The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008 - Page 41

Jo of Palatine · #**801** 01-15-2008, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkie40

I personally assume this man must be haunted with guilt as to whether he should have ended his romantic relstionship with Diana. He might assume if he had married her, then she might be alive.

I once had a romantic fling when I had split for a short time from my later husband but ended the relationship and went back to my later husband. Shortly after that the guy decided to go to India to become a buddhist monk, became one and died since because of an illness contracted there. Shall I feel guilty now? Had I married him instead of my husband, what would have happened? how are we to know? We can only decide to the best of our knowledge and our conscience and go on from that point, not looking back all the time. IMHO, of course.

Duchess · #**802** 01-15-2008, 02:47 PM

i doubt that dr. khan is feeling any guilt....he doesn't need to. he did nothing wrong and from all that we know, he made it clear to her that he didn't want to be in the spotlight. he appears to have been honest with her.

Duchess · #**803** 01-15-2008, 02:50 PM

i just had a thought....what if burrell DOES know something? something big? that he could make money off? why release that information at an inquest where he wouldn't make a dime off it? why not wait and shop it around to highest bidder? of course...he could have done this long ago if he did know something.

Jo of Palatine · #**804** 01-15-2008, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duchess

i just had a thought....what if burrell DOES know something? something big? that he could make money off? why release that information at an inquest where he wouldn't make a dime off it? why not wait and shop it around to highest bidder? of course...he could have done this long ago if he did know something.

That's exactly what I think. If he knew something, he would ahve told it already. He is now trying to present himself as a person broken by his first trial, who only wants to be a "proper" citizen with no wrongdoings whiel all the while making it appear as if he is afraid as the late Diana was and who still has mysteries he dares not reveal. Just playacting to keep him in the public eye, IMho.

pinkie40 · #**805** 01-15-2008, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

I once had a romantic fling when I had split for a short time from my later husband but ended the relationship and went back to my later husband. Shortly after that the guy decided to go to India to become a buddhist monk, became one and died since because of an illness contracted there. Shall I feel guilty now? Had I married him instead of my husband, what would have happened? how are we to know? We can only decide to the best of our knowledge and our conscience and go on from that point, not looking back all the time. IMHO, of course.

Ok, I just saw the interview Dr. Khan gave on CNN. My impression of him is that he is a deep thinking man intensely dedicated to his work...no surprise there. His words about Diana seemed kind and gentle. I can see why his looks and his compassion would appeal to Diana. There is a genuine saddness when he spoke of her so I would gather from this interview and the shot of him crying in sunglasses at the Abbey at her funeral he loved her very deeply. Perhaps he has been unable to speak about her because of his love for her, that was my impression of him after I heard this interview.

I admit "guilt" may be a strong word for such a dedicated man...maybe a better word would be "regret".

pinkie40 · #**806** 01-15-2008, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

That's exactly what I think. If he knew something, he would ahve told it already. He is now trying to present himself as a person broken by his first trial, who only wants to be a "proper" citizen with no wrongdoings whiel all the while making it appear as if he is afraid as the late Diana was and who still has mysteries he dares not reveal. Just playacting to keep him in the public eye, IMho.

Oh, I have believed he knows lots and lots of big things....and have believed this from Day One! I don't think his trial would have crumbled so "neatly" had he not known what he knows....

I surmise he already sees the futility of this inquest in the regards to those important figures (paps, suspected Fiat driver, etc) have refused to cooperate in giving testimony...

Skydragon · #**807** 01-15-2008, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTruth

Diana did not want Charles as King - Yahoo! News UK

Based on some of the other rubbish Diana appears to have said, why has anyone taken any of her 'allegations' seriously.

Princess Diana told Blair: 'Make William king - not Charles', inquest hears | the Daily Mail

Diana wanted William to follow the Queen - Telegraph

in October 1995, Princess Diana said she had sources who had told her the Queen was going to abdicate the following April.

she believed the crown should skip a generation and pass on to her son Prince William - She told another lawyer the Duke of York should act as regent until Prince William was old enough to be crowned.

Oh, so was that her 'source' then?

pinkie40 · #**808** 01-15-2008, 04:10 PM

'Secret' of Diana's butler trashed - CNN.com

This just in on my side of the pond.

Skydragon · #**809** 01-15-2008, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

That's exactly what I think. If he knew something, he would have told it already. He is now trying to present himself as a person broken by his first trial, who only wants to be a "proper" citizen with no wrongdoings whiel all the while making it appear as if he is afraid as the late Diana was and who still has mysteries he dares not reveal. Just playacting to keep him in the public eye, IMho.

The looking 'fearfully' at 'someone' at the inquest was I am told rather pathetic and clearly a very poor act, that fooled nobody!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystic Meg AKA Fabulous Fake

Originally Posted by Fabulous Fake
Having read the transcripts of today's evidence,I feel quite strongly that Paul Burrell will not produce the requested documents tomorrow.
Just call me Mystic Meg

Your wish is my command, at least until the mods see it!!

pinkie40 · #**810** 01-15-2008, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Based on some of the other rubbish Diana appears to have said, why has anyone taken any of her 'allegations' seriously.

Princess Diana told Blair: 'Make William king - not Charles', inquest hears | the Daily Mail

Diana wanted William to follow the Queen - Telegraph

in October 1995, Princess Diana said she had sources who had told her the Queen was going to abdicate the following April.

she believed the crown should skip a generation and pass on to her son Prince William - She told another lawyer the Duke of York should act as regent until Prince William was old enough to be crowned.

Oh, so was that her 'source' then?

Considering October 1995 was one month prior to the dreaded Bashir interview, one could assume she was "looking" for something to justify her cause. Maybe it was one of her fortune tellers, pyschics, healers or merely something Diana devised in her troubled, paranoid mind (remember this was during the "Tiggy" time, too).

zhontella · #**811** 01-15-2008, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Based on some of the other rubbish Diana appears to have said, why has anyone taken any of her 'allegations' seriously.

in October 1995, Princess Diana said she had sources who had told her the Queen was going to abdicate the following April.

she believed the crown should skip a generation and pass on to her son Prince William - She told another lawyer the Duke of York should act as regent until Prince William was old enough to be crowned.

Oh, so was that her 'source' then?

I saw another source for that information somewhere -- I'll try to remember where and provide the link. Anyway, the queen had to change her mind when Charles refused to give up Camilla.

Even though Diana said the crown should skip a generation, and that is preposterous, one has to consider the sources of influence that suggested to her this was possible. Furthermore, it does not necessarily negate all of her other worries and concerns.

Jo of Palatine · #**812** 01-15-2008, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

in October 1995, Princess Diana said she had sources who had told her the Queen was going to abdicate the following April.

she believed the crown should skip a generation and pass on to her son Prince William - She told another lawyer the Duke of York should act as regent until Prince William was old enough to be crowned.

Oh, so was that her 'source' then?

Interesting idea -makes one really wonder... especially as Burrell submitted the name of a Royal and it wasn't HM, DoE or Sarah...

zhontella · #**813** 01-15-2008, 04:39 PM

Inquest transcript, 15th January, afternoon excerpt

1 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Burrell, ........................
5 Now, together with the documents, you wrote me
6 a letter which is headed "Private and confidential".
7 Now, I don't think it's appropriate for there to be
8 private correspondence between a witness and the
9 Coroner. I have looked very carefully at the letter and
10 I don't think that there is anything in it which, in the
11 event, will cause any embarrassment for me to disclose.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder if Burrell ever considered what was personal, confidential
and private when he wrote about some of Diana's more private moments which should have remained private? Dang, what a whiny weasel he is.

zhontella · #**814** 01-15-2008, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

Interesting idea -makes one really wonder... especially as Burrell submitted the name of a Royal and it wasn't HM, DoE or Sarah...

If it wasn't HM, DoE or Sarah, then by process of elimination it would have to be POW. Big deal -- they were bugging him too.

Jo of Palatine · #**815** 01-15-2008, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zhontella

I saw another source for that information somewhere -- I'll try to remember where and provide the link. Anyway, the queen had to change her mind when Charles refused to give up Camilla.

Wasn't Diana still married in April of 1996? There is no chance IMHO that HM would have thought that she could abdicate with Charles still married to Diana. Why should she have done so? There is no reason why she should have done so. But the thought crossed my mind that someone in Charles' circle or the RF set Diana up in order to see what would happen.

Andrew comes to mind. Maybe he didn't want to divorce Sarah but was forced somehow to do it (to test the waters for Charles?) - other than Charles he was a puppet on his mother's strings financially and Sarah had those debts. Why not stir up trouble a bit back then? And if Burrell knew about that and maybe even has proof, then that would be an incentive for the RF to protect him from the Spencers.

Jo of Palatine · #**816** 01-15-2008, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zhontella

If it wasn't HM, DoE or Sarah, then by process of elimination it would have to be POW. Big deal -- they were bugging him too.

Why for heaven's sake should Charles tell Diana that
a) he wanted to bump off herself and Camilla
b) that he had impregnated Tiggy and that she then had an abortion.
c) that his mother wanted to abdicate and he would be king then?
d) that he would marry Tiggy after all that?

And all that while he was in the process of divorcing Diana?

Come on!