The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

There is no evidence to prove that Prince Philip ordered the "execution" of Diana, Princess of Wales, and her boyfriend Dodi Fayed, a coroner has said.

In his summing up at the inquest into their deaths, Lord Justice Scott Baker also said there is nothing to show that MI6 was involved in the Paris car crash

Princess Diana Inquest: No Evidence Prince Philip Ordered 'Execution' Coroner Lord Justice Scott Baker Says |Sky News|UK News

The articles about what the coroner said are all claiming that the jury has only 5 possibilities of a verdict: it was either Henri Paul through drunk driving, it was the pursuit of the paparazzi, it was a combination of both, or is was an "accidential death" without blaming somebody or an open verdict. But they cannot go for a murder plot.

Is that the way it is done in the UK? That the coroner evaluates the evidence and then tells the jury which possibilities are open to them? Sounds a bit strange to me.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

The articles about what the coroner said are all claiming that the jury has only 5 possibilities of a verdict: it was either Henri Paul through drunk driving, it was the pursuit of the paparazzi, it was a combination of both, or is was an "accidential death" without blaming somebody or an open verdict. But they cannot go for a murder plot.

Is that the way it is done in the UK? That the coroner evaluates the evidence and then tells the jury which possibilities are open to them? Sounds a bit strange to me.

Yes, the coroner directs the jury based on the evidence presented. If the jurors disagree and believe there is firm evidence to suggest foul play, they can return their own verdict or refuse to return a verdict, which would mean the possibility of yet another inquest. In this case, the police here and in France have said there is absolutely no evidence of murder.

If you take Fayed out of the equation, there would have been no prolonged investigation by the UK police, no prolonged inquest either.

It is possible that Fayed might try for another inquest based on misdirection by the coroner.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Y

It is possible that Fayed might try for another inquest based on misdirection by the coroner.

But then his own lawyer had all possibilities to bring in his own witnesses, to question the witnesses and the evidence and it didn't help Fayed one bit. Plus Fayed had 10 years to gather evidence. Thu I don't think that Fayed has a chance to go for another inquest - after all, who should say something new there?

I really hope that this verdict will be the end to that endless discussion. As far as I read the protocolls, the coroner allowed Fayed to venture along all avenues he wished to, he got the Secret Services to send witnesses and G´Fayed and his legal team could question them - what more could the coroner do for Fayed? If indeed there had been a conspiracy and all keep the Omertà, then simply there is no way to prove the truth except on searching for evidence that supports this theory. Fayed had all chances to find such evidence and didn't find any. So while everybody has a right to his or her own opinion, there is absolutely no proof existing for murder. And thus I hope the media will stop reporting about the accident as if it was one and let Fayed's and rants be what they are: nightmares of an old man, who represses his own responsibility for the death of his son and Diana.

[rominet09]

I think it will not end the speculation... look at Marilyn Monroe, books about her death are still written nowadays

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by rominet09

I think it will not end the speculation... look at Marilyn Monroe, books about her death are still written nowadays

Yes, but I doubt that there had been such an intense investigation into her death. Plus noone was interested in spending all the money in the world to prove she was murdered. A lot of the speculation about Monroe or the JFK murder come from the fact that either there was no real investigation or the official investigation lied as in the JFK case. But in this case really all interested parties could explore all possibilities and nothing turned up, so while there may still be some single questions there is nothing left to suggest that they were murdered but overwhelming evidence that it was an accident.

[Skydragon]

Although the coroner has said there is no evidence to suggest Philip or MI6 is involved, he has left in the option of unlawfully killed. One of the worst verdicts that could be returned, IMO, is an 'open verdict'.

Unlawful killing encompasses murder, unlawful act manslaughter and gross negligence. To return a verdict of unlawful killing the Coroner or jury needs to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that this is how the deceased came to his death. A coroner cannot find any person guilty of any of these offences, although in some cases it will be obvious that a particular person was involved. In other cases, it will be impossible to infer from the verdict who was responsible for the death and it is not the business of the court to enquire into this.

This, IMO, makes interesting reading, showing the variety of verdicts jurors and coroners can make and the evidence required.

http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-ri...rocedure.shtml

[ghost_night554]

Do we know when the verdict will be returned? I beleive I had read in some article that the coroner would discuss a possible gagging order for Mr Fayed if he objects. I though am finally satisfied with everything, all the evidence, discussion taken place during this inquest and feel that I can finally let this thing go and hopefully many others will too and Diana's soul and her family for that matter can finally rest over all this.

ETA.. CTV news just came on they talked about the inquest and then went around asking people what they think about the inquest and this one lady said that she thinks no matter what the outcome people won't stop and they'll still think that there's more to this than meets the eye. I sat there thinking do these people who say these thing actually stop for a second and read Operation Pagat or even the transcripts from the inquest my likely guess is no. I think before people speak they should really look at the evidence because had you asked me back in July(I've actually explained in other posts how in the begining I doubted every little piece of evidence until I had started to understand everything properly) what I thought I would have said murder. Sorry I know everyone is allowed to have their own opinion and not everyone has the time some of us do but it's just many people who I know haven't read all the evidence as well as I have and make quick judgements from little things they've heard and it drives me insane. If there was any foul play no evidence has been produced and likely never will but I don't beleive so as we've discussed before what kind of preparation would have had to been put in for this plan to have succeeded. There had to be certain factors covered for all this to work and no evidence no matter how confusing showed that.

[Polly]

The Coroner made it abundantly clear that suggestions that anyone or any agency had been instrumental in Diana's death had failed to meet even the most basic test, in law. This is the only measure which we can, in all probity, accept.

I have no doubt that some will continue to find nefarious purpose behind the Princess' death, but speaking as someone who did indeed like Diana and admired the good that she did with AIDS victims and land mines, I say that this drawn-out tragedy has played to a susceptible audience quite long enough!

Those who truly cared for Diana should accept the finality of her death, and acknowledge that continuing speculation and wild and woolly accusations can only now have a damaging effect on her surviving children. I cannot believe that Diana would welcome that.

I repeat: the Coroner has stated, clearly, that other considerations did not meet the basic requirements in British law. That should be quite sufficient, in my opinion.

[Sasha3]

Frankly I think it was an accident all along. From the time I switched over to the news by mistake just after midnight and heard Princess was injured in a car accident and then I decided to stay up until I heard she had just died I was shocked. From that they morning until now people have had conspiracy theories. That accident was due to speed. For all we know Henry Paul could have glimpsed in his review mirror seconds before hitting the white Uno, he then lost control and hit into the number 13 pillar. The shock of that impact is enough to kill anyone if they aren't wearing there seatbelts. That was a violent impact that could break ones neck and which could possibly be why Henry Paul and Dodi died virtually instantly from what I have read in many articles watched many theories on how that Merc could crumple like that. How the Princess was found in the car from what I saw on TV, one frenchman saw what happened but no one took his statement and he saw how the Princess was lying in the car and he phoned the police.

Lets hope the jury find it is an accident and lay this inquest to rest.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by ghost_night 554

I believe I had read in some article that the coroner would discuss a possible gagging order for Mr Fayed if he objects.

If only, unfortunately without a separate prosecution of Fayed, I don't believe a gagging order is possible.

Originally Posted by ghost_night554

I know I should have just edited my other post but CTV news just came on they talked about the inquest and then went around asking people what they think about the inquest and this one lady said that she thinks no matter what the outcome people won't stop and they'll still think that there's more to this than meets the eye. I sat there thinking do these people who say these thing actually stop for a second and read Operation Paget or even the transcripts from the inquest my likely guess is no.

I think the difference between those who want to believe it was murder and intelligent people like you, is that you seem to want to know the truth and have taken the time to read the Paget report and the inquest transcripts. Already some people are saying here in the UK, that even the inquest has been a giant cover up, that those who 'know' what happened were not called etc. When you 'push' them for their reasoning, it transpires that they have even the basic irrefutable facts wrong.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Although the coroner has said there is no evidence to suggest Philip or MI6 is involved, he has left in the option of unlawfully killed. l

Yes, but only connected to either the paparazzi's pursuit or Henri Paul's driving or a combination of both.

From the Scotsman about three of the fives options open to the jury:
Diana inquest warned of witness 'lies' - Scotsman.com News

"- unlawful killing by grossly negligent driving of the paparazzi in the following vehicles;

- unlawful killing through the gross negligence of the driver Henri Paul;

- unlawful killing by the grossly negligent driving of both the following vehicles and Mr Paul; "

[Jo of Palatine]

Lord Justice Scott Baker appears to be very outspoken when he advises the jury:

BBC NEWS | UK | Diana's butler 'obviously' lying

[Warren]

A further quote from Jo's link above:

Lord Baker suggested to the jury that Mr Burrell may have given evidence while thinking that "whatever he said might have an impact on his future enterprises".
Mr Burrell...described himself as "Diana's rock" - but Lord Baker said he was "quite a porous rock" given that many of the princess' secrets were made public.

Ouch!

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Warren

A further quote from Jo's link above:

Lord Baker suggested to the jury that Mr Burrell may have given evidence while thinking that "whatever he said might have an impact on his future enterprises".
Mr Burrell...described himself as "Diana's rock" - but Lord Baker said he was "quite a porous rock" given that many of the princess' secrets were made public.

Ouch!

Brilliant!
Love the new avatar Warren!

[Skydragon]

Princess Diana's inquest has been halted at the last minute after an email from France containing potential new evidence was received by the coroner.

Princess Diana Inquest Halted Over New Evidence |Sky News|UK News

He told the jury: "We received an email from the French giving information in relation in very broad terms, although we have not been able to get a proper translation of it yet, to do with samples and Henri Paul.
"Whether this contains anything that is new seems very doubtful. Whether it does contain anything that is relevant also seems pretty doubtful.
"But having gone six months down the road it seems desirable that we should bottom out this problem before we go any further.

[PadThaiPrincess]

What a juicy headline for doubtful bits of info.