"I have several pieces of fruit, one of which is a banana grown in Ecuador."
It may well be that the second piece of fruit was also grown in Ecuador, just like the first one was, but I simply don't know, so I don't make any statement about its country of origin, nor do I ask you to make any assumption or draw any inference about its country of origin. Therefore, this statement isn't deliberately misleading, because I don't know the country of origin of the second piece of fruit, as it doesn't have a country of origin sticker on it. My statement is totally true and complete to the best of my knowledge, and does not deliberately withold any information.
The way I see it, the fact that I stated that the country of origin of the first piece of fruit is Ecuador does not imply or require that the second piece of fruit is or is not from Ecuador also.
The way I read and analyze the sentence is that it is conveying complete information about just one piece of fruit, and no information at all about the other piece of fruit. I don't think that it's correct to assume any facts or restrictions not explicitly stated.
Likewise, in the original problem, "I have two children, one of whom is a boy born on Tuesday. What is the probability that the other is also a boy?"
The parent may not know what day of the week their other child was born on, for many reasons, such as separation due to war from the pregnant mother before the child was born. The father may have escaped from the conflict with one child, and only know from witnesses that his pregnant wife was captured and gave birth to a child while in a prison camp. The child born in prison may have been born on a Tuesday too, but the father doesn't know, and doesn't say. So his statement is totally true and complete to the best of his knowledge. But we can't assume that his statement says anything at all about the day of birth of the second child, nor use it in our calculation of the probability that he or she is a boy.