The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008

[COUNTESS]

Oh, Charles would have married some, tidy, aristocratic lady, produced his heir and continued skulking around with Camilla. Diana was a fool and made a fuss, others might not have.

[georgiea]

BBC NEWS | UK | Diana driver samples questioned

I find that what the BBC wrote about the inquest today interesting. It talks about Mr. Paul' blood test results not being accurate. I think that is a big win for the al Fayed team and opens up a question that Mr. Paul might not be responsible for the auto accident.

[anbrida]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

Oh, Charles would have married some, tidy, aristocratic lady, produced his heir and continued skulking around with Camilla. Diana was a fool and made a fuss, others might not have.

Oh dear, you made me really confused now. If Charles is this kind of husband, I am glad Diana was a fool.

[Charlotte1]

Originally Posted by georgiea

BBC NEWS | UK | Diana driver samples questioned

I find that what the BBC wrote about the inquest today interesting. It talks about Mr. Paul' blood test results not being accurate. I think that is a big win for the al Fayed team and opens up a question that Mr. Paul might not be responsible for the auto accident.

Again I would suggest that you read the actual court transcripts.

Inquests into the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al Fayed: Hearing transcripts

rather than using the media reports. The media only report snippets that can make headlines, there's not a huge desire to be accurate.

Read the transcripts and Professor Robert Forrest's testimony ( he testified for a day and a half, so there's a lot to his testimony not just the few lines reported in the media) The testimony states that there were 3 tests carried out, it's only the second test that Henri Paul's solicitor was able to question. And this is what the media has latched on to and of course feeds the conspiracy theories. But all 3 tests showed high alcohol levels, all 3 tests were DNA matched to Henri Paul's mother.

Professor Robert Forrest's testimony concluded

21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Professor, if we cast aside
22 completely the samples taken on the 31st and relied
23 simply on the 4th, what would your conclusion be?
24 A. My conclusion -- the ultimate conclusion would be that
25 Mr Paul's ability to safely control the motor vehicle at

111

1 the time of his death was impaired as a result of the
2 consumption of alcohol.

( the sample from 31st August were the ones Henri Paul's solicitor questioned. Samples taken 4th September were taken from the femoral artery, which is the best place to take blood samples for testing. These samples Henri Paul's solicitor didn't question and there was positive evidence that the alcohol level was high, DNA established they were Henri Paul's and all the collection procedures were beyond reproach.)
There was no big win for the al Fayed team at all.

[Russophile]

This is a bit of an aside, but would anybody be interested in an article on Mohammed Al-Fayed's complete breakdown?

[Elspeth]

As long as it's relevant to the thread topic, feel free to post a link.

[Avalon]

Diana's bodyguard: 'I cannot recall very much, but Dodi was to blame for using crash car'

Some quotes from the article:

"I was not happy as Dodi was separating the two security officers, but I went along with the arrangement. It was also Dodi who decided that Paul would be driving the car," he said.

Under cross examination by Michael Mansfield QC, for Mr Al Fayed, he conceded it must have been Mr Paul who gave him details of the plan but insisted that it was still Dodi's idea. "Dodi would not listen to my reasoning," he added.

Mohamed Al Fayed's security chief ordered an employee to get into Trevor Rees's hospital bedroom to ensure that he was "briefed" before he spoke to police, the inquest heard.

Ben Murrell also claimed he was told to tell journalists that Dodi and Diana had planned to live in the former home of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor in Paris with their "new baby". Mr Murrell, who was giving evidence via video-link from Nigeria, said he refused.

Mr Mansfield, lawyer for Mr Al Fayed, was forced to admit that he had no evidence to back the allegations.

The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, demanded to know why Mr Al Fayed had not withdrawn his clearly unsubstantiated remarks, saying: "Because they are grave allegations I would have thought a man with any decency who was not going to pursue them would have withdrawn them."

For me, the most revolting was the fact that Al Fayed wanted to 'brief' Trevor Rees, before he would toak to police. And that Ben Murell 'was told' to tell the journalists about the 'engagement and new baby plans'.
You can really see where all those conspirasy theories come from, if Mr Al Fayed's people 'briefed' everyone to tell what he needed them to tell to support his claims.

[CourtSprite]

Hello magazine for January 22nd has a very interesting article on the man who know one has heard from. Hasnat Khan. His testimony at the inquest is the first time he's spoken publicly about his relationship with the late Princess.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I hope you're fond of Beatrice, then.

Not necessarily. Diana introduced Sarah to Andrew. If Diana had returned from her honeymoon as HRH The Dowager Princess of Wales, I'm not sure the queen would have asked Diana for help in getting the new heir married. I even bet Andrew would not have married Fergie at all but a lady of higher rank and better breeding - thus no Beatrice and Eugenie either. BTW - that would have happened IMHO with Charles getting rid of Diana as well... No William and Harry, no Beatrice and Eugenie...

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by anbrida

Oh dear, you made me really confused now. If Charles is this kind of husband, I am glad Diana was a fool.

I don't see Charles as "that kind of husband". I think he really believed he could make that marriage work when he proposed. Diana told Andrew Morton that she never really felt good when she experienced her first glimpses into what life would be for her as Charles' wife. Even her own grandmother Lady Fermoy warned her that she didn't think Diana would like the way life in the RF would be. Still Diana accepted Charles That, even though she had been worried that he had had relationships with her sister, Anna Wallace and amanda Knatchbull right before he started courting her and on believing, as she told Morton, that he had a relationship with someone else. I mean, come on - a situation like that hints at trouble to come.

Diana claims that she had been warned by an inner voice before accepting Charles' proposal and had spoken to him about her love and he had several times relied: "Whatever love means". But when you watch that engagement interview, then you'll see that Charles is making a joke with these words and it is quite implausible that he would have used htese words several times to her before the wedding announcement. And if he did - wouldn't that have been a reason to be more cautious?

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

Oh, Charles would have married some, tidy, aristocratic lady, produced his heir and continued skulking around with Camilla. Diana was a fool and made a fuss, others might not have.

Diana was the one who said that as a teenager she had wanted to keep herself tidy for something big to come along so I daresay if her relationship to Charles had fallen through there would be a very good chance she'd have married another big name aristocrat with similar results.

As long as we're playing what-if, I think the whole Royal Family would have developed distinctly differently if the Queen Mother and Lord Mountbatten had died before the Queen came to the throne.

There would have been no Queen Mum and Lord Mountbatten fighting over who Charles married and no Lady Fermoy as Lady in Waiting to conspire with the Queen Mum on getting their grandchildren married.

Chances are that without her Mum looking over her shoulder for the first 80 years of her life, the Queen would have been tempted to modernize the monarchy a bit so that a 19 year old virgin with an aristocratic family would not be considered the only suitable bride for a 33 year old heir.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Chances are that without her Mum looking over her shoulder for the first 80 years of her life, the Queen would have been tempted to modernize the monarchy a bit so that a 19 year old virgin with an aristocratic family would not be considered the only suitable bride for a 33 year old heir.

Good thought, Ysbel. Yes, I think as well that Queen Mum had a strong influence on the queen and it was one not necessarily helpful.

Another point: How realistic is it that Diana honestly believed the queen would abdicate as long as Queen Mum was still alive? At least the problems of the naming of the former queen must have given Diana food for thought - two "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother" at the same time with a not-yet divorced king Charles and his separated queen Diana? It boggles my mind to believ that for a moment - but that's what Diana told her lawyers...

Same for the idea that Diana should be injured in an accident so that she could be put in a home or clinic... I doubt any sane person would think up such a problematic plan to deal with a person when divorce as an option was available. But it's interesting that Diana in reality had psychological problems like her suffering from bulimia and it's a an old experience of psychiatrists that patients who suffer from such problems are very afraid to be considered mentally ill - because they know that there is a piece of reality in that fear. So calling a person who is afraid of being ill or being seen as ill "paranoid" in public like Nicholas Soames did could well lead to exact this outcome: a bout of paranoia. Diana must have realised at one point or the other that the life she led was not healthy. The sad thing is that she did not see how to change it.

[Avalon]

Inquest Judge Raps Dodi Fayed's Father

The judge leading the inquest into the death of Princess Diana criticized wealthy businessman Mohamed Al Fayed on Wednesday for not withdrawing allegations that a bodyguard who survived the car crash is faking memory loss and was paid to tell lies.
Al Fayed has claimed that his son, Dodi Fayed, and the princess were targets of a conspiracy led by Prince Philip, the husband of Queen Elizabeth II, and carried out by British security agents.
Lord Justice Scott Baker asked whether Al Fayed still alleges that Trevor Rees, the sole survivor of the Aug. 31, 1997, crash in Paris, is lying and supporting a cover-up.
"I have not maintained those (allegations), and I am not in a position to produce any material to support them," said Michael Mansfield, Al Fayed's lawyer, who cross-examined Rees.
"Why haven't they been withdrawn?" Baker asked. "One would have thought that a man of any decency would have withdrawn."

[TheTruth]

Diana paparazzi defend inquest no-show - Yahoo! News UK

Quote :

Six people were detained on the night of the 1997 crash after taking more than 100 pictures of the crash scene.

How can they not be forced to go in court ?! As far as we know they are really likely to be the ones who created the crash.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

Another point: How realistic is it that Diana honestly believed the queen would abdicate as long as Queen Mum was still alive? At least the problems of the naming of the former queen must have given Diana food for thought - two "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother" at the same time with a not-yet divorced king Charles and his separated queen Diana? It boggles my mind to believ that for a moment - but that's what Diana told her lawyers...

I think its plausible that the Queen would have abdicated if Charles' marriage had gone well and his family stable. Prince Philip did say in 'Meet the Press' in the late 60s that HM would consider abdication if it was appropriate.

What they would have done with two Queen Elizabeths though is anyone's guess. I know the Dutch queens take on the title of 'Princess' when they abdicate.

But I think if the Queen had abdicated or even died while Charles and Diana were in the middle of the War of the Waleses would have meant a quick end to the monarchy. I don't think that a John Major or Tony Blair would have seriously entertained the thought of a warring King and Queen as the country's representatives. As one royal commentator said after John Major had announced the separation and maintained that Diana would be crowned Queen, they said that the monarchy could survive separate courts of King and Queen, but it couldn't survive rival courts. The other alternatives were not so good. Wiilliam and Harry were too young to be effective as monarchs with the option of King Andrew and Queen Sarah an even worse scenario.

If the Queen had died at that point, I daresay the monarchy would have died with her.

[Charlotte1]

Originally Posted by TheTruth

Diana paparazzi defend inquest no-show - Yahoo! News UK



How can they not be forced to go in court ?! As far as we know they are really likely to be the ones who created the crash.

It's not a court as such, it's an inquest. The coroner legally cannot force a non British resident to attend. The British foreign minister approached the French government officials to try and get the French citizens to testify and the French have refused to force them. They maintain that it's voluntary and up to each individual if they wish to testify at the inquest.