( No Title )
Okay, so in Turnabout Trump, after Zak is killed, the killer takes away the bloody ace from the scene and turns Zak around in his chair.
That means when Phoenix comes back into the room, the only clue that the scene has been altered is the fact that the Ace is missing, and there’s a King in it’s place.
Phoenix has to work backwards to deduce why the Ace would be switched for the King (it must have had blood on it), and why that would be incriminating evidence (it switches the position of the killer.)
Therefore, we have to ask again, why would Kristoph– who knew he was taking an Ace from the table, replace it with a King instead of an Ace?
You can say he didn’t know about the blue/red cardbacks easy, but he had to know which card he was taking, and he’d know that Phoenix would notice that the card had been swapped to a King.
So it makes no sense to do that.
The only possible way it makes sense is if a fourth person switches the Ace with a King in order to catch Phoenix’s attention and incriminate Kristoph.
“Well, he took an Ace, and there were four on the table. He wouldn’t expect there to be another Ace for him to use as a replacement.”
Except! Kristoph knew that they were using two decks of cards, he just didn’t know that the backs were different colors. He should be under the impression he could easily get another ace from the deck of cards all over the floor.
“This is just a plot hole.”
Probably, yes, but this is a watsonian discussion only examining the actual contents of the story and not the author’s intentions XD
Discussion ¬