What we know for sure is that on Wednesday night, a private citizen was involved in a very minor traffic accident and that after some time, shots were fired at, and hit, the car in which said private citizen was driving away from the incident.

We don't know exactly where the shooting took place, and the word is that witnesses have been told to shut up. Why, is this a matter of State Security? What does the Minister responsible for police and security have to say about that? No, wait...

The shots were fired by a man who was responsible for the car that had been hit and had its side-mirror broken. This man is a Police Constable who was performing duties as "security driver" for Minister Manuel Mallia, whose official car this was.

Minutes after the incident "in order not to appear to be hiding anything" (quote the Prime Minister) the Department of Information had issued a statement saying that warning shots had been fired into the air and that there had been some sort of chase involved. The resemblance of this work of fiction to anything that had actually happened is coincidental, to coin a phrase.

The day after the incident, Dr Mallia addressed a press conference "correcting" (again quote the Prime Minister) the earlier impression given. He also said - while addressing the conference - that this was not a ministry but a police matter. He was not asked, from what I can make out, why he was addressing a press conference if it was not a ministry matter but a police matter.

Dr Mallia was not asked if, and if so why, he had demanded a list of police firearm discharge incidents over the last 15 years. If he had been asked, perhaps he would have been forthcoming. I will be forgiven for doubting it.

Dr Mallia also told the press that the policeman involved was a good cop, ignoring the known fact that he had been convicted previously for failing to follow orders. Maybe Dr Mallia wasn't aware that his trusted man was, well, perhaps not such a paragon, and he wasn't asked.

He did not explain in any detail why his "security driver" was armed. He did try a bit of smoke and mirrors by pointing out that armed protection had been given to others in the past, prompting a denial by his predecessors in office.

In the meantime, the private citizen was arrested (some time on Wednesday night) and released some time on Friday, late morning. Dr Mallia does not appear to have been moved to explain why someone at whom shots had been fired had been kept under arrest, with all those shades of days gone by coming back to haunt us.

The Prime Minister, on his part, eventually and after sober examination of the runes (i.e. public opinion) has let it been known that he is "angry and disgusted", but his general tone was clear that the cop is the target of his ire. I almost feel some slight sympathy for him, being hung out to dry like this. Very slight, of course.

Dr Muscat was certainly not angry and disgusted at his minister, in whose direction a veritable avalanche of questions continue rolling.

The questions are in connection with his fitness for office and his involvement in the SOP (standard operating procedure) when certain types of cops are involved, that of trying to shift the blame in any direction but theirs, to mention but two aspects.

The Prime Minister has also let it be known that he will not be taking action against Dr Mallia (we weren't expecting any, frankly, we live in the real world that is Malta in 20(19)1(8)4) until "the inquiry" is concluded.

Pray tell, PM, since when do magisterial inquiries determine POLITICAL responsibility? The magistrate will be looking at the incidents for what they are, a minor traffic accident that developed into circumstances that might, according to lawyers who know this stuff, necessitate an attempted murder charge.