once upon a time there happened to be a desert oasis with a population of three- Mr A, Mr B and Mr C no one really knows why but they were all enemies and then one day Mr A and Mr B decided-quite separately that Mr C should die - he shouldn’t be allowed to stay alive and so they executed their plans dastardly Mr A poisoned C’s water with evil glee knowing that when C drank eagerly he would drop dead quite suddenly but unknown to him Mr B poked little holes in C’s canteen knowing that without water to drink C would soon be on life’s brink so all the poison dripped away with all the water , one would say that with the double treachery Mr C would be a dead man anyday and so it did happen that with no water in his canteen and none to refill Mr C did drop dead of thirst But that did beg the question- who did him in? A and B play the blame game A says C never drank any of the poison So how is he to blame? but as B points out that his puncturing the canteen is irrelevant for C would have drunk the water and still met the same end so it really is a contest of means versus the end the end is the same and the question remains- whodunnit?
My attempt at poetically rendering the Smullyan's Paradox, which goes thus:
"At a desert oasis, A and B decide independently to ****** C. A poisons C’s canteen, and later B punches a hole in it. C dies of thirst. Who killed him? A argues that C never drank the poison. B claims that he only deprived C of poisoned water. They're both right, but still C is dead. Who's guilty?"