I was on the brink of voting for Double A at first, because I felt his arguments under pressure were a little weak, though having been put through it firsthand in early rounds, I sympathised a little. However, all the scummy signs were there...

Sasaki, on the other hand, had been on my case for the entire game and had essentially ignored every attempt I made to defend myself; I'm sorry, but when I know I'm innocent and someone is that hellbent on me being the scum, I'm going to suspect something. As I said, I only told the truth the entire way through the game... it seemed it was only the reasoning of two dead players that absolved me of any culpability.

Obviously, you have already seen my post voting for Sasaki, but there was a second post saved in my inbox that was partly written in the event I voted Double A instead. It basically said that I felt Sasaki was a deserved winner for the way in which he had played the game, and that my vote for AA would mean that no matter the outcome, Sasaki would've won. If he'd been town, fantastic, if not, well he was a good mafia anyway...

...but I scrapped this at the last second. I was trying to finish my Double A argument, watch the rest of United-Milan (my father left Old Trafford ten mins early to beat traffic and text me saying 'watch utd, txt bk scores'), finish my prawn jalfrezi before it went completely cold (it was already luke-warm -_-') and had Beskar repeatedly sending game invites for R.U.S.E over Steam.

Beskar had gotten impatient, my dad was phoning from the car because I wasn't texting back... I grew annoyed and had grown tired of the stress of the game itself, so I simply copy-pasted the Sasaki vote (which I'd completed already) and posted it.

So yes, it was literally that close. I was about a paragraph away from voting Double A, but being pestered by family and friends led me to ditch the argument and go for the one already written. Sasaki had convinced me at the end that he wasn't the scum; I simply wasn't able to follow through with it.