The Gaffe machine has struck again. Di-ve reports an assault on a security officer by a Moroccan who was being deported to Casablanca. The description of the violent act leaves much to be desired… in particular the owlish question that is left hanging is the following: To wit, who hit who with the handcuff?”As the plane distanced itself from Malta, one of the Moroccans, who were all handcuffed, started causing trouble to the security officers and at one point assaulted one of them, injuring him in his face after being hit by the handcuff.”
1. The phrase “to distance oneself” does not fit. It is normally used “to declare onself unconnected or unsympathetic to something.” Like I would distance myself from both political parties.
2. “Who were all handcuffed” would be better phrased as “all of whom were handcuffed”or even more simply “one of the handcuffed Moroccans.
3. “causing trouble to the police officers”. Ermmmm.
4. “at one point assulted one of them injuring him in his face after being hit by the handcuff”. So a Moroccan assaulted him and a Moroccan injured him (presumably an officer) in the face. The sentence continues and the subject (the by now notorious Moroccan) has not changed so we must presume it was this Moroccan who was hit by the handcuff. A nasty handcuff indeed.
Self-defence? If I were di-ve I would plead ignorance of the grammar.
…The Waters? What waters? We’re in the desert.
I was misinformed.