<[quote=MrPedantic]I'm sorry, I was unclear. I'll see if I can find a form of words we can agree on. Perhaps:...>


Sometimes, to express an inference:

2. If MrP was the man you saw in the car at 6am, he can't have been the person who stole my bike at 6.01. >

Yes, I'd call that an epistemic conditional (belief, etc.) and I'd do the same with:

If he'll kill himself, he'll kill us.


<b) 'Will' does not primarily express futurity; it simply means 'is prepared to'. In which case, #3 can only be taken as a modalised type 1. (But I'd suggest that this is more problematical than treating the sentence as an inference that doesn't need to 'obey the rules'.) >


I agree that it the latter does not fit well into the 0-3 schema. But who gives a damn, eh? Better to also consider semantics and pragmatics, and not just syntax, when one is looking for a desired effect.

Often, what appear to be rules are only hints. We need to use native speaker logic to guide us.