More than a decade on, conspiracy theories surrounding the death of Princess Diana have finally been laid to rest — or have they?

The crash occurred just after midnight on August 31, 1997. A limousine carrying Diana, the divorced Princess of Wales, and her then-paramour Dodi Al Fayed, the son of an Egyptian billionaire, collided with a pillar in the Alma Tunnel in central Paris. Al Fayed and the driver, Henri Paul, were pronounced dead at the scene. Diana was taken by ambulance to Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, where she died a few hours later of cardiac arrest. Only Al Fayed's bodyguard survived the accident.

When Diana was laid to rest on September 6, millions of people lined the streets of London to observe the funeral procession; at least two billion more throughout the world watched on TV. Her brother, the 9th Earl of Spencer, eulogized Diana as "the very essence of compassion, of duty, of style, of beauty." Then he added: "It is a point to remember that of all the ironies about Diana, perhaps the greatest was this: a girl given the name of the ancient goddess of hunting was, in the end, the most hunted person of the modern age."

The paparazzi did it

He was referring, of course, to the paparazzi. From the moment it was revealed in 1980 that Prince Charles had taken an interest in the youthful and attractive Lady Diana Spencer, she had been hounded by the press. She was to become the most famous woman in the world — her every deed, no matter how private or trivial, meticulously photographed, documented, and splashed across the front pages of tabloids everywhere. Right up until the moment of her death, the press were in hot pursuit.

Among the first details to surface about the accident that killed her was the fact that the driver of the limousine had been speeding to evade paparazzi photographers. Unsurprisingly, the blame was immediately laid on them. Critics called them "legalized stalkers," "cowardly murderers," and "assassins." And certainly they bore some of the responsibility for participating in a high-speed chase under very dangerous conditions. However, autopsy results soon revealed that Henri Paul, the driver, had a blood alcohol level at least three times the legal limit. At the end of a two-year police investigation, the paparazzi were largely exonerated and the preponderance of the blame -- in official circles, at least -- shifted to Paul.

The royal family did it

Not everyone was satisfied with the official version of events, however. Within hours of the announcement of her death, rumors of a plot to assassinate Princess Diana had begun to swirl. The main culprits: the royal family, assisted by the British intelligence service.

Why, you ask, would the House of Windsor want Princess Diana dead? Because, the whisper campaign went, she was poised to embarrass the crown by marrying Dodi Al Fayed, a Muslim, who would become stepfather to Princes William and Harry, the heirs to the British throne. It was even speculated that Diana was pregnant with Al Fayed's child.

These paranoid accusations gained more traction than they deserved thanks to their tabloid appeal, not to mention the tireless championing of Mohamed Al Fayed, Dodi's father, who refuses to this day to believe the fatal car crash was a mere accident. It was suggested that an agent of MI6, the British intelligence service, was present at the scene, posing as a member of the press. It was suggested that a mysterious vehicle, a white Fiat Uno, was used by the conspirators to block the limousine's path, forcing it to collide with the pillar. It was suggested that recordings from closed-circuit cameras in the Alma Tunnel which ought have documented the precise sequence of events were either tampered with or summarily disposed of. And so on.

None of these assertions have held up under scrutiny. Diana was not, in fact, pregnant, according to tests run on samples of her blood collected at the scene. Nor were Diana and Dodi planning to get married, according to sources close to the principals. There were no unaccounted-for vehicles, least of all a phantom Fiat, involved in the crash. Of the 10 traffic cameras located in and around the tunnel, none were properly positioned to record the accident itself. And no convincing evidence of government involvement has ever been found.

Al Fayed's enemies did it

Another bogeyman conjured up by those who refuse to accept the official explanation is a group of shadowy figures lumped under the heading "Enemies of Al Fayed." In this version of events, the real target of the assassination plot was Dodi Al Fayed. The motive was revenge against his father. Diana's death was incidental, or a diversion at most.

It stands to reason that a man as wealthy and powerful as Mohamed Al Fayed acquired some equally powerful enemies over the years, but -- who are they? What are their names? Where is the evidence of a cabal? Nothing tangible has ever been put forward. One would think that if there were even a shred of truth to this scenario, Al Fayed himself would have long since demanded an appropriate investigation and punishment of the actual wrongdoers.

Diana herself did it

Without a doubt the oddest conspiracy theory advanced to explain the events of August 31, 1997 revolves around the claim that Princess Diana faked her own death. With the help of Dodi and his family's massive wealth, Diana carefully planned the "accident" as a cover so the couple could slip away, change their identities, and begin a new life far away from public scrutiny. This would mean, of course, that the bodies buried in Princess Diana's and Dodi Al Fayed's graves actually belong to somebody else.

What makes this plausible, supposedly, is the "fact" that there was no postmortem examination of Diana's body — which is patently false. A full postmortem exam was conducted on August 31 by Home Office pathologist Dr. Robert Chapman as soon as Diana's remains were returned to England. If the point of this plot was for Diana to escape into hiding alive and unharmed, something went horribly wrong between the planning and the execution.

Investigators: 'This was a tragic accident'

It's hard to imagine a government inquiry more thorough than the 900-page Operation Paget, supervised by Lord Stevens, the former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service, at a cost of £4 million. Investigators not only checked each element of the predominant conspiracy theory — the one backed by Mohamed Al Fayed — against all available evidence and testimony, but incorporated Fayed's own research in their output. Their findings were unambiguous:

"Our conclusion is that, on all the evidence available at this time, there was no conspiracy to murder any of the occupants of the car. This was a tragic accident."

There are those who remain unconvinced, of course, because — well, that's what being a conspiracy theorist is all about. Foremost is Mohamed Al Fayed, who has dismissed the report as "garbage" and derided Lord Stevens as "a tool for the establishment and the royal family and intelligence." He continues to insist that pertinent facts were ignored. Other dissenters partake of the general mistrust of government which seems to have become a permanent feature of the post-twentieth-century zeitgeist. How can we believe the results of the inquiry, they ask, when it was conducted by officials of the same government that perpetrated the crime? Still others, unrecovered from the shock of Diana's untimely passing, continue to find it impossible to accept the haphazardness of the event.

It was to all of these factions, and to those who simply grieve the loss of the "people's princess" to this day, that Lord Stevens addressed these final words:

"Three people tragically lost their lives in the accident and one was seriously injured. Many more have suffered from the intense scrutiny, speculation and misinformed judgements in the years that have followed. I very much hope that all the work we have done and the publication of this report will help to bring some closure to all who continue to mourn the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed, and Henri Paul."

For some, it is safe to say, the case will never be closed.

 

---

 

Princess Diana's Death:
Conspiracy Theories - coverups.com

The Queen did it. Or maybe it was M.I.6, the British secret service. The motive: to prevent Princess Diana from marrying Dodi Fayed, bearing his child---step sibling to a future king--- and becoming a Muslim. Or maybe the motive was to protect the new world order from an activist princess with inconvenient ideas, such as banning land mines. How did the killers do it? Small bombs placed on the front and roof of the Mercedes in which she and Dodi rode. Or maybe the Mercedes was sabotaged with a remote-control device that locked the wheels and steering column at the flick of a switch in some far-off location---say, Balmoral. Some anti-Royals believe the queen pushed the button herself.

Like most conspiracy theories, the scenarios spun since Diana's death lead everywhere and nowhere. Many of the juiciest theories circulate on the Internet, where postings about Diana are rapidly becoming as numerous as those about the deaths of JFK, Marilyn Monroe and the king of the after world, Elvis Presley. But it is Egypt, homeland of the Fayeds, that has become the center of a booming conspiracy-theory industry.

Already at least half-a-dozen books about the dead princess are on sale in Cairo. One called "Who Killed Diana?!" was written in three days and is selling briskly enough, at $1.47 a copy, to warrant a second edition, out this week. Author Mohamed Ragab maintains that Britain's royal family and "Jewish circles" ordered the deaths to keep Diana from marrying Dodi. In the daily Al Ahram, Anis Mansour, a former adviser to Anwar Sadat, said Diana was "killed by British Intelligence to save the monarchy." A well-known Egyptian film director, Khairy Beshara, is writing the script for a movie about Diana's life. He has some reservations about the conspiracy theories, but he says she "suffered from cruel traditions" imposed on her by her in-laws.

Egyptians jumped to ugly conclusions about Diana's death partly because of a deeply ingrained feeling that the British, who ruled them until 1952, regard them as inferior. Egyptians say "a Dodi cannot marry the Princess of Wales, and the British would go as far as having them killed," says newspaper columnist Mohamed Sid Ahmed. "Conspiracy theories are a stock in trade here," says Tim Sullivan, a political science professor at American University in Cairo. He traces the cause to a sense of powerlessness. "When you think you don't have control over your life and over events," he says, "then conspiracy theories explain what is happening."

The First Diana Conspiracy Site popped up on Internet in Australia only hours after the death was announced. "The whole thing seems too pat and too convenient," it said, putting blame for the crash on Western governments, arms manufacturers and the royal family. One reporter heard the theory about the remote-control device in Paris, London, Los Angeles, and Milan, where a bodyguard claimed that the Mercedes S-280, the model used by Diana, often figures in murderous "accidents."

In Los Angeles, Leslie Barry, 35, voices another widely held theory. "I'm sure the royals did a blood test on her body and found out she was pregnant," Barry says. "They'll probably now use this to blackmail Diana's family, especially if her brother tries to have more contact with the boys." Other people think the crash was aimed at killing Dodi, not Diana. "I heard he stiffed some people in his business here," says a well heeled Beverly Hills resident.

Then there are the true believers who think Diana is still alive. Subscribers to this theory, say she was fed up with the intrusions on her private life and used the resources of the Fayed family to fake her death. One message on the London Net Web site says Diana and Dodi are living on "a small tropical island near the Middle East," communicating with her sons by "satellite video conferencing."

While no solid evidence exists, conspiracy theories about the death of Princess Diana continue to grow and flourish. To many it doesn't seem fitting, or even reasonable, that somebody as special and unique as Diana should die in something as common as an automobile accident. Perhaps they are right.

 

---

 

 

Faked Death

1. Plot

Fed up with the constant intrusions into her private life by the media, Diana, helped by the huge resources of Dodi, arranges a spectacular 'death' from which she can retreat into blissful isolation. One version of the theory claims that the crash was an attempt at a faked death that went horribly wrong.

2. Evidence

a. Bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones still lives, but testimony from Mercedes auto experts says that it would have been almost impossible for anyone to have survived a crash in the tunnel in a car going at 121 mph. Maybe, as driver Henri Paul's lawyers claim, the car was not going that fast. Maybe the crash was faked by the army-trained Rees-Jones who had previously deposited Di and Dodi elsewhere.

b. Dodi's usual driver was not used. Mystery still surrounds Henri Paul, the security officer who stepped in at the last minute to drive the Mercedes S-280. It took a full two days for his name to be revealed, for instance. Co-workers at the Ritz Hotel say he kept himself to himself and never socialised with them. One version of this conspiracy has it that Paul simply did not exist, another that he was quickly whisked away from the hospital after being declared dead by doctors in cahoots with the Al Fayed family.

c. Just six hours before she died Di let slip to Daily Mail reporter Richard Kray that she was about to withdraw completely from public life.

Likelihood: 2/10

Parts of it sound feasible but what about Di's two children? It is almost inconceivable that she would want to miss out on the rest of their lives. The chances of her coming back to see them without being noticed are surely slim, though plastic surgery permitting it might be prudent to look out for a similarly built 'nanny' appearing on the scene in the future.

MI6 Killed Di

1. Plot

Rogue elements in the British secret service decide that Di is a threat to the throne, and therefore the stability of the state. They take her out.

2. Evidence

a. Recent revelations have shown that there are rogue elements in the secret service who act as more or less autonomous cells. Some of these have been revealed to have a pretty strange view of what constitutes a threat to the state. For instance, they have files on John Lennon, current British Home Secretary (Interior Minister) Jack Straw and they once tried to destabilise the 1970s Labour government. It is not inconceivable that the same agents who believed Lennon was capable of leading revolution also believed Diana was capable of fomenting popular unrest.

b. MI6 is suspected of bugging Diana throughout her years in the Royal limelight, and many believe they were behind the leaking of the 'Squidgygate' phone tapping tapes which damaged her image during the break up with Charles.

c. Bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones was a former member of the crack Parachute Regiment, one of the most toughest in the British army. He also completed two stints in Northern Ireland and served in the Royal Military Police, just the kind of background that would have seen him come into contact with members of the secret service. Theorists cite the fact Rees-Jones survived the crash as evidence that he was in on the plot to snuff out the Diana threat.

Likelihood: 3/10

Few doubt that the nutters at MI6 are capable of anything but surely even they would have had qualms about bumping off Diana, if only for the reason that her death might bring on the very things they most fear, the drift toward a republican state in the UK, as Charles loses still more popularity.

Did MI6 Kill Diana? We examine the evidence

Target Dodi

1. Plot

Business enemies of Dodi and his father Mohammed Al Fayed assassinate Dodi, with the death of Di a magnificent cover for their operation.

2. Evidence

Al Fayed has not got to the top without making some serious enemies along the way. The owner of Harrods fought a bitter battle for the top London store some years ago and has also been denied British nationality after question marks were raised about his business practise. His activities have included under the counter payments to Conservative MPs. as his oldest son and heir, Dodi would be an obvious target for anyone wanting to settle a score with Al Fayed.

Likelihood: 1/10

With Di involved, the police operation is likely to be one of the biggest in Paris history so any assassin would be taking one hell of a risk by cutting the break cable, say, of Dodi's car. Then again, the day of the Jackal is a Paris story.

---

 

Princess Diana Death Conspiracy

The Queen did it. Or maybe it was M.I.6, the British secret service. The motive: to prevent Princess Diana from marrying Dodi Fayed, bearing his child—step sibling to a future king— and becoming a Muslim. Or maybe the motive was to protect the new world order from an activist princess with inconvenient ideas, such as banning land mines. How did the killers do it? Small bombs placed on the front and roof of the Mercedes in which she and Dodi rode. Or maybe the Mercedes was sabotaged with a remote-control device that locked the wheels and steering column at the flick of a switch in some far-off location—say, Balmoral. Some anti-Royals believe the queen pushed the button herself. Princess Dian Death Conspiracy continues to baffle everyone.

Like most conspiracy theories, the scenarios spun since Diana’s death lead everywhere and nowhere. Many of the juiciest theories circulate on the Internet, where postings about Diana are rapidly becoming as numerous as those about the deaths of JFK, Marilyn Monroe and the king of the after world, Elvis Presley. But it is Egypt, homeland of the Fayeds, that has become the center of a booming conspiracy-theory industry.

Already at least half-a-dozen books about the dead princess are on sale in Cairo. One called “Who Killed Diana?!” was written in three days and is selling briskly enough, at $1.47 a copy, to warrant a second edition, out this week. Author Mohamed Ragab maintains that Britain’s royal family and “Jewish circles” ordered the deaths to keep Diana from marrying Dodi. In the daily Al Ahram, Anis Mansour, a former adviser to Anwar Sadat, said Diana was “killed by British Intelligence to save the monarchy.” A well-known Egyptian film director, Khairy Beshara, is writing the script for a movie about Diana’s life. He has some reservations about the conspiracy theories, but he says she “suffered from cruel traditions” imposed on her by her in-laws.

Egyptians jumped to ugly conclusions about Diana’s death partly because of a deeply ingrained feeling that the British, who ruled them until 1952, regard them as inferior. Egyptians say “a Dodi cannot marry the Princess of Wales, and the British would go as far as having them killed,” says newspaper columnist Mohamed Sid Ahmed. “Conspiracy theories are a stock in trade here,” says Tim Sullivan, a political science professor at American University in Cairo. He traces the cause to a sense of powerlessness. “When you think you don’t have control over your life and over events,” he says, “then conspiracy theories explain what is happening.”

The First Diana Conspiracy Site popped up on Internet in Australia only hours after the death was announced. “The whole thing seems too pat and too convenient,” it said, putting blame for the crash on Western governments, arms manufacturers and the royal family. One reporter heard the theory about the remote-control device in Paris, London, Los Angeles, and Milan, where a bodyguard claimed that the Mercedes S-280, the model used by Diana, often figures in murderous “accidents.”

In Los Angeles, Leslie Barry, 35, voices another widely held theory. “I’m sure the royals did a blood test on her body and found out she was pregnant,” Barry says. “They’ll probably now use this to blackmail Princess Diana’s family, especially if her brother tries to have more contact with the boys.” Other people think the crash was aimed at killing Dodi, not Diana. “I heard he stiffed some people in his business here,” says a well heeled Beverly Hills resident. Is it Princess Dian Death Conspiracy or accident?

Then there are the true believers who think Diana is still alive. Subscribers to this theory, say she was fed up with the intrusions on her private life and used the resources of the Fayed family to fake her death. One message on the London Net Web site says Diana and Dodi are living on “a small tropical island near the Middle East,” communicating with her sons by “satellite video conferencing.”

While no solid evidence exists, conspiracy theories about the death of Princess Diana continue to grow and flourish. To many it doesn’t seem fitting, or even reasonable, that somebody as special and unique as Diana should die in something as common as an automobile accident. Perhaps they are right.

MI6 and the Princess of Wales

Attached below is a sworn and testified statement that I have made on 12th May 1999 to the enquiry into the deaths of the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed, and Henri Paul. I firmly believe that MI6 have information in their files that would assist Judge Stephan’s enquiry. Why don’t they yield up this information? They should not be entitled to use the Official Secrets Act to protect themselves from investigation into the deaths of three people, particularly in the case of an incident of this magnitude and historical importance.

More incriminating evidence of Princess Dian Death Conspiracy

I, Richard John Charles Tomlinson, former MI6 officer, of Geneva, Switzerland hereby declare:

1. I firmly believe that there exist documents held by the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) that would yield important new evidence into the cause and circumstances leading to the deaths of the Princess of Wales, Mr Dodi Al Fayed, and M. Henri Paul in Paris in August 1997.

2. I was employed by MI6 between September 1991 and April 1995. During that time, I saw various documents that I believe would provide new evidence and new leads into the investigation into these deaths. I also heard various rumours ? which though I was not able to see supporting documents ? I am confident were based on solid fact.

3. In 1992, I was working in the Eastern European Controllerate of MI6 and I was peripherally involved in a large and complicated operation to smuggle advanced Soviet weaponry out of the then disintegrating and disorganised remnants of the Soviet Union. During 1992, I spent several days reading the substantial files on this operation. These files contain a wide miscellany of contact notes, telegrams, intelligence reports, photographs etc, from which it was possible to build up a detailed understanding of the operation. The operation involved a large cast of officers and agents of MI6. One more than one occasion, meetings between various figures in the operation took place at the Ritz Hotel, Place de Vendome, Paris. There were in the file several intelligence reports on these meetings, which had been written by one of the MI6 officers based in Paris at the time (identified in the file only by a coded designation). The source of the information was an informant in the Ritz Hotel, who again was identified in the files only by a code number. The MI6 officer paid the informant in cash for his information.

I became curious to learn more about the identity of this particular informant, because his number cropped up several times and he seemed to have extremely good access to the goings on in the Ritz Hotel. I therefore ordered this informant’s personal file from MI6′s central file registry. When I read this new file, I was not at all surprised to learn that the informant was a security officer of the Ritz Hotel. Intelligence services always target the security officer’s of important hotels because they have such good access to intelligence. I remember, however, being mildly surprised that the nationality of this informant was French, and this stuck in my memory, because it is rare that MI6 succeeds in recruiting a French informer. I cannot claim that I remember from this reading of the file that the name of this person was Henri Paul, but I have no doubt with the benefit of hindsight that this was he. Although I did not subsequently come across Henri Paul again during my time in MI6, I am confident that the relationship between he and MI6 would have continued until his death, because MI6 would never willingly relinquish control over such a well placed informant. I am sure that the personal file ofHenri Paul will therefore contain notes of meetings between him and his MI6 controlling officer right up until the point of his death. I firmly believe that these files will contain evidence of crucial importance to the circumstances and causes of the incident that killed M. Paul, together with the Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed.

4. The most senior undeclared officer in the local MI6 station would normally control an informant of M.Paul’s usefulness and seniority. Officers declared to the local counter-intelligence service (in this case the Directorate de Surveillance Territoire, or DST) would not be used to control such an informant, because it might lead to the identity of the informant becoming known to the local intelligence services. In Paris at the time of M. Paul’s death, there were two relatively experienced but undeclared MI6 officers. The first was Mr Nicholas John Andrew LANGMAN, born 1960. The second was Mr Richard David SPEARMAN, again born in 1960. I firmly believe that either one or both of these officers will be well acquainted with M Paul, and most probably also met M. Paul shortly before his death. I believe that either or both of these officers will have knowledge that will be of crucial importance in establishing the sequence of events leading up to the deaths of M.Paul, Dodi Al Fayed and the Princess of Wales. Mr Spearman in particular was an extremely well connected and influential officer, because he had been, prior to his appointment in Paris, the personal secretary to the Chief of MI6 Mr David SPEDDING. As such, he would have been privy to even the most confidential of MI6 operations. I believe that there may well be significance in the fact that Mr Spearman was posted to Paris in the month immediately before the deaths.

Continuing the evidences of Princess Dian Death Conspiracy

5. Later in 1992, as the civil war in the former Yugoslavia became increasingly topical, I started to work primarily on operations in Serbia. During this time, I became acquainted with Dr Nicholas Bernard Frank FISHWICK, born 1958, the MI6 officer who at the time was in charge of planning Balkan operations. During one meeting with Dr Fishwick, he casually showed to me a three-page document that on closer inspection turned out to be an outline plan to assassinate the Serbian leader President Slobodan Milosevic. The plan was fully typed, and attached to a yellow “minute board”, signifying that this was a formal and accountable document. It will therefore still be in existence. Fishwick had annotated that the document be circulated to the following senior MI6 officers: Maurice KENDWRICK-PIERCEY, then head of Balkan operations, John RIDDE, then the security officer for Balkan operations, the SAS liaison officer to MI6 (designation MODA/SO, but I have forgotten his name), the head of the Eastern European Controllerate (then Richard FLETCHER) and finally Alan PETTY, the personal secretary to the then Chief of MI6, Colin McCOLL. This plan contained a political justification for the assassination of Milosevic, followed by three outline proposals on how to achieve this objective.

I firmly believe that the third of these scenarios contained information that could be useful in establishing the causes of death of Henri Paul, the Princess of Wales, and Dodi Al Fayed. This third scenario suggested that Milosevic could be assassinated by causing his personal limousine to crash. Dr Fishwick proposed to arrange the crash in a tunnel, because the proximity of concrete close to the road would ensure that the crash would be sufficiently violent to cause death or serious injury, and would also reduce the possibility that there might be independent, casual witnesses. Dr Fishwick suggested that one way to cause the crash might be to disorientate the chauffeur using a strobe flash gun, a device which is occasionally deployed by special forces to, for example, disorientate helicopter pilots or terrorists, and about which MI6 officers are briefed about during their training. In short, this scenario bore remarkable similarities to the circumstances and witness accounts of the crash that killed the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed, and Henri Paul. I firmly believe that this document should be yielded by MI6 to the Judge investigating these deaths, and would provide further leads that he could follow.

6. During my service in MI6, I also learnt unofficially and second-hand something of the links between MI6 and the Royal Household. MI6 are frequently and routinely asked by the Royal Household (usually via the Foreign Office) to provide intelligence on potential threats to members of the Royal Family whilst on overseas trips. This service would frequently extend to asking friendly intelligence services (such as the CIA) to place members of the Royal Family under discrete surveillance, ostensibly for their own protection. This was particularly the case for the Princess of Wales, who often insisted on doing without overt personal protection, even n overseas trips. Although contact between MI6 and the Royal Household was officially only via the Foreign Office, I learnt while in MI6 that there was unofficial direct contact between certain senior and influential MI6 officers and senior members of the Royal Household. I did not see any official papers on this subject, but I am confident that the information is correct. I firmly believe that MI6 documents would yield substantial leads on the nature of their links with the Royal Household, and would yield vital information about MI6 surveillance on the Princess of Wales in the days leading to her death.

7.I also learnt while in MI6 that one of the “paparazzi” photographers who routinely followed the Princess of Wales was a member of “UKN”, a small corps of part-time MI6 agents who provide miscellaneous services to MI6 such as surveillance and photography expertise. I do not know the identity of this photographer, or whether he was one of the photographers present at the time of the fatal incident. However, I am confident that examination of UKN records would yield the identity of this photographer, and would enable the inquest to eliminate or further investigate that potential line of enquiry.

8. On Friday August 28 1998, I gave much of this information to Judge Herv? Stephan, the French investigative Judge in charge of the inquest into the accident. The lengths which MI6, the CIA and the DST have taken to deter me giving this evidence and subsequently to stop me talking about it, suggests that they have something to hide.

Continuing Princess Dian Death Conspiracy..

9. On Friday 31 July 1998, shortly before my appointment with Judge Herv? Stephan, the DST arrested me in my Paris hotel room. Although I have no record of violent conduct I was arrested with such ferocity and at gunpoint that I received a broken rib. I was taken to the headquarters of the DST, and interrogated for 38 hours. Despite my repeated requests, I was never given any justification for the arrest and was not shown the arrest warrant. Even though I was released without charge, the DST confiscated from me my laptop computer and Psion organiser. They illegally gave these to MI6 who took them back to the UK. They were not returned for six months, which is illegal and caused me great inconvenience and financial cost.

10. On Friday 7th August 1998 I boarded a Qantas flight at Auckland International airport, New Zealand, for a flight to Sydney, Australia where I was due to give a television interview to the Australian Channel Nine television company. I was in my seat, awaiting take off, when an official boarded the plane and told me to get off. At the airbridge, he told me that the airline had received a fax “from Canberra” saying that there was a problem with my travel papers. I immediately asked to see the fax, but I was told that “it was not possible”. I believe that this is because it didn’t exist. This action was a ploy to keep me in New Zealand so that the New Zealand police could take further action against me. I had been back in my Auckland hotel room for about half an hour when the New Zealand police and NZSIS, the New Zealand Secret Intelligence Service, raided me. After being detained and searched for about three hours, they eventually confiscated from me all my remaining computer equipment that the French DST had not succeeded in taking from me. Again, I didn’t get some of these items back until six months later. Continue reading Princess Dian Death Conspiracy

11. Moreover, shortly after I had given this evidence to Judge Stephan, I was invited to talk about this evidence in a live television interview on America’s NBC television channel. I flew from Geneva to JFK airport on Sunday 30 August to give the interview in New York on the following Monday morning. Shortly after arrival at John F Kennedy airport, the captain of the Swiss Air flight told all passengers to return to their seats. Four US Immigration authority officers entered the plane, came straight to my seat, asked for my passport as identity, and then frogmarched me off the plane. I was taken to the immigration detention centre, photographed, fingerprinted, manacled by my ankle to a chair for seven hours, served with deportation papers (exhibit 1) and then returned on the next available plane to Geneva. I was not allowed to make any telephone calls to the representatives of NBC awaiting me in the airport. The US Immigration Officers – who were all openly sympathetic to my situation and apologised for treating me so badly – openly admitted that they were acting under instructions from the CIA.

12. In January of this year, I booked a chalet in the village of Samoens in the French Alps for a ten day snowboarding holiday with my parents. I picked up my parents from Geneva airport in a hire car on the evening of January 8, and set off for the French border. At the French customs post, our car was stopped and I was detained. Four officers from the DST held me for four hours. At the end of this interview, I was served with the deportation papers below (exhibit 2), and ordered to return to Switzerland. Note that in the papers, my supposed destination has been changed from “Chamonix” to “Samoens”. This is because when first questioned by a junior DST officer, I told him that my destination was “Chamonix”. When a senior officer arrived an hour or so later, he crossed out the word and changed it to “Samoens”, without ever even asking or confirming this with me. I believe this is because MI6 had told them of my true destination, having learnt the information through surveillance on my parent’s telephone in the UK. My banning from France is entirely illegal under European law. I have a British passport and am entitled to travel freely within the European Union. MI6 have “done a deal” with the DST to have me banned, and have not used any recognised legal mechanism to deny my rights to freedom of travel. I believe that the DST and MI6 have banned me from France because they wanted to prevent me from giving further evidence to Judge Stephan’s inquest, which at the time, I was planning to do.

13. Whatever MI6′s role in the events leading to the death of the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed and Henri Paul, I am absolutely certain that there is substantial evidence in their files that would provide crucial evidence in establishing the exact causes of this tragedy. I believe that they have gone to considerable lengths to obstruct the course of justice by interfering with my freedom of speech and travel, and this in my view confirms my belief that they have something to hide. I believe that the protection given to MI6 files under the Official Secrets Act should be set aside in the public interest in uncovering once and for all the truth behind these dramatic and historically momentous events.

Was Princess Dian Death Conspiracy or accident or ourder is upto you to decide.

Source: theunexplainedmysteries

---

 

Death of Diana, Princess of Wales

On 31 August 1997, Diana, Princess of Wales, died as a result of injuries sustained in a car collision in the Pont de l'Alma road tunnel in Paris, France. Her companion, Dodi Fayed, and the driver of the Mercedes-Benz W140, Henri Paul, were pronounced dead at the scene of the accident. Fayed's bodyguard, Trevor Rees-Jones, was the only survivor. Although at first the media pinned the blame on the paparazzi, the crash was ultimately found to be caused by the reckless actions of the chauffeur, who was the head of security at the Ritz and had earlier goaded the paparazzi waiting outside the hotel.^[1] An 18-month French judicial investigation concluded in 1999 that the crash was caused by Henri Paul, who lost control of the car at high speed while under the influence of alcohol, which may have been made worse by the simultaneous presence of an anti-depressant and traces of a tranqulizing anti-psychotic in his body.^[2][3]

From February 1998, Dodi's father, Mohamed Al-Fayed (the owner of the Hôtel Ritz, for which Paul worked) claimed that the crash was a result of a conspiracy,^[4] and later contended that the crash was orchestrated by MI6 on the instructions of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.^[5] His claims that the crash was a result of a conspiracy were dismissed by a French judicial investigation^[2] and by Operation Paget, a Metropolitan police inquiry that concluded in 2006.^[6]

An inquest headed by LJ Scott Baker into the deaths of Diana and Dodi began at the Royal Courts of Justice, London, on 2 October 2007 and was a continuation of the original inquest that began in 2004.^[7] On 7 April 2008, the jury released an official statement that Diana and Dodi were unlawfully killed by the grossly negligent driving of chauffeur Henri Paul and the paparazzi.^[8] Though the official verdict implicated the pursuing vehicles, the jury also named the intoxication of the driver and the victims' decisions to not wear seat-belts as contributing factors to their deaths. Additionally, the Mercedes had been travelling at over twice the legal speed limit of that particular section of road and had long since left the paparazzi vehicles far behind by the time the accident occurred.^[9]

 

Circumstances

On 30 August 1997, Diana, Princess of Wales, arrived in Paris, France, with Dodi Fayed, the son of Mohamed al-Fayed. They had stopped there en route to London, having spent the preceding nine days together on board Mohamed al-Fayed’s yacht, the Jonikal, on the French and Italian Riviera. They had intended to stay overnight. Mohamed al-Fayed was and is the owner of the Hôtel Ritz Paris. He also owned an apartment in Rue Arsène Houssaye, a short distance from the hotel and located just off the Avenue des Champs Elysées.

Henri Paul, the Acting Head of Security at the Ritz Hotel, had been instructed to drive the hired black 1994 Mercedes-Benz S280 through Paris in order to elude the paparazzi.^[10] A decoy vehicle left the Ritz first, attracting a throng of photographers. Diana and Fayed would then depart from the hotel's rear entrance.

At around 12:20 am on 31 August 1997, Diana and Fayed left the Ritz to return to the apartment in rue Arsène Houssaye. They were the rear passengers in a black Mercedes-Benz S280, registration number "688 LTV 75", driven by Paul. Trevor Rees-Jones, a member of the Fayed family's personal protection team, was in the front passenger seat.

They left from the rear of the hotel, the Rue Cambon exit. After crossing the Place de la Concorde they drove along Cours la Reine and Cours Albert 1er (the embankment road running parallel to the River Seine) into the Place de l’Alma underpass. At around 12:23 am at the entrance to the tunnel, their driver lost control; the car swerved to the left of the two-lane carriageway before colliding head-on with the 13th pillar supporting the roof at an estimated speed of 105 km/h (65 mph).^[11] It then spun and hit the stone wall of the tunnel backwards, finally coming to a stop. The impact of the crash caused substantial damage, particularly to the front half of the vehicle. There was (and still is) no guard rail between the pillars to prevent this. The Place de l'Alma underpass is the only one on that embankment road that has roof-supporting pillars.

As the victims lay in the wrecked car, the photographers continued to take pictures. Critically injured, Diana was reported to repeatedly murmur "oh my God," and, after the photographers were pushed away by emergency teams, "leave me alone".^[12]

Dodi Fayed had been sitting in the left rear passenger seat and appeared to be dead. Nevertheless, fire officers were still trying to resuscitate him when he was pronounced dead by a doctor at 1:32 am; Henri Paul was declared dead on removal from the wreckage. Both were taken directly to the Institut Médico-Légal (IML), the Paris mortuary, not to a hospital. Autopsy examination concluded that Paul and Fayed had both suffered a rupture in the isthmus of the aorta and a fractured spine, with, in the case of Paul, a medullar section in the dorsal region and in the case of Fayed a medullar section in the cervical region.

Still conscious, Rees-Jones had suffered multiple serious facial injuries. The two forward passengers' airbags had functioned normally. None of the car's occupants were wearing seat belts.

Diana, who had been sitting in the rear right passenger seat, was still conscious. It was first reported that she was crouched on the floor of the vehicle with her back to the road. It was also reported that a photographer who saw Diana described her as bleeding from the nose and ears with her head rested on the back of the front passenger's seat; he tried to remove her from the car but her feet were stuck. Then he told her that help was on the way and to stay awake; there was no answer from Diana, just blinking.

In June 2007 the Channel 4 documentary Diana: The Witnesses in the Tunnel claimed that the first person to touch Diana was Dr. Maillez,^[13] who chanced upon the scene. He reported that Diana had no visible injuries but was in shock and he supplied her with oxygen.

The first police patrol officers arrived at the scene at 12.30. Shortly afterwards, the seven paparazzi on the scene were arrested. Diana was removed from the car at 1:00 am She then went into cardiac arrest. Following external cardiopulmonary resuscitation, Diana’s heart started beating again. She was moved to the SAMU ambulance at 1:18 am The ambulance departed the crash scene at 1:41 am and arrived at the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital at 2:06 am^[14] Despite attempts to save her, her internal injuries were too extensive: her heart had been displaced from the left to the right side of the chest, which tore the pulmonary vein and the pericardium. Despite lengthy resuscitation attempts, including internal cardiac massage, she died at 4 am^[15] At 5:30, her death was announced at a press conference held by a hospital doctor; Jean-Pierre Chevènement, France's Interior Minister; and Sir Michael Jay, Britain's ambassador to France.

Many have speculated that if Diana had worn a seat belt, her injuries would have been less severe.^[16] Initial media reports stated that Trevor Rees-Jones was the only car occupant to have worn a seat belt. These reports proved incorrect, as both the French and British investigations concluded that none of the occupants of the car was wearing a seat belt at the time of the impact.^{[N 1][N 2]}

Later that morning, Chevènement, together with French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, Bernadette Chirac (the wife of the French President, Jacques Chirac), and Bernard Kouchner (French Health Minister), visited the hospital room where Diana's body lay and paid their last respects. After their visits, the Anglican Archdeacon of France, Father Martin Draper, said commendatory prayers from the Book of Common Prayer.

At around 2:00 pm, Diana's former husband, Prince Charles, and two older sisters, Lady Sarah McCorquodale and Lady Jane Fellowes, arrived in Paris; they left with her body 90 minutes later.

Subsequent events

Initial media reports stated Diana's car had collided with the pillar at 190 km/h (120 mph), and that the speedometer's needle had jammed at that position. It was later announced the car's actual speed on collision was about 95–110 km/h (60–70 mph), and that the speedometer had no needle as it was digital; this conflicts with the list of available equipment and features of the Mercedes-Benz W140 S-Class, which used a computer-controlled analogue speedometer, with no digital readout for speed. The car was certainly travelling much faster than the legal speed limit of 50 km/h (31 mph), and faster than was prudent for the Alma underpass. In 1999, a French investigation concluded the Mercedes had come into contact with another vehicle (a white Fiat Uno) in the tunnel. The driver of that vehicle has never come forward, and the vehicle itself has not officially been identified.

An eighteen-month French judicial investigation concluded in 1999 that the car crash that killed Diana was caused by Paul, who lost control of the car at high speed while intoxicated.^[19]

In October 2003, the Daily Mirror published a letter from Diana in which, ten months before her death, she wrote about a possible plot to kill her by tampering with the brakes of her car. “This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous.” She said “my husband^[20] is planning ‘an accident’ in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for Charles to marry”.^[21]

On 6 January 2004, six years after her death, an inquest into the deaths of Diana and Dodi Fayed opened in London held by Michael Burgess, the coroner of the Queen's household. The coroner asked the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir John Stevens, to make inquiries, in response to speculation (see below) that the deaths were not an accident. The Metropolitan Police investigation reported their findings in Operation Paget in December 2006.

Later in 2004, US TV network CBS showed pictures of the crash scene showing an intact rear side and an intact centre section of the Mercedes, including one of an unbloodied Diana with no outward injuries, crouched on the rear floor of the vehicle with her back to the right passenger seat—the right rear car door is completely opened. The release of these pictures caused uproar in the UK, where it was widely felt that the privacy of Diana was being infringed, and spurred another lawsuit by Mohammed al-Fayed.^[22]

In January 2006, Lord Stevens explained in an interview on GMTV that the case is substantially more complex than once thought. The Sunday Times wrote on 29 January 2006 that agents of the British secret service were cross-examined, because they were in Paris at the time of the accident. It was suggested in many journals that these agents might have exchanged the blood test of the driver with another blood sample (although no evidence for this has ever been forthcoming).^[23][24]

On 13 July 2006, the Italian magazine Chi published a photograph showing Diana in her "last moments" despite an unofficial blackout on such photographs being published. The photograph was taken shortly after the crash, and shows the Princess slumped in the back seat while a paramedic attempts to fit an oxygen mask over her face. This photograph was also published in other Italian and Spanish magazines and newspapers.

The editor of Chi defended his decision by saying he published the photographs taken from the French investigation dossier for the "simple reason that they haven't been seen before" and that he felt the images do not disrespect the memory of the former Princess.^[25]

Funeral

Diana's death was met with extraordinary public expressions of grief, and her public funeral at Westminster Abbey on 6 September drew an estimated 3 million^[26] mourners and onlookers in London, as well as worldwide television coverage, which overshadowed the news of the death the previous day of Mother Teresa.

Members of the public were invited to sign a book of condolence at St James Palace. Throughout the night members of the Women's Royal Voluntary Service and the Salvation Army combined to provide support for people queuing along the Mall.^[27] More than one million bouquets were left at her London home, Kensington Palace, while at her family's estate of Althorp the public was asked to stop bringing flowers, as the volume of people and flowers in the surrounding roads was said to be causing a threat to public safety.

By 10 September, the pile of flowers outside Kensington Gardens was 1.5 metres deep in places and the bottom layer had started to compost.^[28] The people were quiet, waiting patiently in line to sign the book and leave their gifts. There were a few minor incidents. Fabio Piras, a Sardinian tourist, was given a one-week prison sentence on 10 September for having taken a teddy bear from the pile. When the sentence was later reduced to a £100 fine, Piras was punched in the face by a member of the public when he left the court.^[29] The next day, Maria Rigociova, a 54-year-old secondary school teacher, and Agnesa Sihelska, a 50-year-old communications technician, were each given a 28-day prison sentence for having taken eleven teddy bears and a number of flowers from the pile outside St. James' Palace.^[30] This too was later reduced to a fine (of £200 each) after they had spent two nights in prison.

Some criticised the reaction to Diana's death at the time as being "hysterical" and "irrational". As early as 1998 philosopher Anthony O'Hear identified the mourning as a defining point in the "sentimentalisation of Britain", a media-fuelled phenomenon where image and reality become blurred.^[31] These criticisms that were repeated on the 10th anniversary, where journalist Jonathan Freedland expressed the opinion that "It has become an embarrassing memory, like a mawkish, self-pitying teenage entry in a diary,... we cringe to think about it." Some cultural analysts disagreed. Sociologist Deborah Steinberg pointed out that many Britons associated Diana not with the Royal Family but with social change and a more liberal society: "I don't think it was hysteria, the loss of a public figure can be a touchstone for other issues."^[32]

Reactions

Royal family

The reaction of the Royal Family to Diana's death caused unprecedented resentment and outcry. They were at their summer residence at Balmoral Castle, and their initial decision not to return to London or to mourn more publicly was much criticised at the time. Their rigid adherence to protocol, and their concern to care for Diana's grieving sons, was interpreted by some^[specify] as a lack of compassion.

In particular, the refusal of Buckingham Palace to fly the Royal Standard at half-mast provoked angry headlines in newspapers.^[33] "Where is our Queen? Where is her Flag?" asked The Sun. The Palace's stance was one of royal protocol: no flag could fly over Buckingham Palace, as the Royal Standard is only flown when the Queen is in residence, and the Queen was then in Scotland. Furthermore, the Royal Standard never flies at half-mast as it is the Sovereign's flag and there is never a dead Sovereign (the new monarch immediately succeeds his or her predecessor).

Finally, as a compromise, the Union Flag was flown instead, at half-mast, as the Queen left for Westminster Abbey on the day of Diana's funeral. This set a precedent, and Buckingham Palace has subsequently flown the Union Flag when the Queen is not in residence.

The Queen, who returned to London from Balmoral, agreed to a television broadcast to the nation.

Public reactions

Over a million people lined the four-mile (6 km) route from Kensington Palace to Westminster Abbey.^[34] Outside the Abbey and in Hyde Park crowds watched and listened to proceedings on giant outdoor screens and huge speakers as guests filed in, including representatives of the many charities of which Diana was patron. Notable attendants included Hillary Rodham Clinton; Bernadette Chirac, wife of the French President, Jacques Chirac; and other celebrities, including Italian tenor Luciano Pavarotti and Diana's good friends singers George Michael and Elton John – the latter performed a rewritten version of his song, "Candle in the Wind", that was dedicated to her.^[35] The service was televised live around the world.

Protocol was disregarded when the guests applauded the speech by Diana's younger brother Earl Spencer, who strongly criticised the press and indirectly criticised the Royal Family for their treatment of her.^[36] The funeral is estimated to have been watched by 2.5 billion worldwide.^[37]

After the end of the ceremony, the coffin was driven to Althorp in a Daimler hearse.^[38] Mourners cast flowers at the funeral procession for almost the entire length of its journey and vehicles even stopped on the opposite carriageway of the M1 motorway as the cars passed on the route to Althorp.^[39] In a private ceremony, Diana was buried on the Althorp estate on an island in the middle of a lake. In her casket, she wears a black Catherine Walker dress and is clutching a rosary in her hands. A visitors' centre is open during summer months, allowing visitors to see an exhibition about her and to walk around the lake. All profits made are donated to the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund.

During the four weeks following her funeral, the overall suicide rate in England and Wales rose by 17% and cases of deliberate self harm by 44.3%, compared with the average reported for that period in the four previous years. Researchers suggest that this was caused by the "identification" effect, as the greatest increase in suicides was by people most similar to Diana: women aged 25 to 44, whose suicide rate increased by over 45%.^[40]

In the years after her death, interest in the life of Diana has remained high. As a temporary memorial, the public co-opted the Flamme de la Liberté (Flame of Liberty), a monument near the Alma Tunnel, and related to the French donation of the Statue of Liberty to the United States. The messages of condolence have since been removed, and its use as a Diana memorial has discontinued, though visitors still leave messages at the site in her memory. A permanent memorial, the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fountain was opened in Hyde Park in London on 6 July 2004.

Diana was ranked third in the 2002 Great Britons poll sponsored by the BBC and voted for by the British public, just above Charles Darwin (4th), William Shakespeare (5th), and Isaac Newton (6th).

In 2003, Marvel Comics announced it was to publish a five-part series entitled Di Another Day (a reference to the James Bond film Die Another Day) featuring a resurrected Diana, Princess of Wales, as a mutant with superpowers, as part of Peter Milligan's satirical X-Statix title. Amidst considerable outcry, the idea was quickly dropped.^[41] Heliograph Incorporated produced a roleplaying game, Diana: Warrior Princess by Marcus L. Rowland, about a fictionalised version of the twentieth century as it might be seen a thousand years from now. Artist Thomas Demand made a video, Tunnel, in 1999, that featured a trip through a cardboard mock-up of the tunnel in which Diana died.

After her death, the actor Kevin Costner, who had been introduced to the Princess by her former sister-in-law, Sarah, Duchess of York, claimed he had been in negotiations with the divorced Princess to co-star in a sequel to the thriller film The Bodyguard, which starred Costner and Whitney Houston. Buckingham Palace dismissed Costner's claims as unfounded.^[42]

Actor George Clooney publicly lambasted several tabloids and paparazzi agencies following Diana's death. A few of the tabloids boycotted Clooney following the outburst, stating that he "owed a fair portion of his celebrity" to the tabloids and photo agencies in question.^[43]

Conspiracy theories

Although the initial French investigation found that Diana, Princess of Wales, had died as a result of an accident, the conspiracy theories persistently raised by Mohammed al-Fayed and the Daily Express suggested that she was assassinated. In 2004 a special Metropolitan Police inquest team, Operation Paget, headed by the then Commissioner Lord Stevens, was established to investigate the conspiracy theories.

A report with the findings of the criminal investigation was published on 14 December 2006. The inquest was closed following the conclusion of the British Inquest into the deaths in April 2008.

2007 inquest

Under English law, an inquest is required in cases of sudden or unexplained death.^[44] The inquests into the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed opened on 8 January 2007, with Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss acting as Deputy Coroner of the Queen's Household for the Diana inquest and Assistant Deputy Coroner for Surrey in relation to the Fayed inquest. Butler-Sloss originally intended to sit without a jury;^[45] this decision was later overturned by the High Court,^[46] as well as the jurisdiction of the Coroner of the Queen's Household. On 24 April 2007, Butler-Sloss stepped down, saying she lacked the experience required to deal with an inquest with a jury.^[7] The role of Coroner for the inquests was transferred to Lord Justice Scott Baker, who formally took up the role on 11 June as Coroner for Inner West London.

On 27 July 2007, Baker, following representations for the lawyers of the interested parties, issued a list of issues likely to be raised at the inquest, many of which had been dealt with in great detail by Operation Paget.

The issues identified were:

1. Whether driver error on the part of Henri Paul caused or contributed to the cause of the collision
2. Whether Henri Paul's ability to drive was impaired through drink or drugs
3. Whether a Fiat Uno or any other vehicle caused or contributed to the collision
4. Whether the actions of the Paparazzi caused or contributed to the cause of the collision
5. Whether the road/tunnel layout and construction were inherently dangerous and, if so, whether this contributed to the collision
6. Whether any bright/flashing lights contributed to or caused the collision and, if so, their source
7. Whose decision it was that the Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed should leave from the rear entrance to the Ritz and that Henri Paul should drive the vehicle
8. Henri Paul's movements between 7 and 10 pm on 30 August 1997
9. The explanation for the money in Henri Paul's possession on 30 August 1997 and in his bank account
10. Whether Andanson was in Paris on the night of the collision
11. Whether Diana's life would have been saved if she had reached hospital sooner or if her medical treatment had been different
12. Whether Diana was pregnant
13. Whether Diana and Dodi Al Fayed were about to announce their engagement
14. Whether and, if so in what circumstances, the Princess of Wales feared for her life
15. The circumstances relating to the purchase of the ring
16. The circumstances in which Diana's body was embalmed
17. Whether the evidence of Tomlinson throws any light on the collision
18. Whether the British or any other security services had any involvement in the collision
19. Whether there was anything sinister about (i) the Cherruault burglary or (ii) the disturbance at the Big Pictures agency
20. Whether correspondence belonging to the Princess of Wales (including some from Prince Philip) has disappeared, and if so the circumstances.^[47]

The inquests officially began on 2 October 2007 with the swearing of a jury of six women and five men. Lord Justice Scott Baker delivered a lengthy opening statement giving general instructions to the jury and introducing the evidence.^[48] The BBC reported that Mohammed Al-Fayed, having earlier reiterated his claim that his son and Diana were murdered by the Royal Family, immediately criticised the opening statement as biased.^[49]

The inquest heard evidence from people connected with Diana and the events leading to her death, including Paul Burrell, Mohamed Al-Fayed, her stepmother, the survivor of the crash, and the former head of MI5.^[50]

Lord Justice Scott Baker began his summing up to the jury on 31 March 2008.^[51] He stated there was "not a shred of evidence" that the Duke of Edinburgh ordered the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, or that the security services organised it.^[52] Lord Justice Scott Baker concluded his summing up on Wednesday, 2 April 2008.^[53] After summing up, the jury retired to consider five verdicts, namely unlawful killing by the negligence of either or both the following vehicles or Henri Paul; accidental death or an open verdict.^[51] The jury decided on 7 April 2008 that Diana had been unlawfully killed by the grossly negligent driving of chauffeur Henri Paul and following vehicles.^[8][54]

The cost of the death inquiry exceeded £12.5 million, with the coroner's inquest at £4.5 million, and a further £8 million spent on the Metropolitan Police investigation. It lasted 6 months and heard 250 witnesses, with the cost heavily criticised in the media.^[55]

Internet coverage

Diana's death occurred at a time when internet use in the developed world was booming, and several national newspapers and at least one British regional newspaper had already launched online news services. BBC News had set up online coverage of the general election earlier in 1997^[56] and as a result of the widespread public and media attention that Diana's death resulted in, BBC News swiftly created a website featuring news coverage of Diana's death and the events that followed it. Diana's death helped BBC News officials realise how important online news services were becoming, and a full online news service was launched on 4 November that year.^[57]

< Prev		Next >