Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney

Question

Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant, manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions, was injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention.

(A) Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant, manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions, was injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention.

(B) Despite the fact that the lead attorney and his assistant entered the courthouse with police escort, they were manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded the attorney with questions and injured him so seriously that he needed immediate medical attention.
 
(C) Despite their entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant were manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions, injuring him so seriously as to warrant immediate medical attention.

(D) Despite the fact that they entered the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant, having been manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters, was bombarded with questions and injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention.
 
(E) Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant were manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions and injured him so seriously as to warrant immediate medical attention.

x2suresh · Answer

A,C,E -- out ( him- ambiguous --> it can refer to Attorney or his assistant)
D --> was is incorrect. (Sub-Verb problem)
B is the best

vannu · Answer

B for me.

Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant, manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions, was injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention.

(A) Despite  entering the courthouse with police escort , the lead attorney and his assistant, manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded  him  with questions, was injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention.

(B) Despite  the fact that the lead attorney and his assistant  entered the courthouse with police escort,  they were  manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded  the attorney  with questions and injured him so seriously that he needed immediate medical attention. -  The best answer because there is no confusion in the pronouns.
 
(C) Despite their entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant were manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions, injuring him so seriously as to warrant immediate medical attention.

(D) Despite the fact that they entered the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant, having been manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters, was bombarded with questions and injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention.

(E) Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant were manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions and injured him so seriously as to warrant immediate medical attention.

vesam · Answer

A, C, E --> ambiguous him - out
D - Who injured seriously is ambiguous - out

IMO B

Aarial · Answer

I have a question. It would be great if an expert could give me an answer. This sentence uses 'that' after reporters. One of the OG explanations mentioned that one can not use 'that' to refer to people. Isn't this sentence incorrect then? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks !

sayantanc2k · Answer

Absolutely, the relative pronoun "that" cannot modify people. Nonetheless in this case one may as well consider that the relative pronoun "that" refers to the "crowd" rather than the "reporters".

Abhishek009 · Answer

A. Who is him referring to the lead attorney or the assistant.

B. They referring to both the lead attorney and his assistant and the lead attorney clears the ambiguity
 
C. Who is him referring to the lead attorney or the assistant.

D. Having been is definitely not required.

E. Who is him referring to the lead attorney or the assistant.

Options A, C and E have the same pronoun error , use of him , which leads to an ambiguity the antecedent can be referring to the lead attorney or the assistant, hence IMHO (B)

Skyline393 · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The original sentence contains several errors. First, the subject of the original sentence is "the lead attorney and his assistant", yet the corresponding verb is "was injured". The subject and the verb do not agree in number – one is plural, the other singular. Second, "despite" is not properly used with a verb phrase. Instead, it requires a noun or noun phrase. For example, "Despite eating the apple..." is not correct, but "Despite his eating the apple..." is correct. Third, "injured seriously enough to warrant medical attention" is incorrect in this context. "X enough to Y" is used when the emphasis is on Y. "So X as to Y" is used when the emphasis is on X. For example, "I am tall enough to touch the ceiling" implies that the focus is on the fact of being able to touch the ceiling. "So tall as to be able to touch the ceiling" implies that the focus is on the fact of being tall. Finally, the use of the pronoun "him" is ambiguous, since it could refer to either the attorney or his assistant. 
(A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence. 
 (B) CORRECT.  It eliminates the subject-verb agreement issue and ensures that "despite" is followed by a noun ("the fact"). Additionally, the choice uses the correct expression "so X as to Y" to emphasize the seriousness of the injury. Finally, the sentence is reworked to avoid pronoun ambiguity. 
(C) The pronoun "him" has an ambiguous antecedent, since it could refer either to the attorney or his assistant. 
(D) The singular verb "was" does not agree with the plural subject "the lead attorney and his assistant." Additionally the phrase "injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention" incorrectly emphasizes the medical attention over the seriousness of the injury, 
(E) The pronoun "him" has an ambiguous antecedent, since it could refer either to the attorney or his assistant. Additionally, the word "despite" is incorrectly followed by the verb "entering" instead of a noun or noun phrase.

pikolo2510 · Answer

AjiteshArun   generis   GMATNinja   daagh

If a pronoun is already used in a sentence, then any other form of usage for that pronoun should refer to the same noun right?

For example, In the above question, lets take option E, we have
- the attorney and his assistant

--> The pronoun "his" refers to the attorney
--> Now the pronoun "him" used in second half of the sentence should also refer to "the attorney"

Is my understanding right? Can you help me identify where I am going wrong?

AjiteshArun · Answer

We do want to be careful in situations where an option uses the same (or similar, like they and their ) pronouns to refer to different elements in the sentence. We should be ready to remove such options for ambiguity. However, just the fact that we'd like to maintain consistency in pronoun reference doesn't mean that we can apply the "reverse" and expect pronouns to be consistent in what they refer to. The managers held a meeting with the engineers. They said that they were very happy with their work. There is a lot of ambiguity around the they and their in the second sentence. However, even if we assume that the they refers to managers , we cannot assume that the their refers (again) to managers. The managers could be congratulating the engineers, or they could be gloating about how well they themselves have done. Knowing managers, the second is more likely.

The point is that even if the they is clear for some reason, there is no guarantee that the their will also be clear. We'll have to work to make the sentence clearer. For example: They said that they were very happy with their own work. ← This sentence is a little better, though we are still not really sure what the they refers to. There are very few absolutes when it comes to pronouns, and it is not always "wrong" to use something like an it multiple times to refer to different parts of the same sentence. This is something we have to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

eswarchethu135 · Answer

Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney and his assistant, manhandled by an aggressive crowd of reporters that bombarded him with questions, was injured seriously enough to warrant immediate medical attention.

Here "him" can refer to the attorney or his assistant. Pronoun ambiguity.  ELIMINATED 
 
Only best choice, where there is no pronoun ambiguity.  CORRECT 
 
Here "him" can refer to the attorney or his assistant. Pronoun ambiguity.  ELIMINATED 
 
Lot of errors in this statement. "Having been" is awkward to use here.  ELIMINATED 
 
Here "him" can refer to the attorney or his assistant. Pronoun ambiguity.  ELIMINATED

OPTION:  B

chrtpmdr · Answer

Can someone clarify why B) uses "so that ..." while E) uses the idiom "so x as to y" (?) 
Isn't "so x as to y" the prefered idiom?

I know that E) has other fallacies, but still, I did not know that "so that ..." is a correct idiom.

Vivek1707 · Answer

Second, "despite" is not properly used with a verb phrase. Instead, it requires a noun or noun phrase. For example, "Despite eating the apple..." is not correct, but "Despite his eating the apple..." is correct.

Hi could someone explain this to me , why is "despite eating the apple is a verb phrase and "Despite his eating the apple" is a noun phrase , any further examples would really help

AjiteshArun · Answer

Hi  Vivek1707 ,

That part of the explanation is wrong.

This is incorrect.  Despite  can absolutely be (directly) followed by an - ing .

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

Despite entering the courthouse with police escort, the lead attorney

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards