Analyze the given statements and decide which of the conclusions logically follow, assuming the statements to be true even if they contradict general facts.

Statements:
No Apple is an Orange.
Some Fruits are Oranges.
All Berries are Fruits.
Conclusions:
I. Some Fruits are not Apples.
II. Some Fruits are Apples.

The correct option is Only I follows.

Let us analyze the given statements step-by-step using logical reasoning and Venn diagrams concept:
1. No Apple is an Orange: The set of Apples and the set of Oranges have no intersection at all (completely disjoint).
2. Some Fruits are Oranges: There is a common region (intersection) between the set of Fruits and the set of Oranges. This means those particular Fruits which are inside the Oranges set can never be Apples (since no Apple is an Orange).
3. All Berries are Fruits: The set of Berries is completely inside the set of Fruits.

Now let us evaluate each conclusion based on these statements:

Conclusion I: Some Fruits are not Apples.
From Statement 2, we know that "Some Fruits are Oranges". From Statement 1, we know that "No Apple is an Orange" (or "No Orange is an Apple"). Therefore, those Fruits which are Oranges can definitely never be Apples. Thus, Conclusion I logically and definitely follows.

Conclusion II: Some Fruits are Apples.
The statements give no information asserting that Fruits must overlap with Apples. While it might be possible in some hypothetical Venn diagram configurations, it is not a definite certainty derived strictly from the statements. Hence, Conclusion II does not logically follow.

Therefore, only Conclusion I follows.