Ace Attorney Has A Reputation For "No, Your Client Can't Be Declared Innocent Unless You Prove SOMEONE

Ace Attorney has a reputation for "No, your client can't be declared innocent unless you prove SOMEONE ELSE DID THE CRIME. That's the rules." And I don't think that's entirely fair.

But sometimes, man. Some fucking times that reputation is spot on.

Most of its cases are carefully sculpted to preserve some sense of ambiguity as to your client's provable involvement. You can craft a scenario in court that says your client was unconscious in a back room, but you're not given the ability to prove that. AA cases operate on the backfoot, with the prosecution laying out a clear and concise case for "They did it" and the attorney struggling to unwind it.

Finding the killer usually serves simultaneously as the clincher that absolves your client. Instead of "Your client didn't do it BUT WE'LL CONVICT THEM ANYWAY if you can't find someone else who did," it becomes a more clear-cut argument of "My client couldn't have done it because this guy did it instead."

...

And then there's shit like

So we're agreed! The evidence has shown that the defendant was on the other side of a gigantic, impassible ravine from where the murder took place. Therefore, it would be physically impossible for them to even have been present for the murder, let alone the perpetrator of the crime.

So. We're done here, right?

Mmm... no. I'm invested in the plot now. I want to see where this is going.

This fucking justice system, I swear.