I cannot for the life of me figure this out. I ended up getting
H--> fingerprints OR footprints
so ~fingerprints AND ~footprints --> ~H
S-->~fingerprints OR ~footprints
so fingerprints AND footprints -->S
But I couldn't figure out how fingerprints and no footprints would play into all this.
I also treated this as a SA Q.
Well, we ruled out Herbert, then concluded that the killer must have been Samantha. This is textbook False Choice. To prove our case, we want to say that the killer had to be either Herbert or Sam.
(C) says just that, and since we know it's not Herbert, that proves it must be Samantha.
Clear?
Crystal.....i was making that significantly harder than it had to be.
RSS
Feedly