I don't know if this will pan out, obviously, but I have a hunch about the overall structure for of the Devil's Episodes. Namely that they seem to have increasingly "guilty" clients.
Episode 0 has Carlos Flatt. Carlos is not only innocent of the specific crime he has been accused of, he is innocent of any crime at all. He's a down on his luck, working class guy who is justifiably angry about his situation. Clean as the driven snow. Won't even touch lootboxes.
Episode 1 has David and Serra Ashur. Technically, Morgan is defending herself when she's defending Serra, but the point stands that Serra is the one in the hot seat during the latter half Episode 1. We'll tackle them seperately.
David is innocent of the specific crime he has been accused of, namely suicide, but he is, in fact, guilty of a crime. Creating each of those 300+ AIs was a crime, according to the law as written. But it is not a crime the audience is likely to recognize as either criminal or immoral, although it was extremely reckless.
Serra is, possibly, by technicality, not guilty of being an AI. Possibly. But even if she was, the audience is absolutely going to see that law as unjust in the extreme, because it criminalizes Serra's very existence. So, she wasn't programmed, and therefore is technically innocent, but even then, any legal system that would prosecute her for being an AI will not be seen as legitimate by the audience.
Episode 2 has Sosuke Ikariya, who is innocent of the five murders he is accused of comitting, but is guilty of quite a lot of murder in general. But there are some mitigating factors, to wit: 1, he is murdering nouveau riche assholes. 2, at the end of the Episode, we are assured that he will not be comitting any more murders (at least, none which are not comitted in direct defense of Makoto). Thus, Morgan, Serra, and the player are not indirectly responsible for any future murders he commits.
Episode 3 seems to be setting the next client as a radical activist, the sort the State would probably label a terrorist instead. If it is instead the case that Episode 3's client has been dragged in as a scapegoat, my theory may not hold. But if this is someone like the Witch of the West, or some figure we've yet to hear about, then that person would, unequivocally, be guilty of the crime they've been accused of.
And for the first time, Serra, and the player, would have to confront the idea of defending someone who has comitted a crime, potentially a quite serious crime like arson, and will do so again if let free. In this case, we are left with only mitigating factors, namely the motive: resisting tyrrany, which is a very noble end.
All this would indicate a trend, of increasingly "guilty" clients, from fully innocent, to innocent*, to complicated, to guilty-but-have-you-considered-the-implications, all the way to...
The guiltiest of guilties, of course.
Evangeline Morgan. Who is guilty of all this and more, who will kill if let free, who will revel in evil and bloodshed until the day she is caught and sentenced. (Right?)
The structure is building Serra, and indirectly the audience, up to the point where she can accept defending someone who has done wrong, with no caveats, asterisks, or mitigation.
Until she can defend the Devil herself.
Because that is what a defense attourney does. They are not called, as almost always happens in Ace Attourney, to defend the innocent. Often, they defend the guilty. And, this is the key, they are right to do so. Even monsters need someone to fight for them. That is the adverserial process. Without that, without a defender, the product is unjust. You need someone who can stand up and...
