Lelouch Vi Britannia is dead at the end of Code geass

"1. The Japanese version showed Lelouch being alive. " "This is not something to debate. The fact of the matter is that the Code Geass R2 ending I posted the last round had this scene on DVD. This is a fact, not an opinion or an edit. My opponent can have his own opinions but not his own facts" Words of Con. .. .. I will not argue any longer upon this point, but all i ask is for the voters to read my arguments and then con's arguments. "My opponent has tried time after time in this debate to shift the burden of proof on to me. The burden of proof is on him since he is the one making the claim that someone is dead. That suggests, that they were previously out and about living somewhere and no longer are living anymore. I merely have to prove that Lelouch is not dead. I made the claim that it was Lelouch driving the carriage with C. C. in the back. My opponent has yet to refute this. He has offered no alternative. So who must we imagine is driving the carriage? Who is C. C. talking to? My opponent has offered no evidence but only opinion in this matter. I have offered a video clip as evidence suggesting whom it might be. Should we leave this matter to the conjecture of my opponent or to the video itself? " However, con is ALSO making the claim that Lelouch is alive. So I'm not asking Con to provide proof of Lelouch being alive but provide proof to his points and his claim. AS for the carriage rider, I have indeed made a claim, I specifically said that Lelouch was not the carriage rider because it's a mere fact because Lelouch's face IS NEVER SHOWN. . therefore Con needs to prove that Lelouch is the carriage driver because my very evidence is that the carriage driver's face is never revealed, which then brings us to the Original japanese version, in which Con and I discussed already in which Con was eager to rid of that losing argument. AS for who C2 was talking to in the last scene , I am only assuming through observations and my CLAIM that C2 was talking to Lelouch while looking up into the sky (Heaven) yet con keeps mentioning how I'm only stating my opinion when Con has not even backed up any evidence to which that C2 was talking to the carriage driver, but Con is assuming. "What evidence does my opponent have previously showing that the alteration of the eyes equals death? That is merely speculation. Then my opponent goes on further to make the absurd claim that a shot to the head is similar to a stabbing. A gun shot to wound to the head is fatal and there is a high chance of death. The gun shot to Charles' head was clean and bloodless. Versus the stabbing which was bloodier and a lot sloppier as well. A sword and gun are two different weapons" AND this is the part of the argument where I laugh. Con has clearly said I'm only making speculations but what Con HAS FORGOTTEN is that Charles WAS CLEARLY shot in the heart, So I ask Con to rewatch the anime and that Con is only making pointless points that are merely speculations and con hasn't gone to far to watch the anime as this debate goes fourth. In any case, Charles was shot in the heart just the same spot where Lelouch was stabbed and if Con didn't know being stabbed in the heart is quite fatal and one can immediately become pale in which Lelouch did become but Charles did not. So, this CLEARLY shows that Con has not tried to understand and rewatch the anime to prove his points, which he lacks knowledge of Code geass, while, I on the other hand clearly know every detail if not most of the detail that anyone may throw at me and I will have the tendency of actually doing my research unlike Con. AS for my evidence, I specifically told Con to rewatch some scenes to prove my evidence, if Con is to lazy to do so, then so be it, however the evidence is their for the voters.