Well,
THIS ARTICLE from the News of the World certainly makes it out to be self-defence:
Quote:
The onlooker added: "It was completely unprovoked. Cheryl was just minding her own business when this attendant let rip at her for no reason.
"She hit Cheryl and Cheryl hit her back. Before you knew it, people were pulling them apart.
|
There's our trusted friend 'an onlooker' again! Who ARE they?
Smacks a bit of 'damage limitation' to me . . . .
However,
THIS ARTICLE from the People Online goes into quite a lot of detail about the bust-up, and also names a couple of the witnesses.
Which one do you believe (if any!!)?
12-01-2003, 11:03 AM
Hybrid Mode
