Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Main / GuiltyUntilSomeoneElseIsGuilty

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Fixed a red link.


** It's played straight in ''VideoGame/PhoenixWrightAceAttorneySpiritOfJustice'' in the final case, since the case is pretty clearly a KangarooCourt run by a despot who wants the defendant to be convicted to break the spirit of LaResistance and isn't afraid to abuse authority as [[spoiler:the Queen of Khura'in]] to do so.[[spoiler: Even when you ''do'' prove the defendant Not Guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt on account of him being ''dead'' when the crime took place, ''and'' prove the evidence against him in a previous case was fabricated, Ga'ran just writes a new law declaring standing up to her to be a crime punishable by summary execution. You only win the case by proving she never had a claim to the throne and thus all her laws are invalid.]]

to:

** It's played straight in ''VideoGame/PhoenixWrightAceAttorneySpiritOfJustice'' ''VisualNovel/PhoenixWrightAceAttorneySpiritOfJustice'' in the final case, since the case is pretty clearly a KangarooCourt run by a despot who wants the defendant to be convicted to break the spirit of LaResistance and isn't afraid to abuse authority as [[spoiler:the Queen of Khura'in]] to do so.[[spoiler: Even when you ''do'' prove the defendant Not Guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt on account of him being ''dead'' when the crime took place, ''and'' prove the evidence against him in a previous case was fabricated, Ga'ran just writes a new law declaring standing up to her to be a crime punishable by summary execution. You only win the case by proving she never had a claim to the throne and thus all her laws are invalid.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* ''WesternAnimation/BigCityGreens'': In the Season 4 episode "Green Trial", Cricket was accused of eating Nancy's strawberry cake. So Tilly tries to prove her brother's innocence. At the end of the episode, it was actually Grandpa Nick who ate the cake.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** It's played straight in ''VideoGame/PhoenixWrightAceAttorneySpiritOfJustice'' in the final case, since the case is pretty clearly a KangarooCourt run by a despot who wants the defendant to be convicted to break the spirit of LaResistance and isn't afraid to abuse authority as [[spoiler:the Queen of Khura'in]] to do so.[[spoiler: Even when you ''do'' prove the defendant Not Guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt on account of him being ''dead'' when the crime took place, ''and'' prove the evidence against him in a previous case was fabricated, Ga'ran just writes a new law declaring standing up to her to be a crime punishable by summary execution. You only win the case by proving she never had a claim to the throne and thus all her laws are invalid.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** ''VisualNovel/ApolloJusticeAceAttorney'': Case 3 has Machi, a frail fourteen-year-old, being suspected of killing Romein [=LeTouse=] with a 45-caliber pistol, the recoil from which should be enough to dislocate the shoulder of a ''grown man'', never mind a teenager, and neither of Machi's arms have been ripped out of their sockets. Even though this fact is enough to prove Machi didn't kill Romein, the court only gets convinced of Machi's innocence once Daryan's breakdown exposes him as the killer.
** Zig Zagged with Case 4 of Apollo Justice. On the one hand, they do work out who the guilty person is. On the other hand, there's no way to prove it. Ultimately though, the trial is the first to be done by Jury, and this lessening of the burden of proof is enough to save your defendant, since one of the jurors decides to vote Not Guilty. (Leaving aside that the juror in question is Apollo's and Trucy's mother)

to:

** ''VisualNovel/ApolloJusticeAceAttorney'': Case 3 has Machi, a frail fourteen-year-old, being suspected of killing Romein [=LeTouse=] with a 45-caliber pistol, the recoil from which should be enough to dislocate the shoulder of a ''grown man'', man'' (and indeed, it ''did'' mess up the killer's arm), never mind a teenager, and neither of Machi's arms have been ripped out of their sockets. Even though this fact is enough to prove Machi didn't kill Romein, the court only gets convinced of Machi's innocence once [[spoiler: Daryan's breakdown exposes him as the killer.
killer, which in turn only happens when Machi is convinced to testify against him]]. The creator later commented that he wanted the inconsistency to be because [[spoiler:Daryan, a police detective]] was messing with evidence behind the scenes, but this didn't really come through in the final product.
** Zig Zagged with Case 4 of Apollo Justice. On the one hand, they do work out who the guilty person is. On the other hand, there's no way to prove it. Ultimately though, the The good news is, it's a trial is the first to be done by Jury, jury, and this lessening of the burden of proof is enough to save your defendant, since one of the jurors decides have the sense to realize this trope doesn't apply and so will vote Not Guilty. (Leaving aside that [[spoiler: The only way to get the Bad Ending is to have the juror you control vote Guilty against all reason, which results in question is Apollo's a hung jury (because all the other jurors made the obvious choice), a mistrial, and Trucy's mother)Vera dying in the hospital. On the other hand, if Vera is declared Not Guilty, she survives and presumably can provide evidence against Kristoph herself.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* In ''VisualNovel/TyrionCuthbertAttorneyOfTheArcane'', for magic-related crimes, the public won't accept homicides going unsolved, so accused clients are guilty unless someone else's guilt can be proven.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

[[folder:Fanwork]]
* A justified case in the ''Franchise/AceAttorney'' / ''WesternAnimation/MiraculousLadybug'' crossover ''Fanfic/TalesOfKittyWhiskersAndLadybug'', where Mike Meekins is on trial for killing his boss Rekta Resu while [[CartesianKarma he was the akuma Bad Badger]]. In this case, Apollo Justice has to prove that Mike Meekins was under the mental corruption of the supervillain Hawkmoth, and thus should not be charged for a crime outside of his normal mental state.
[[/folder]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* In ''Film/TimeAfterTime'', the police arrest a time-travelling H.G. Wells in 1979 for a string of murders that were actually committed by Jack the Ripper. He insists that his love interest Amy is in danger from the real killer and says he'll confess on the condition that they protect her. Jack strikes again before they get to Amy's apartment, [[spoiler:killing Amy's roommate, whom they mistake at the time for Amy]].

to:

* In ''Film/TimeAfterTime'', the police arrest a time-travelling H.G. Wells in 1979 for a string of murders that were actually committed by Jack the Ripper. He insists that his love interest Amy is in danger from the real killer and says he'll confess on the condition that they protect her. Jack strikes again before they get to Amy's apartment, [[spoiler:killing killing Amy's roommate, whom they mistake at the time for Amy]].Amy.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* In ''Film/TheresSomethingAboutMary'', Ted is arrested for being serial killer, and due to a comedic misunderstanding, appears to nonchalantly confess. Fortunately for Ted, they soon catch the guy who presumably actually did it.
* In ''Film/TimeAfterTime'', the police arrest a time-travelling H.G. Wells in 1979 for a string of murders that were actually committed by Jack the Ripper. He insists that his love interest Amy is in danger from the real killer and says he'll confess on the condition that they protect her. Jack strikes again before they get to Amy's apartment, [[spoiler:killing Amy's roommate, whom they mistake at the time for Amy]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** One of the bad endings of ''Dual Destinies'' case 5 revolves around an aversion; if you mess up in [[spoiler: Bobby Fulbright]]'s testimony, Athena and Simon Blackquill will be declared innocent despite the true culprit never being identified. It counts as a bad ending for two reasons: One, Athena and Simon will never get closure regarding Metis' death, and two, UR-1 was one of two cases that catalyzed the Dark Age of the Law (the other being the case that got Phoenix disbarred, which was itself solved and Phoenix exonerated back in ''Apollo Justice''), and the Dark Age cannot come to a close without the case being solved.

to:

** One of the bad endings of ''Dual Destinies'' averts this twice, and both times, it's not exactly a good thing. The first time is at the end of case 4; while Yuri Cosmos does suffer a "breakdown" like most culprits do, he's not guilty of the murder of Clay Terran, yet revealing his wrongdoings is enough to get Sol Starbuck a "not guilty" verdict. If the fact that this has never before happened in series history wasn't enough to set off alarm bells, the fact that you hadn't even had a playable segment since you'd last received a new piece of evidence should; the evidence that exonerates Starbuck instead points the finger at *Athena*, and case 5 revolves around an proving her innocent as well. A bad ending to case 5 involves a second aversion; if you mess up in [[spoiler: Bobby Fulbright]]'s testimony, Athena and Simon Blackquill will be declared innocent despite the true culprit never being identified. It counts as a bad ending for two reasons: One, Athena and Simon will never get closure regarding Metis' death, and two, UR-1 was one of two cases that catalyzed the Dark Age of the Law (the other being the case that got Phoenix disbarred, which was itself solved and Phoenix exonerated back in ''Apollo Justice''), and the Dark Age cannot come to a close without the case being solved.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* ''Series/TheLawAccordingToLidiaPoet'': Lidia always proves a client innocent by showing that someone else committed the murder they're accused of, who then gets arrested for it while they are released (aside from the one case where she defends a guilty person, who confesses).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* Mocked in ''WebAnimation/SoThisIsBasically VideoGame/AceAttorney'', which uses the trope name almost word for word. Phoenix argues that his client can't have committed murder with a gun due to having been a five-month-old infant who couldn't even pick the gun up. (This is only narrowly an exaggeration of a case in ''Apollo Justice.'') The ObviouslyEvil witness admits that Phoenix proved that it was impossible... and then, with absolutely no evidence, launches into a rant about how the baby somehow picked up the bullet and dropped it out of a tall building or a blimp so that it landed on the victim's head and killed her, before challenging Phoenix to disprove it. Upon hearing this, the judge happily declares the baby to be guilty.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* In ''Film/The Cocoanuts'', after Mrs. Potter's stolen necklace has been recovered from beachfront lot #26, Bob is accused of stealing it simply because he refused to explain ''why'' he was so determined to win the bidding for the lot. [[spoiler:It's because he and Polly wish to build their dream home there.]]

to:

* In ''Film/The Cocoanuts'', ''Film/TheCocoanuts'', after Mrs. Potter's stolen necklace has been recovered from beachfront lot #26, Bob is accused of stealing it simply because he refused to explain ''why'' he was so determined to win the bidding for the lot. [[spoiler:It's because he and Polly wish to build their dream home there.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* In ''Film/The Cocoanuts'', after Mrs. Potter's stolen necklace has been recovered from beachfront lot #26, Bob is accused of stealing it simply because he refused to explain ''why'' he was so determined to win the bidding for the lot. [[spoiler:It's because he and Polly wish to build their dream home there.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
inappropriate apostrophe


* ''Series/{{Psych}}'': In the episode ''Dead Bear Walking'', Shawn is able to prove that the bear did not kill it's handler. However, Cody Blair (the county director of animal control) decides that the execution will still happen unless he and Gus find the true culprit within 12 hours.

to:

* ''Series/{{Psych}}'': In the episode ''Dead Bear Walking'', Shawn is able to prove that the bear did not kill it's its handler. However, Cody Blair (the county director of animal control) decides that the execution will still happen unless he and Gus find the true culprit within 12 hours.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ''Literature/TheAdventuresOfTomSawyer'': Muff Potter is accused of the murder of Dr. Robinson--an allegation he doesn't contest because he blacked out drunk at the crime scene and woke up with a knife in his hand. After his arrest, no one in town doubts that he did it. When he is about to be sentenced to death, Tom Sawyer steps out at the trial because he and Huckleberry Finn witnessed Injun Joe commit the act and then frame Muff. Joe, who is present, flees from the courtroom, leading to all charges against Muff be dropped.

to:

* ''Literature/TheAdventuresOfTomSawyer'': Muff Potter is accused of the murder of Dr. Robinson--an allegation he doesn't contest because he believes he blacked out drunk at the crime scene (in actual fact he was knocked out by the doctor at the start of the fight) and woke up with a knife in his hand. After his arrest, no one in town doubts that he did it. When he is about to be sentenced to death, Tom Sawyer steps out at the trial because he and Huckleberry Finn witnessed Injun Joe commit the act and then frame Muff. Joe, who is present, flees from the courtroom, leading to all charges against Muff be dropped.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Sol Starbuck is only acquitted because the bloody fingerprints on the lighter point to the real killer. It doesn’t matter that they didn’t say it was Athena until after the verdict; the court had proof that it was someone besides the defendant on trial.


** ''VisualNovel/PhoenixWrightAceAttorneyDualDestinies'': [[AvertedTrope Averted]] in case 4. By the end of the case, the true culprit has not been identified, but it has been definitively proven that Solomon Starbuck could not possibly have killed Clay Terran, so the judge delivers his verdict of "Not Guilty". Granted, the evidence proving this immediately implicates Athena Cykes (who's also innocent; the real culprit framed her) of the same crime, but this is not revealed until after the verdict is delivered. Clay Terran's true killer isn't found out until the next case.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Zig Zagged with Case 4 of Apollo Justice. On the one hand, they do work out who the guilty person is. On the other hand, there's no way to prove it. Ultimately though, the trial is the first to be done by Jury, and this lessening of the burden of proof is enough to save your defendant, since one of the jurors decides to vote Not Guilty. (Leaving aside that the juror in question is Apollo's and Trucy's mother)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


A misdeed has occurred, and one character -- usually a protagonist -- is assumed to be the culprit, either because they have a history of being a troublemaker, or simply because they were the first to find the body -- the second person on the scene of the crime saw them standing next to the victim and naturally assumed that they did it. The problem is that the accused character is innocent. While the character's closest friends and relatives may believe their innocence, everyone else will believe they're guilty. The "evidence" can sometimes be wafer thin and lacking coherence, such as a motive. Arguments in their defense tend to be ignored - the other characters will still believe they did it. The only way everyone will be convinced that the accused isn't guilty is with the strongest evidence of all: exposing the true culprit, and yet this is ''not'' a [[KangarooCourt Kangaroo Court]] -- the court simply follows its own inscrutable train of thought, and ''will'' clear your name once it becomes apparent that the prosecution was trying [[FrameUp to frame you]]. It's just that the standards for proof are apparently -- and hopefully -- very different from [[RealLife real life]].

to:

A misdeed has occurred, and one character -- usually a protagonist -- is assumed to be the culprit, either because they have a history of being a troublemaker, or simply because [[TheCorpseStopsHere they were the first to find the body body]] -- the second person on the scene of the crime saw them standing next to the victim and naturally assumed that they did it. The problem is that the accused character is innocent. While the character's closest friends and relatives may believe their innocence, [[ConvictedByPublicOpinion everyone else will believe they're guilty.guilty]]. The "evidence" can sometimes be wafer thin and lacking coherence, such as a motive. Arguments in their defense tend to be ignored - the other characters will still believe they did it. The only way everyone will be convinced that the accused isn't guilty is with the strongest evidence of all: exposing the true culprit, and yet this is ''not'' a [[KangarooCourt Kangaroo Court]] -- the court simply follows its own inscrutable train of thought, and ''will'' clear your name once it becomes apparent that the prosecution was trying [[FrameUp to frame you]]. It's just that the standards for proof are apparently -- and hopefully -- very different from [[RealLife real life]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** One of the bad endings of ''Dual Destinies'' case 5 revolves around an aversion; if you mess up in [[spoiler: Bobby Fulbright]]'s testimony, Athena and Simon Blackquill will be declared innocent despite the true culprit never being identified. It counts as a bad ending for two reasons: One, Athena and Simon will never get closure regarding Metis' death, and two, UR-1 was one of two cases that catalyzed the Dark Age of the Law (the other being the case that got Phoenix disbarred, which was itself solved and Phoeniz exonerated back in ''Apollo Justice''), and the Dark Age cannot come to a close without the case being solved.

to:

** One of the bad endings of ''Dual Destinies'' case 5 revolves around an aversion; if you mess up in [[spoiler: Bobby Fulbright]]'s testimony, Athena and Simon Blackquill will be declared innocent despite the true culprit never being identified. It counts as a bad ending for two reasons: One, Athena and Simon will never get closure regarding Metis' death, and two, UR-1 was one of two cases that catalyzed the Dark Age of the Law (the other being the case that got Phoenix disbarred, which was itself solved and Phoeniz Phoenix exonerated back in ''Apollo Justice''), and the Dark Age cannot come to a close without the case being solved.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Double example also listed under Visual Novels


* ''Franchise/AceAttorney'': This is not an actual part of the law system in the games, but due to the ways the trials are set up, it is rare to be able to decisively prove your defendant innocent without proving how the crime happened at every step and who actually did it. In the earlier games, for the few exceptions where you do conclusively prove your defendant's innocence early, the game requires you to continue until you've caught the real killer, but some later games will instead give you alternate game over screens to the tune of "your client was declared innocent, but the killer got away", or even in one example work it into the plot and save catching the actual criminal for a later case.

Changed: 355

Removed: 354

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


A misdeed has occurred, and one character -- usually a protagonist -- is assumed to be the culprit, either because they have a history of being a troublemaker, or simply because they were the first to find the body -- the second person on the scene of the crime saw them standing next to the victim and naturally assumed that they did it. The problem is that the accused character is innocent. While the character's closest friends and relatives may believe their innocence, everyone else will believe they're guilty. The "evidence" can sometimes be wafer thin and lacking coherence, such as a motive. Arguments in their defense tend to be ignored - the other characters will still believe they did it. The only way everyone will be convinced that the accused isn't guilty is with the strongest evidence of all: exposing the true culprit.

And yet this is ''not'' a [[KangarooCourt Kangaroo Court]] -- the court simply follows its own inscrutable train of thought, and ''will'' clear your name once it becomes apparent that the prosecution was trying [[FrameUp to frame you]]. It's just that the standards for proof are apparently -- and hopefully -- very different from [[RealLife real life]].

to:

A misdeed has occurred, and one character -- usually a protagonist -- is assumed to be the culprit, either because they have a history of being a troublemaker, or simply because they were the first to find the body -- the second person on the scene of the crime saw them standing next to the victim and naturally assumed that they did it. The problem is that the accused character is innocent. While the character's closest friends and relatives may believe their innocence, everyone else will believe they're guilty. The "evidence" can sometimes be wafer thin and lacking coherence, such as a motive. Arguments in their defense tend to be ignored - the other characters will still believe they did it. The only way everyone will be convinced that the accused isn't guilty is with the strongest evidence of all: exposing the true culprit.

And
culprit, and yet this is ''not'' a [[KangarooCourt Kangaroo Court]] -- the court simply follows its own inscrutable train of thought, and ''will'' clear your name once it becomes apparent that the prosecution was trying [[FrameUp to frame you]]. It's just that the standards for proof are apparently -- and hopefully -- very different from [[RealLife real life]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ''Film/CaptainAmericaCivilWar'': Security footage implicates Bucky Barnes for a bombing in Vienna, and he only gets proven innocent once evidence is discovered that he was framed by Zemo, the real mastermind behind the terrorist attack.

to:

* ''Film/CaptainAmericaCivilWar'': Security footage implicates Bucky Barnes for a bombing in Vienna, and he only gets proven innocent once evidence is discovered that he was framed by Zemo, the real mastermind behind the terrorist attack. His history as a brainwashed assassin, along with his extremely violent escape (''also'' arranged and induced by Zemo) only makes him look more guilty.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


A misdeed has occurred, and one character - usually a protagonist - is assumed to be the culprit, either because they have a history of being a troublemaker, or simply because they were the first to find the body - the second person on the scene of the crime saw them standing next to the victim and naturally assumed that they did it. The problem is that the accused character is innocent. While the character's closest friends and relatives may believe their innocence, everyone else will believe they're guilty. The "evidence" can sometimes be wafer thin and lacking coherence, such as a motive. Arguments in their defense tend to be ignored - the other characters will still believe they did it. The only way everyone will be convinced that the accused isn't guilty is with the strongest evidence of all: exposing the true culprit.

And yet this is ''not'' a [[KangarooCourt Kangaroo Court]] - the court simply follows its own inscrutable train of thought, and ''will'' clear your name once it becomes apparent that the prosecution was trying [[FrameUp to frame you]]. It's just that the standards for proof are apparently - and hopefully - very different from [[RealLife real life]].

to:

A misdeed has occurred, and one character - -- usually a protagonist - -- is assumed to be the culprit, either because they have a history of being a troublemaker, or simply because they were the first to find the body - -- the second person on the scene of the crime saw them standing next to the victim and naturally assumed that they did it. The problem is that the accused character is innocent. While the character's closest friends and relatives may believe their innocence, everyone else will believe they're guilty. The "evidence" can sometimes be wafer thin and lacking coherence, such as a motive. Arguments in their defense tend to be ignored - the other characters will still believe they did it. The only way everyone will be convinced that the accused isn't guilty is with the strongest evidence of all: exposing the true culprit.

And yet this is ''not'' a [[KangarooCourt Kangaroo Court]] - -- the court simply follows its own inscrutable train of thought, and ''will'' clear your name once it becomes apparent that the prosecution was trying [[FrameUp to frame you]]. It's just that the standards for proof are apparently - -- and hopefully - -- very different from [[RealLife real life]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* ''Franchise/AceAttorney'': This is not an actual part of the law system in the games, but due to the ways the trials are set up, it is rare to be able to decisively prove your defendant innocent without proving how the crime happened at every step and who actually did it. In the earlier games, for the few exceptions where you do conclusively prove your defendant's innocence early, the game requires you to continue until you've caught the real killer, but some later games will instead give you alternate game over screens to the tune of "your client was declared innocent, but the killer got away", or even in one example work it into the plot and save catching the actual criminal for a later case.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* The overarching plot of ''Literature/MairelonTheMagician'' is that Mairelon has been framed for stealing the Saltash Set and needs to find the real thief to clear his name. As revealed near the end of the story, he actually has an alibi for the night of the theft, but he feels that if he can't find the real thief Society will continue to assume it was him, whatever the Law might say.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for [[TheInspectorIsComing Fairy Inspection Day]], which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for at the risk of losing Cosmo and Wanda (bonus points for [[DidntThinkThisThrough failing a lie detector test]]), it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].

to:

* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for [[TheInspectorIsComing Fairy Inspection Day]], which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[CoincidentalBroadcast sheer]] [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for at the risk of losing Cosmo and Wanda (bonus points for [[DidntThinkThisThrough failing a lie detector test]]), it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for [[TheInspectorIsComing Fairy Inspection Day]], which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for at the risk of losing Cosmo and Wanda, it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].

to:

* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for [[TheInspectorIsComing Fairy Inspection Day]], which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for at the risk of losing Cosmo and Wanda, Wanda (bonus points for [[DidntThinkThisThrough failing a lie detector test]]), it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for [[TheInspectorIsComing Fairy Inspection Day]], which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for, it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].

to:

* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for [[TheInspectorIsComing Fairy Inspection Day]], which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for, for at the risk of losing Cosmo and Wanda, it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for Fairy Inspection Day, which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for, it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].

to:

* ''WesternAnimation/TheFairlyOddparents'' episode "Inspection Detection" has Timmy prepping for [[TheInspectorIsComing Fairy Inspection Day, Day]], which comes at the wrong time when some of the items he wished for, by [[ContrivedCoincidence sheer coincidence]], include items that were shoplifted from a local department store, and because he cannot explain where he got the stuff he wished for, it leads his parents [[MistakenForThief to suspect he is the shoplifter]]. Timmy knows he is innocent and suspects TheBully, Francis, is the real shoplifter when put in a PoliceLineup with him and Chester and AJ and finds a stolen walkie-talkie in his pants, but [[AdultsAreUseless his parents]] and the [[PoliceAreUseless police]] are too stupid to believe him, leaving him no choice but to go on the run in order to prove his innocence. Near the end of the episode, Timmy successfully proves that Francis is the perpetrator, thanks to Cosmo shapeshifting into a security camera and [[CaughtOnTape catching Francis on video stealing a tub of lard]].

Top