Appeal for NCIML Question #13


I believe that “Amanda and Kiss” is a valid answer. The last sentence says that either one or two people are guilty, and the conditions specified by the problem will be met if Amanda and Kiss are guilty and Huggs is innocent.


Here's how it works out:

Amanda:	
	1. [Hugg is guilty (false) --> Kiss is guilty (true)] TRUE
	2. [Hugg is guilty (false) AND Kiss is guilty (true)] FALSE
Hugg:
	1. [Amanda's statements are both true] FALSE
	2. [Amanda is innocent (false) or Kiss is innocent (false)] FALSE
Kiss:
	1. [Amanda is guilty (true) and Hugg is guilty (false)] FALSE
	2. [Hugg is innocent (true) or Amanda is guilty (false)] TRUE

Amanda and Kiss each have one true statement and one false statement, and Hugg has two false statements, and this implies that Amanda and Kiss are guilty and Hugg is innocent. So we see that this is consistent.


It might be argued that the first sentence specifies that there is only one guilty person, so the last sentence doesn't open up the possibility that there are two guilty people. However, the first sentence, "Moe knows that one of three people made a prank phone call," in conjunction with the last sentence, can easily be interpreted to mean that there is at least one guilty person, not necessarily exactly one. Furthermore, in the second sentence, the use of the phrase "guilty party" doesn't rule out the possibility that there was more than one guilty person. 


(appeal was accepted -- TW)