> 'Facts' don't have an independent objective existence,
  > unfortunately. 'Things that occurred' ( the literal
  > etymology of 'facts' ) always require some form
  > of interpretation in order to bring them into our
  > domain of comprehension, and that's where the
  > fuzziness enters.

That etymology is exactly how I understand facts, too. But I think many people don't use the term in that way.

For example, "It's 3:56 pm in the UK" is a fact in my mind.

(It won't be the case in a minute of course.)

The way I see it: facts are like memoized predicates. They are statements of truth within a particular context. Often they need to be re-executed to be kept fresh.