Miles Edgeworth was actually a better lawyer than Phoenix Wright.

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