I was checking the example sentences of 判明する on the Weblio EN-JA dictionary and it seems that, when it means "to turn out (that)", 判明する is written in the dictionary form (it turns out) or in the past tense (it turned out).
I don't understand why is it not 判明している, like when that same verb means "it is known".
I understand why it appears as 判明した, because that could mean "it became known". But I don't understand why 判明する. I'd think that meant "it will become clear (later on)".
I know the English verb is actually in the same tense, but I still don't get it. Can some Japanese verbs in dictionary form express a current situation even if they're not stative?
The sentences I saw were:
It turns out that he was right
The evidence implicates many people in the affair
I'd write the first one as
and the second one as
to mean essentially the same thing.
By the way, in the case of this sentence:
Later on it came to light that the document was a forgery
Shouldn't it be 判明していた? Why not? Because it is still known that those documents are false? Wouldn't 判明していた imply that as well?