phoenix handle my case than Edgeworth. Edgeworth is not a better lawyer for relying only on himself, he is a fool for it.

I guess that's enough, rofl. Sorry about the long wait, I'm at my stepbrother's house and without my real computer (using mah POS laptop). Good luck to both of us.
Debate Round No. 3
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
What would the client be guilty of though? Purgory perhaps?
Posted by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
What leads you to make this accusation? If the site admins didn't have sufficient info, how do you?
I'm quite curious. So if you would, please show this evidence, or your client will be found guilty.
Posted by sweatycreases 9 years ago
sweatycreases
HEY BEEM0R, YOU SHOULD BE AWARE THAT KLEPTIN AND LOGICAL MASTER ARE THE SAME PERSON, SO YOU HAVE LESS OF A CHANCE TO WIN THIS DEBATE WHEN HE VOTES SEVERAL TIMES FOR HIMSELF. I CONTACTED THE SITE ADMINISTRATORS ABOUT THIS AND THIS WAS THEIR REPLY:

Hi Sweaty,

After doing some investigation I was unable to confirm your hypothesis.
I
will continue to look into the matter. Having multiple accounts on
Debate.org is against the terms of service and warrants account
closure.

Regards,

Webmaster

AS FOR LOGICAL MASTER / KLEPTIN, THERE ARE MORE THAN ONE OF US WHO SEEK TO OUST YOU DUE TO THE FACT THAT YOU ARE CHEATING ON ALL OF YOUR DEBATES. WE VOTED AGAINST ALL OF YOUR DEBATES TO OFFSET THE ADVANTAGE YOU'VE GIVEN YOURSELF.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
To my stalker who has so far managed to provide two votes against me in ALL of my debates: You could have at least provided some input on this one. :D

Anyways, good debate, beem0r. I suppose since I'm going to get more and more votes piled up on me regardless, I'll reveal my actual opinion on the subject without fear of discouraging the voters.

Yes, I've always wondered why the Prosecution could get away with presenting itself in the fashion which it does. Heck, in most of the cases, Phoenix can disprove all of the evidence against his client and still come close to losing merely because he hasn't found a motive for the one who he trying to pin the murder on.
Posted by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
Rofl @ /b/ moar

Also, my apologies for the wait time, travel and such.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
You wrote "Narcism" The word is "Narcissism".

Even your link to dictionary says "Narcissism".

You just copied the definition and replaced the word "narcissism" with "narcism"

This is what you get when you look up "narcism"

http://dictionary.reference.com...

nar·cis·sism /ˈnɑrsəˌsɪzɛm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[nahr-suh-siz-em] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1.inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity.

See? It defaults to "Narcissism" because it's probably a common error.
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
Why dont you scroll down and see for your self. Try on glasses as i suggested.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
Eyeleapy. Take a closer look.

"Did you mean: narcissism?"

NAR-CIS-M

Does not exist.

NAR-CIS-SISM is the word defined.

NAR-CIS-M
NAR-CIS-SISM

Notice the three missing letters?
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
Actually here it is

narcism :
noun
an exceptional interest in and admiration for yourself; "self-love that shut out everyone

here is the link
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Not only are you an R-tard but don't know anythink about Greek Myths.

PS-Poser!
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
beem0r?

More like /b/ moar!
20 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DSanteramo 8 years ago
DSanteramo
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by philosphical 8 years ago
philosphical
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Panda 8 years ago
Panda
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by appletreez 9 years ago
appletreez
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by JUDGE 9 years ago
JUDGE
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by jiffy 9 years ago
jiffy
Logical-Masterbeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03