Three separate statements are recorded: B ≥ C, C > D, and D = E.
Conclusions: I. B > E
II. C > E
Which conclusion follows?

The three statements share the intermediates C and D, so they join into one run: B ≥ C > D = E. For II, C > D and D = E give C > E, the equality passing the strict relation across unchanged. For I, B ≥ C and C > E compose to B > E, since a non-strict link followed by a strict one gives a strict result. Both follow. 'Only II follows' is the trap for a solver who believes the opening non-strict link B ≥ C caps the whole chain at ≥ and so blocks the strict B > E; in fact strictness is lost only when every link in the run is non-strict. 'Neither' comes from treating D = E as a dead end, which would strand both conclusions.