God's Imitator

"At the time, the situation was that both sides had reached the point of no return. If Tang Qing’s speculation about ’killing wife for insurance money’ was confirmed, he could present evidence after the court adjourned, showing that Lawyer Lin was providing strategic counsel and legal assistance to the husband, thus implicating Lawyer Lin as a sinner.

"And Lawyer Lin proposed two hypotheses: one was ’murder-suicide,’ meaning the wife intended to die and thus wanted to go down with her husband; the other was ’another perpetrator,’ implying the wife had an accomplice, directly pointing to Tang Qing.

"The key here is that Tang Qing realized Wang Yongxin was actually siding with Lawyer Lin. That Lion King Card was a setup by Wang Yongxin and Lawyer Lin from the start.

"Including the ring and the photo from the online circle, these two pieces of evidence seemed insignificant but would ultimately point to the direction depicted by Lawyer Lin.

"Wang Yongxin and Lawyer Lin probably couldn’t communicate, so was this cooperation purely a matter of eye contact? Did they know each other beforehand and mutually understood each other?

"Or one could also say: from a God-like perspective, Wang Yongxin’s strategy made him invincible.

"He pretended to follow Tang Qing’s line of reasoning and presented evidence, gaining Tang Qing’s trust, yet he embedded information favorable to Lawyer Lin within the evidence.

"If Lawyer Lin couldn’t find this information, he would win; if Lawyer Lin found it, he would still win.

"Regardless of whether Lawyer Lin or Tang Qing held the visa time slots, he would gain the most profit and never become the loser himself.

"Since Lawyer Lin found this information and successfully turned the tables, obviously Wang Yongxin was siding with Lawyer Lin.

"For Tang Qing, the situation was already a matter of one against two.

"Feng Yuguang could be seen as dead; Lin Sizhi and Wang Yongxin were top players, and they had the advantage of evidence.

"If the game dragged into the next round, he was doomed to lose.

"So Tang Qing decisively chose to cut his losses, asserting his support for the ’murder-suicide’ hypothesis.

"This way, the role he played would not be classified as a sinner.

"Once Tang Qing took a stand, it meant that the entire Community 7 could only follow suit, ensuring 15 votes.

"And Lawyer Lin, Wang Yongxin, and Feng Yuguang basically were willing to accept such a result, with the players behind them also likely to vote in favor.

"Of course, Lawyer Lin and Wang Yongxin didn’t bring Tang Qing to utter ruin because they had other traps laid elsewhere and didn’t see the need for a life-and-death struggle in the performance.

"Everyone had a different level of acceptance of this truth, most accepted it relatively well, but some players instinctively resisted, not quite able to accept.

"Yet, among these people, many preferred to support with dissenting votes rather than oppose, which led to this outcome being forcibly established as the truth.

"Ultimately, this presented the final result.

"So... it’s clear why some in the ’closing vote’ also voted for Feng Yuguang and Tang Qing.

"Feng Yuguang is a doctor and was invisible throughout, but that bottle of medication from Wang Yongxin was quite deadly.

"In the final truth, ’the husband controlled the wife through medication’ was an established fact.

"So, who provided the husband with this medication? Who suggested to the husband to use medication to control the wife?

"If there’s any person, it can only be the doctor.

"What’s most unfortunate is that Feng Yuguang spoke so little during this process, without evidence or testimony to establish him as having a justice-oriented persona, so the audience has the freedom to determine whether he gave the medication.

"Feng Yuguang likely wasn’t conscious of this; he probably believed, wishfully, that without explicit evidence pointing to him, the audience couldn’t vote against him.

"But from the previous ’truth vote,’ it’s evident that the game’s dissent determination mechanism is relatively lenient.

"Initially, I didn’t fully believe in the ’murder-suicide’ proposed by Lawyer Lin, thinking there were doubts but couldn’t conceive of a more convincing possibility, so voting any which way was unrestricted.

"And the final ’closing vote’ is similarly unrestrained.

"In such freedom, many in the audience would vote guilty because as long as the dissent votes exceeded half, players who voted to support him would have their visa time divided by those who voted against.

"This is tangible gain.

"Additionally, not many bet on him, and few would vote in support risking everything because if they failed to protect him, everything they owned would go down the drain.

"Lawyer Lin had no such worries.

"Theoretically, he could have provided legal advice to the husband, but the confirmed truth contained no direct evidence pointing to that. Lawyer Lin’s performance throughout the trial was also positive; claiming he provided legal aid to the husband was quite tenuous.

"The prior insurance evidence Lawyer Lin repeatedly questioned—the possibility of succeeding in defrauding insurance was low, while Tang Qing thought it was a gambler’s desperate risk, which partly distanced Lawyer Lin’s connection with the husband.

"Moreover, there ought to be numerous supporters backing him, hence no danger.

"Tang Qing’s situation was extremely unique...

"When an actor’s image, behavior, qualities, etc., are perfectly aligned with the character, it’s considered ’perfect portrayal.’

"Tang Qing’s image and behavior matched the detective role perfectly.

"But the inner qualities... did not.

"According to the ultimate truth, the detective was innocent; he truly wasn’t involved in the case, didn’t lie, nor committed any unjust acts.

"However, Tang Qing himself lied multiple times during this game: he intentionally claimed there was plenty of evidence in the evidence room and that he struggled to find these specific pieces of evidence. This was substantial deception.

"The rule about ’creating evidence’ is a double-edged sword.

"If the evidence already existed and Tang Qing merely presented them, then the sin could still be up for debate; but if Tang Qing created these pieces himself, it would be disastrous upon deeper contemplation.

"This made people believe Tang Qing played with explicit malice, misaligned with the detective’s righteous character in the plot.

"So, once aware of this hidden mechanism regarding evidence, many in the audience could internally determine he hadn’t achieved ’perfect portrayal.’

"In contrast, this issue didn’t exist for the remaining three.

"Wang Yongxin provided several pieces of evidence, including the ring, gold card, and medication, yet these props lacked clear directionality; he didn’t directly accuse Feng Yuguang of being the husband’s accomplice but left things open for the audience to fill in.

"And, he never mentioned whether there were many or few pieces of evidence in the evidence room nor that he struggled to find these items, not considered deliberate deception.

"After all, this was part of the game’s hidden mechanism.

"Thus, he was much safer than Tang Qing, avoiding self-destructive fire.

"So, ultimately, those open to dissent votes were Feng Yuguang and Tang Qing."

After thinking it all through, Huang Shengjie attempted to click the screen again.

This time, he discovered he could cast dissent votes for Feng Yuguang and Tang Qing.