Grand jury problem (LOGIC problem solving)

[einasteph29]

Hello guys..

I just want to know the answer here.
We tried to give our best just to understand this but we failed to do so..

I hope someone will help..^^

This is the problem:

Paul, Genelle, and Homer testified before a grand jury. Paul testified that Fisher did not embezzle funds only if both Laskey defrauded clients and Marshall did not receive stolen property. Genelle testified that Fisher embezzled funds and either Laskey did not defraud clients or Marshall received stolen property. Homer testified that Laskey did not defraud clients if and only if both Marshall received stolen property and Fisher embezzled funds. Based on this evidence the grand jury indicted two people. Who are they? After the indictment was handed down, it was discovered that Genelle lied. How does this affect the evidence?

Our teacher in Logic told us that we have to translate sentences in symbols then we have to make a truth-table to justify Paul's, Genelle's and Homer's statements.

Thanks in advance ^_^

 

[CompuChip]

Our teacher in Logic told us that we have to translate sentences in symbols then we have to make a truth-table to justify Paul's, Genelle's and Homer's statements.

Well, that sounds like a sensible piece of advise.
So you could start by defining
F: Fisher embezzled funds
L: Laskey defrauded clients
M: Marshall received stolen property

Then can you express the information in the story as logical statements?
For example, "If Laskey defrauded clients, then Marshall received stolen property but Fisher did not embezzle funds" would become
L \implies (M \wedge \neg F)

 

[einasteph29]

@ CompuChip:

thank u very much! ^^

 

[moonman239]

This is homework, it sounds like. The rules say you should have posted this in the homework forum.