I don't think that is strictly true. I manage to have nights out without any hassle. Then again Im quite selective about where I go.

Aye, don't get much trouble int conny club Or at Darby and Joan nights.

There's no "blood tub" at Fingerpost anymore. I was in that night when Dicko knocked one of the committee men over a table with one punch and killed him.

We were on stage at the time rehearsing. I knew Alex and Betty quite well as he was good friends with my brother in law who sadly died of throat cancer a few years ago.

I doubt a police officer would make that claim on an internet discussion board. They would not acknowledge any knowledge of an incident or they would state they could not comment on the incident.

If a person claims to know 'as a fact' something on here then they shouldn't be surprised if they are asked to substantiate their claim, particularly when there is a police investigation ongoing. Most people state something as 'a fact' when what they really mean is that somebody they know/trust who may or may not have seen what happened told them about it. But that doesn't make it fact.

Yes but if they do know something as fact, it doesn't mean they can give proof of that as if they are in a position where they have seen the tape and shouldn't or have seen the tape and should not be telling people that they have, then they are hardly going to say, hey I'm joe bloggs, my job is and this is how I saw it.

Just the same as on the DA thread, when I said that the house hunting had to be rumour. I knew the reasons why as fact, but does not mean I'll tell everyone else why.

DA has just bopped the rumours on the head today anyways.

Or someone on here might even know sia and rang him to see if he's ok and got told the story.

That would be the story from Sia's POV?

So you're suggesting Sia kicked off? You're going to look a bit daft when the truth comes out if you are.

Yes and I totally beleive it.

When did I even get close to suggesting that?

That's right. I didn't!

I said Sia's POV. 'POV' means point of view.

I didn't say you did, I was asking if you was hence the question mark.

Your question was rhetorical because you began it 'So you are ...' You already thought you knew my answer and your tone was just a tad derisory.

No police officer worth their salt will take one person's word against another. They will seek corroborating evidence. If the three men in question are finally charged with assault then that is because the police will have established enough corroborating evidence to suggest there is a case to be answered. However, just because Sia sees things one way (his way) - something that is totally natural - does not actually mean that an assault was committed. Therefore, when Sia tells his story it will be from his point of view. Things could look different from somebody else's point of view.

Seriously, let it go.