[vorpal83]

Spoiler for more stuff past W_H:

I am who I am; Frederica Bernkastel.
Furude Rika and Frederica are different. Shame on you if you thought so.

Your argument is that Beatrice can say that Battler' is not Battler Ushiromiya if he is both Battler and not Battler. Therefore Battler is and is not Ayumu's son. Even if it is stated in red that he is not Ayumu's son.

Now I'll prove that Red truth is infinitely true, and therefore cannot be contradicted. If it wasn't so, Bernkastel would have told him already. I come to this conclusion form the following.

I'm gonna call Ayumu's Battler BATTLER for now.

Beatrice says Battler' is not BATTLER, Ayumu's son.
Battler is Kinzo's grandson.(red)
But Battler' CANNOT say that he is Ayumu's son in red!


Your argument that Battler' is and is not Battler only holds if Battler can say that he is Ayumu's son.
IF Battler' is Battler and is not Battler, both should be sayable in red, regardless of whether the person saying it is a witch or not.

So now, If ANGE says that Battler' is her brother, Battler's sister is Ange, and ANGE is Ange. it cannot be contradicted by saying that Battler' is not Battler. In fact, ANGE should be Battler''' 's sister from game 3. If she can still say that Battler' is her brother regardless, then we have to conclude that both Battler' = Battler''' = Battler, despite all that happens.

Therefore Battler' is Battler and it cannot be said that he is and is not Battler. So what must be eliminated is the false fact that Battler' is Ayumu's son.

Some kind of different case seems to hold for Bernkastel. I'm not sure how it works. Frederika Bernkastel is not Rika. Frederika Bernkastel may not be Bernkastel. Bernkastel may be Rika or maybe not... Of course, Frederika could be lying, but we have no red truth there to play with.