[Plebeian] Strange situation Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Lateral Puzzles » Solved Lateral Thinking Puzzles » Solved Puzzles - October 2013 » [Plebeian] Strange situation « Previous Next »

Author Message
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 894
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 10:50 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve said he wasn't, but George said he had to be
(Based on a true story)
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 63
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 10:56 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

He1 - Steve? George? other party?
He2 - Steve? George? other party?
Is Steve H? A? M?
Is George H? A? M?
Did Steve lie? Did George lie?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 897
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 11:40 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

He1 - Steve? George? other party? He1 is Steve
He2 - Steve? George? other party? He2 is also Steve
Is Steve H? A? M?
Is George H? A? M? Yes to both
Did Steve lie? Yope Did George lie? Yope
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 67
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 12:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve wasn't/had to be... somewhere? someone? of certain quality?
Are Steve and George related? Is anyone besides Steve and George involved?
Is Steve's age? profession? relevant?
Is George's age? profession? relevant?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 899
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 2:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve wasn't/had to be... somewhere? no someone? no of certain quality? no - except for a very loose (and possibly misleading) definition of 'Quality'
Are Steve and George related? no Is anyone besides Steve and George involved? There is a third relevant person - HAF (Anne)
Is Steve's age? profession? relevant? no
Is George's age? no profession? relevant? Very
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 76
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 2:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When Steve said he wasn't, did he say it to George? Anne? Someone else?
When George said Steve had to be, did he say it to Steve? Anne? Someone else?
When George said Steve had to be, was he (George) doing his work?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 906
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 3:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When Steve said he wasn't, did he say it to George? He did Anne? And presumably this too, earlier Someone else? Yope
When George said Steve had to be, did he say it to Steve? Anne? Someone else? All of these
When George said Steve had to be, was he (George) doing his work? Indeed - outside of his work context, he certainly wouldn't say the same!
Psydkik (Psydkik)
New member
Username: Psydkik

Post Number: 204
Registered: 9-2013
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 3:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is George in the medical profession?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 907
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 3:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is George in the medical profession? No
A LTPF list would zoom in on this quickly, but I'd rather avoid it - I think this could go pretty quickly anyway
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 85
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 3:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When George said Steve had to be, did he (George) mean obligation? legal rule? The fact that he (George) knew Steve was?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 908
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 4:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When George said Steve had to be, did he (George) mean obligation? legal rule? THIS The fact that he (George) knew Steve was?
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 89
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Friday, October 11, 2013 - 4:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was George a lawyer? A judge?
Did he say that Steve, according to the rule, had to be, while he knew that Steve in fact was not?
Steve wasn't/had to be... responsible for something? guilty? charged?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 909
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Saturday, October 12, 2013 - 2:19 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was George a lawyer? A judge? This
Did he say that Steve, according to the rule, had to be, while he knew that Steve in fact was not? Very much so!
Steve wasn't/had to be... responsible for something? guilty? charged? ...but none of these
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 94
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Saturday, October 12, 2013 - 3:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When Steve said he wasn't and when George said Steve had to be, were they refering to the same "being"?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 910
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Saturday, October 12, 2013 - 3:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When Steve said he wasn't and when George said Steve had to be, were they referring to the same "being"? Yes they were
Psydkik (Psydkik)
New member
Username: Psydkik

Post Number: 219
Registered: 9-2013
Posted on Sunday, October 13, 2013 - 11:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve wasn't/had-to-be:
- involved in a particular event?
- the same person also known as [someone]?
- in a particular place?
- aware of a particular thing?
- telling the truth, or lying?
- a particular ethnicity?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 911
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 10:30 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve wasn't/had-to-be:
- involved in a particular event?
- the same person also known as [someone]?
- in a particular place?
- aware of a particular thing?
- telling the truth, or lying? Not as such, but OTRT. He wasn't lying, but the judge (knowing he wasn't) said that bizarrely, in the eyes of the law he had to be
- a particular ethnicity?
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 102
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 12:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was Steve a witness? Accused in a criminal case? Sued in a civil case?
Did the judge mean that Steve had been legally obliged not to tell the truth?
Did the judge mean that other facts, together with applicable laws, indicated that Steve was lying?
Amol (Amol)
New member
Username: Amol

Post Number: 115
Registered: 7-2001
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 12:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Reminds me of an old story... may be an urban myth.

Is any close relative of Steve relevant ?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 918
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 2:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was Steve a witness? Accused in a criminal case? Sued in a civil case? No to all
Did the judge mean that Steve had been legally obliged not to tell the truth? No - Steve was clearly truthful throughout
Did the judge mean that other facts, together with applicable laws, indicated that Steve was lying? OTRT - though Steve wasn't lying, the law took an opposing view

Reminds me of an old story... may be an urban myth. This is a true story - sometimes stranger than fiction!

Is any close relative of Steve relevant ? Only Anne - Steve's wife
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 919
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 3:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

To clarify a point from Redwine's last post - there may be some criminal case eventually connected to this scenario, but Steve has not been accused of criminal activity here
Psydkik (Psydkik)
New member
Username: Psydkik

Post Number: 228
Registered: 9-2013
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 3:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So I can now reword your original as the following?

"Steve said (correctly) that he wasn't lying, but George the Judge said that according to law, he had to be lying, even though George also knew Steve was not lying. Steve's wife Anne was present and relevant in some way."

Did this happen in court?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 921
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Monday, October 14, 2013 - 4:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

"Steve said (correctly) that he wasn't lying, but George the Judge said that according to law, he had to be lying, even though George also knew Steve was not lying. Steve's wife Anne was present and relevant in some way." If I said No It'd be more misleading - so I'll say Yope - but the judge never suspected or said that George was lying in what he said, merely that the law (stupidly) took an opposing view

Oh - and yes, in court
Psydkik (Psydkik)
New member
Username: Psydkik

Post Number: 235
Registered: 9-2013
Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 11:54 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Ok, I'm splitting it in bits to try to work out which bit I've got wrong

Steve said (correctly) that he wasn't lying?

George the Judge said that, according to law, Steve was lying?

George agreed that under any other definition, Steve was not lying?

Steve's wife Anne was present and relevant in some way?
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 118
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 1:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Does the law express statement about facts that is obviously false (like: "All cars have three wheels")?
Did Steve, saying he hadn't been lying, contradict the law?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 929
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 2:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve said (correctly) that he wasn't lying? Yope - it's more accurate to say that Steve made an assertion which was clearly true. He hadn't actually been accused of lying

George the Judge said that, according to law, Steve was lying? Again yope - Judge George said that due to constraint of the law he was unable to find that Steve was true with his assertion

George agreed that under any other definition, Steve was not lying? This is certainly true. George and any reasonable person would agree that Steve was telling the truth

Steve's wife Anne was present and relevant in some way? Yes she was

Does the law express statement about facts that is obviously false (like: "All cars have three wheels")? Not quite - the law doesn't specifically state something that is false - it is more that it doesn't allow wriggle-room for the judge in this case to make a common-sense judgement

Did Steve, saying he hadn't been lying, contradict the law? So this would be no, for reasons above - Steve hadn't said he wasn't lying, he merely made an assertion, and the law didn't allow this assertion to be accepted

(Trying to tread a fine line here between being so obscure as to frustrate players, and saying too much to give the game away)
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 126
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 2:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was Steve drunk when he made his assertion? Was there any other relevant evidence presented to Judge George?
Did Judge George mean rather than Steve's assertion could not have been legally binding, than imply Steve had been lying?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 930
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 3:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was Steve drunk when he made his assertion? Nope, he was sober and otherwise fine Was there any other relevant evidence presented to Judge George? None was needed...
Did Judge George mean rather than Steve's assertion could not have been legally binding, than imply Steve had been lying? If you mean what I think you mean - yes. As I said, the judge never doubted that Steve was telling the truth, but the law wouldn't allow him to legally accept Steve's assertion. The judge himself was quite baffled to find himself in this position
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 131
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - 7:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Did Steve's assertion concern Anne? If yes, was there a divorce? Recognizing a baby?
Does the puzzle take place in modern times?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 935
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 10:00 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Did Steve's assertion concern Anne? It's not something specifically about Anne, but there are implications for her whichever decision is reached by the judge
If yes, was there a divorce? No divorce... Recognizing a baby? No children involved AFAIK
Does the puzzle take place in modern times? Very much so - it's an unusual news item I saw a few days ago! Sufficient research could unearth the story - but the LTPF crowd will get there soon!
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 937
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 10:31 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Small Blooper - There are, in fact, two children - though their parentage is in no doubt. And the decision reached by the Judge has some impact on her because of the children
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 154
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 12:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

If the assertion had been made by Anne, would Judge George have been in the same situation? Could Anne have made similar assertion at all?
Was the assertion made too late to have legal effects?
Does the assertion concern custody upon the children? Their health? Education? Holidays?
Was there a conflict between Steve and Anne?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 942
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 12:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

If the assertion had been made by Anne, would Judge George have been in the same situation? He would - the legal position would be the same. But it would have been a much less unusual debate if Steve had not been there to make the statement. But he was

Could Anne have made similar assertion at all? She could though, yes, if she chose. As could others

Was the assertion made too late to have legal effects? YES! - this arises because a certain judgement was made 3 years previously concerning this case, which could not be overturned

Does the assertion concern custody upon the children? Their health? Education? Holidays? None of these

Was there a conflict between Steve and Anne? Not directly, no - this is no divorce or custody case. Anne isn't contesting Steve's assertion, her financial situation could have changed somewhat with the opposite outcome (but this is no inheritance case either)
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 158
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 1:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was Steve heard in court also in that previous trial 3 years before? Did he, making his assertion, deny or change something he said before?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 943
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 2:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was Steve heard in court also in that previous trial 3 years before? FA - There was no trial - but it was in court - And Steve wasn't present

Did he, making his assertion, deny or change something he said before? No - he never said anything before, the court did, and he was refuting it
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 160
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 3:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Ok, so there was a judgment. 3 years later, Steve wanted to refute it, but time to make assertions like his was limited to 3 years. As Steve made his assertion after this time, judge George could not accept it. Is this correct?

If the above is correct:
Was the first judgment false? Did the first judgment concern Steve's situation? Anne's situation? Was the first judgment done in criminal case?
Could Steve make his assertion earlier?
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 945
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 3:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Ok, so there was a judgment. 3 years later, Steve wanted to refute it, but time to make assertions like his was limited to 3 years. As Steve made his assertion after this time, judge George could not accept it. Is this correct? Spot on! Well done - Though I'll clarify slightly by saying that the "3 years" aspect to this is because the ruling (made several years earlier in fact) was beyond a 3-year limit to be overturned. It's just that this has only just come to court years later.

If the above is correct:
Was the first judgment false? It was incorrect, though at the time it would be deemed a reasonable finding Did the first judgment concern Steve's situation? Very much so! Anne's situation? Indirectly - as his wife this affected her Was the first judgment done in criminal case? No
Could Steve make his assertion earlier? He did in a sense, a few years prior to the court case. Everyone accepted that his assertion was true at the time - they couldn't possibly doubt it...

Actually, I'll adjust this comment - The first judgement directly affected Steve's wife, she was the one who went to court all those years ago...
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 165
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 6:46 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

As there was no criminal case, did Anne sue someone? Did she sue Steve?

Wild guess: Did she, several years ago, wanted to establish Steve's death (I mean the court procedure, in which someone who hasn't appeared for a long time can be announced dead by court)? And after several years Steve appeared in court, declared he was not dead and then Judge George said he had to be dead?
I doubt that's it, as claims concerning establishing one's death are usually not time-limited for obvious reason.
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 951
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, October 17, 2013 - 10:15 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Wild guess: Did she, several years ago, wanted to establish Steve's death (I mean the court procedure, in which someone who hasn't appeared for a long time can be announced dead by court)? And after several years Steve appeared in court, declared he was not dead and then Judge George said he had to be dead?
I doubt that's it, as claims concerning establishing one's death are usually not time-limited for obvious reason. As this is LTPF, Wild guesses are always welcome. And in this instance, especially as its SPOT ON!!!

****** SPOILER *****

Our tale concerns a man who, in 1986, disappeared. leaving his family (and much debt). Some years later, his wife got him legally declared dead, meaning she could claim benefits as a widow. In 2005 the man simply reappeared. It seems a court case had only recently been brought (presumably either by the government wishing to reclaim the benefits paid). Our man stands in the doc stating "I'm alive" (which we believe to be true...) but the judge discovers that under local state (Ohio) law, death rulings cannot be overturned after 3 years so he cannot rule that a man standing in front of him is alive!


I'll dig out the original article, which was in the BBC news recently

Thanks to all who participated, and well done Redwine on the "Wild Guess"!
Redwine (Redwine)
New member
Username: Redwine

Post Number: 182
Registered: 10-2013
Posted on Thursday, October 17, 2013 - 10:20 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Wow. I posted this guess just to cover the bases and I never believed it could be close to the solution... The absurds of law still astonish me, even given that I'm a lawyer...
Great puzzle, that was fun for me.
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 953
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, October 17, 2013 - 10:31 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Only in America (possibly...). And as a lawyer you'll be happy to hear he has right of appeal!

Actually, once the puzzle got started I had a thought - if the man has tried and failed to be declared alive, this could open up other interesting possibilities (like not paying taxes, or killing someone - being legally dead is a pretty good defence!)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24486718
Kalira (Kalira)
New member
Username: Kalira

Post Number: 21
Registered: 9-2013
Posted on Thursday, October 17, 2013 - 1:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Unfortunately, by the time I had questions to ask on this puzzle, my questions led my brain straight to the solution, which I read a few days ago. Didn't want to swoop in when I was pretty sure I had the answer, but Redwine got it shortly thereafter anyway :-) Good puzzle, Plebeian!
Plebeian (Plebeian)
New member
Username: Plebeian

Post Number: 959
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, October 18, 2013 - 4:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Thanks :-)
Always a potential issue I think, creating a puzzle around something that's current news - if someone has seen the report and connects the dots the picture becomes clear quickly.

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: