S1-S10 are simply statements. No claim is made here that they are true, or even consistent (which they clearly are not).

C11-C14 introduce a context identified as SHS in which it is asserted that there is a person whose surname is Holmes and who is a detective. C15 indicates that the explicit assumptions of the context LAO (“Law and Order”) are also assumptions of SHS.

C21-C24 introduce a context identified as USL in which it is asserted that there is a person whose surname is Holmes and who is a justice. C25 indicates that the explicit assumptions of the context LAO (“Law and Order”) are also assumptions of USL.

Finally, C31-C37 introduce the explicit assumptions and assertions of context LAO.

Thus, we have the context of “Sherlock Holmes stories” assuming the (explicit assumptions of the) “Law and order” context, from which we may deduce that Holmes solves crimes. But we cannot deduce that Holmes is poorly paid because there is an implicit assumption of the “Law and order” context that it describes non-fictional people.