Talk:Case from 17 years ago

Both rooms messy?

@Black Demon, it seems I got the which room had the sink running wrong, however Conan seems to state that both rooms were messy. Is there a better source Japanese or Chinese that says other wise? --Jimmy-kud0-tv2 (talk) 07:04, 27 September 2016 (CEST)

This is the Japanese dialogue I got: link

In the previous line Haibara mentioned that the BO's MO is to make the scenes look like nothing has happened before leaving. Then she said that Amanda's room seems to be "like that". The 2 Chinese translations also reflected this meaning. What I interpreted from this line was that the BO wanted to make her death look like a spontaneous one (due to accident/disease/old age etc.) and not caused by human, that's why they left the water running to reinforce that scenario. Black ★ Demon 10:53, 27 September 2016 (CEST)

I guess I'm still not understanding. Don't we know that the taps were left on due to the creation of the dying message? I find it a bit ridiculous that he would be able to carry the shards of cut glass from one room to the other while being chased by someone trying to kill him. If he were to have dropped a single letter shard a long the way, it would ruin the whole thing. Plus if any of the cut shards that he removed were left behind in Amanda's room, the killer would have had to go back to remove them so that the cases would not be connected. That's a lot of going back and forth that someone would have noticed. It makes the whole thing not work out nearly as well as the case that took place in the present day.

If Kohji had done all of it in his own room, while the killer was out in the hall trying to get in, he would have just enough time to cut the glass and smash the cups up. The cups shards would then disguise the broken glass. The killer would break in and cause a struggle, resulting in Kohji's death and then leave. It would all work a lot better like the current case. --Jimmy-kud0-tv2 (talk) 17:39, 27 September 2016 (CEST)

Jimmy I agree that seems pretty odd to cut the glass in one hotel room and transport it to the other. What if the rooms were connected though? Quite a few American hotels have a door between rooms so they can be linked together if one family stays in 2 adjacent rooms. (Or sometimes a pair, you can unlock the one on your side and the adjacent room can open theirs. When both sides are unlocked, people can move between the rooms) Asaka/Rum/Whoever could be locked outside the two rooms and Kohji could be moving through the interior door. Chekhov MacGuffin ^talk 21:48, 27 September 2016 (CEST)

(leaving this information from the forums here for future reference.Link of info from Valentin)--Jimmy-kud0-tv2 (talk) 00:46, 16 May 2017 (CEST)

  Show spoilers »

As a brief supplement to Conan and Haibara’s conversation about the rooms of Amanda Hughes and Kouji Haneda, I took a closer look at those sentences in my copy of Volume 89 and tried to provide a translation as faithful and clear as possible.

1: Haibara それより引っかかるのは荒らされたまま放置されたこの部屋… [１：それより］［２：引っかかるのは］［３：荒らされたまま］［４：放置された］［５：この部屋］… [1: more than that] [2: what bothers (me)] [3: in a devastated state] [4: left behind] [5: this room] … More than that, what bothers me is this room that was left behind in a devastated state …

2: Haibara 組織の仕業ならこんな事有り得ない… ［６：組織の仕業なら］［７：こんな事］［８：有り得ない］… [6: as for the work of the organization] [7: a thing like this] [8: inconceivable] … As for the work of the organization, a thing like this is inconceivable …

3: Haibara 何もなかったかのように立ち去るのが彼らのやり方なのに… ［９：何もなかったかのように］［１０：立ち去るのが］［１１：彼らのやり方］［１２：なのに］… [9: as if nothing had been there] [10: to (stand up and) leave] [11: their way of doing] [12: despite] Despite leaving as if nothing had been there is their way of doing …

4: Haibara 実際、殺された資産家の部屋はそうだったみたいだし… ［１３：実際］、［１４：殺された資産家の部屋は］［１５：そうだったみたいだし］… [13: in fact], [14: the room of the killed wealthy person] [15: seems to have been like that] In fact, the room of the killed wealthy person seems to have been like that …

5: Conan 確かに洗面所の蛇口の水も出しっ放しだったって書いてある… ［１６：確かに］［１７：洗面所の蛇口の水］［１８：も］［１９：出しっ放しだった］［２０：って書いてある］… [16: indeed] [17: the water of the tap of the bathroom] [18: also] [19: was left running] [20: is written] It is indeed written that the water of the tap of the bathroom was also left running …

Someone who talks about A and then about B will use an anaphoric term in the following sentence for referring to whatever was stated last instead of forcing the hearer to guess which one of the previously mentioned things is meant. In “I had a troublesome dog. Then I had a peaceful turtle. That was much better.”, that only refers to the peaceful turtle and not to the troublesome dog that was mentioned before the peaceful turtle. Correspondingly, I can’t think of any reasonable explanation why Haibara should first (Sentence 1) talk about A (Kouji Haneda’s room “left behind in a devastated state”) and then (Sentences 2–3) contrast A (Kouji Haneda’s room “left behind in a devastated state”) with B (“leaving as if nothing had been is their way of doing”) just to eventually (Sentence 4) utter C (“seems to have been like that”) for referring back not to what was stated immediately before that (“leaving as if nothing had been there is their way of doing” in Sentences 2–3), but to what was stated at the beginning (Kouji Haneda’s room “left behind in a devastated state” in Sentence 1). She is confused by the fact that a room was left in a devastated state although the organization seems to be involved, makes the focus shift by mentioning their usual modus operandi and compares the other room with that (their usual modus operandi). So I agree with Chekhov MacGuffin and Serinox and dare say that every other reading of those words has nothing to do with natural language use.

As for Conan’s reply, I have a minor remark. While it doesn’t change the sense dramatically, I think that the absence of a comma after 確かに (indeed) entails that 確かに (indeed) emphasizes the rest of the sentence instead of directly affirming Sentence 4. To illustrate that, I put indeed after it is; here are the two versions for comparison:

Official Version 確かに洗面所の蛇口の水も出しっ放しだったって書いてある… It is indeed written that the water of the tap of the bathroom was also left running …

Alternative Version 確かに、洗面所の蛇口の水も出しっ放しだったって書いてある… Indeed, it is written that the water of the tap of the bathroom was also left running …

I think that, in the latter sentence, Conan would first agree with Haibara explicitly and then mention the rest of his answer to support what she said, whereas, in the first sentence, he would solely emphasize something that supports what she said and might agree only implicitly. Again, the difference wouldn’t be too significant; I just think that the question if Conan agrees with Haibara explicitly or perhaps only implicitly isn’t completely irrelevant either, so I at least wanted to mention it.

I hope this helps to clear things up a bit.

About the image, I can try to retype-set it with a corrected translation. Valentin's is pretty good. Or we can wait until the episode and use Crunchy the crunchy subs since they are likely to be good. Chekhov MacGuffin ^talk 03:57, 16 May 2017 (CEST)

Soul Detective Gaito Hotta clue about Asaka, as explained by Sanpei Kokuri

List of details that were incorrect in the fan translation for the case

The fan scanlation for file 948 went from Japanese to Chinese to Indonesian to English. To avoid misinfo, I want to list some things that may be off. The anime episode should air soonish, but eh why not. Chekhov MacGuffin ^talk 06:00, 11 May 2017 (CEST)

• Amanda Hughes is a 資産家 【しさんか】 - wealthy person, not an investor.
• Haibara's line on pg 6 upper left (I think is) 実際,殺された資産家の部屋はそうだつたみたいだし - In fact, the room of the wealthy person who was killed had a similar impression, right? That implies it was like the BO's style mentioned in the previous sentence.

• The tap was apparently left running in Amanda's room, not Kohji's.

• The gender of Asaka is neutral.