[parmnion]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

If one actually analyses exactly what transpired, they will see:

1. That the wine was merely in the process of being dispensed into various cups with NO ONE actually lifting any cup to their lips and attempting to drink.

It is impossible therefore at this stage, to state with certainty just what the HM's who were dispensing the wine INTENDED to do next:

a) Where they greedily and selfishly filling their own individual cups with no care or regard for other HM's not yet present?

b) Where they genuinely pouring the wine into cups with the intention of then re-pouring from overfull cups into less full cups to ensure that the wine was shared as equally as possible, and that each HM received a cup?

The only evidence we can consider is the TESTIMONY of the HM's themselves as to what their intentions were;

c) LAURA: "I actually was going to share it out". "I took it to share it out with everybody".

With no other evidence to guide us, and presumption and speculation not admissable, then we have to accept b) above, that the intention WAS to share the wine equally AND ensure that ALL the HM's received their share*.

2. Natalie, was BRUSQUE in the manner in which she joined the other HM's at the table; leaning in, arms extended and pointing.

3. Natalie BARKED commands in an aggressive and rude tone.

4. Natalie was ARROGANT and CONFRONTATIONAL when she snatched the wine bottle from Ryan's grasp.

5. Natalie was CONFRONTATIONAL, CONTEMPTUOUS, and ARROGANT when she responded to the HM's LEGITIMATE protestations by TURNING HER BACK and WALKING AWAY, and saying: "Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."

6. Natalie had only mere personal PRESUMPTION and NO EVIDENCE at all, to justify stating that: "I realised that we weren't going to get any".

7. Natalie was AGGRESSIVE and VIOLENT in both word and action when she knocked Laura's arm away and told her to "Feck off".

My verdict is that BB's warning to Natalie was justified.

*It should be noted here, that the abhorrent game-playing manipulator Sam - who was later to defend Natalie and sympathise with her to the other HM's - was THE ONLY HM to actually selfishly scurry away from the table clutching a glass full of wine which HE HAD JUST POURED HIMSELF, whilst contemptuously LAUGHING to boot.

Rat Sam's 'defence' of Natalie was nothing more than a preemptive tactic to divert blame for the fracas away from Natalie so that he could later unfairly refocus it on Ryan.

Whatever DID previously occur between Sam and Ryan, it has become irrefutably obvious whilst watching this show, that BOTH Ryan and Sam, have 'buried the hatchet' - Ryan has genuinely buried it, and Sam has buried it in Ryan's back.

watched again and this is spot on.

[Lostie!]

Yes. It's physical contact and that should always result in at least a warning not to do it again.

But Evelyn's overdramatic "SHE JUST ****ING HIT HER!!!!!!" was unnecessary.

[Dollface]

Originally Posted by Lostie!

Yes. It's physical contact and that should always result in at least a warning not to do it again.

But Evelyn's overdramatic "SHE JUST ****ING HIT HER!!!!!!" was unnecessary.

once again I find myself 100% agreeing with you

[MrWong]

It annoys me that Nat didn't get angry with Sam and Ryan for being greedy bastards.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by parmnion

watched again and this is spot on.

Thank you Parmion.

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Thank you Parmion.

nice spot with sam pouring his then bolting.

[BB-J*I*N*X]

yes, she tried to hit Laura