The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008

[pinkie40]

I can't imagine a M-B that had been previously reported to have been stolen, stripped and rebuilt to be allowed to be part of a fleet of cars used for high profile, high level celebrities.

What is strange to me in all the photos of the M-B in question is that it seemed there was no blood ever shown (did I miss this maybe???)...I can assume, with the injuries sustained by the bodyguard alone, the amount of blood in the car and around the car (especially on the white airbags) would be a substantial amount...

Also, it was mentioned in a report on CNN hosted by Anderson Cooper, a couple from New York saw Diana thrown upon the dashbooard with her face towards them....then I would also surmise Diana would have sustained a bloody scalp (one can make out dark shadows from the "black and white" photocopied images on certain websites) from her crashing into the windshield.


So where is all this blood and would this be the reason, as mentioned by Simone Simmons, as to why the tunnel was washed clean??

 

[Roslyn]

So where is all this blood and would this be the reason, as mentioned by Simone Simmons, as to why the tunnel was washed clean??

I don't think you'd necessarily get cuts from being hurled against the dashboard, and even if there were cuts, they might not bleed much. I thought Diana's injuries were mainly internal. I would expect there to have been a good deal of blood from Rees' injuries, but there might not have been any spurting if he didn't sever arteries. I don't know details of the injuries to Paul and Dodi, but if they were killed instantly, the blood flow would follow the course of gravity, wouldn't it? The one colour photo I have seen does show some reddy-brown stuff, but as it was a black car, and had black interior, I think, blood mightn't have shown up anyway.

I'm not sure what you mean about Simmons. Did she say the tunnel was washed clean because there was blood, or because there was no blood? I would expect it to have been washed clean of any blood as a matter of course. Apart from the need to remove the blood in the interests of good taste, there would also have been brake fluid and oil and maybe petrol and other car fluids to remove in the interests of safety.

 

[Skydragon]

But surely that's the point, Skydragon, i.e. that too many did not believe that the earlier inquest was perfectly satisfactory? Nor should we forget that a royal hasn't died in such controversial circumstances before. I think, therefore, that the inquest is entirely appropriate.

I will only think it a waste of time and money if any detail, claim and counter-claim, accusation etc. is not fully addressed so that it can publicly be dismissed. To the conspiracy die-hards, it's a matter of justice being seen to have been done. If not, the rumours and sheer spite surrounding the BRF will continue well into history's record, and I, for one, don't believe that they deserve this.

This is the one and only inquest, there have been two investigations so far and if the inquest doesn't return the verdict Fayed wants, he will push for another one. It doesn't matter what the full and detailed investigation showed, the theorists will continue to believe she was murdered. Already I can hear them saying, 'they didn't call this witness' and 'they didn't take that into account'.

The investigation and inquest will do nothing to convince those that want to believe that her death was so mundane.

 

[Skydragon]

Also, it was mentioned in a report on CNN hosted by Anderson Cooper, a couple from New York saw Diana thrown upon the dashbooard with her face towards them....then I would also surmise Diana would have sustained a bloody scalp (one can make out dark shadows from the "black and white" photocopied images on certain websites) from her crashing into the windshield.

I watched the documentary on Ch4, which showed pictures of Diana after the crash and there was no major impact mark to be seen. I also remember Eve Pollard telling us that she (her paper) had been offered 'crash pictures' and all they showed was a small trickle of blood. I would doubt the authenticity of a couple seeing Diana thrown against the dashboard, when every other witness has said she was in the back, do you have a link to this story?

 

[GillW]

I watched the documentary on Ch4, which showed pictures of Diana after the crash and there was no major impact mark to be seen. I also remember Eve Pollard telling us that she (her paper) had been offered 'crash pictures' and all they showed was a small trickle of blood. I would doubt the authenticity of a couple seeing Diana thrown against the dashboard, when every other witness has said she was in the back, do you have a link to this story?

Everything I've read - including the Paget Report - states Diana was found slumped behind the front seats. Anyone who saw her impacting the windscreen had to have been inside the tunnel at the time of impact and seen that happen before she slumped back into the foot well - and I doubt she would have done that from a position above the two front seats. I think we can safely disregard the account...

 

[Gita]

Diana jury told that snappers expected key announcement

 

[Skydragon]

Diana jury told that snappers expected key announcement

Good old rumour to blame then! "He told me there was a rumour of an announcement".
Had she been with Dodi long enough to get engaged or be pregnant enough to know? Why has no doctor come forward to say she saw him, or shopkeeper to say she bought a diy kit?

 

[Polly]

Good old rumour to blame then! "He told me there was a rumour of an announcement".
Had she been with Dodi long enough to get engaged or be pregnant enough to know? Why has no doctor come forward to say she saw him, or shopkeeper to say she bought a diy kit?

You know, Skydragon, I don't really understand this last post. Perhaps I'm dense?

What her relationship was or wasn't with Dodi is of no interest to me and probably not to anyone else except Dodi's father. I couldn't care less who Diana might or might not have wanted to marry and so far as I'm concerned, a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc. would never have exercised my mind. All are honourable religions, and not the only ones, for that matter, in my humble opinion.

What does exercise me, nonetheless, is the adamant refusal to allow Mercedes' engineers to examine the car. They are brilliant and gifted men and women, and by golly, they can tell, precisely, what duress the car was placed under. As I've indicated above, something really untoward must have occurred to destroy Diana's car so comprehensively. I speak from personal experience.

I thought the lovely Diana an ill-advised and silly young woman in many ways. However, she contributed to this world in significant ways, she did a great deal to combat ignorance and prejudice and she worked very hard to bring the wretched of this earth to our compassion and understanding. No matter her agenda - she was a humanitarian success, and I honour her for that: always will.

I believe that it's our bounden duty to examine every tiny detail of her death. First, we owe it to her; second, we owe it to our beloved Queen and her family.

Refusing to acknowledge any or all possibilities in this Inquest, and leaving any little pebble of dissention unaddressed, will not exonerate those who do not deserve (in my opinion) the opprobrium of culpability in Diana's death.

 

[Skydragon]

don't really understand this last post. Perhaps I'm dense?.... What her relationship was or wasn't with Dodi is of no interest to me and probably not to anyone else except Dodi's father.....
....However, she contributed to this world in significant ways, ....
I believe that it's our bounden duty to examine every tiny detail of her death.

My post was about the photographers, yet again trying to find an excuse for their inexcusable behaviour that night, the pathetic 'we heard a rumour so we pursued her', when in fact they pursued her, sometimes with her help, regardless of any rumour. < ed >

As regards the rest of your post, do we really need to have her reputation further sullied by the acceptance by many, that this woman had leapt into another bed at the first opportunity and got herself pregnant? Do we need to know anything but the absolute facts regarding the crash.

I hadn't given any thought to which religion any of her male friends were and I don't understand your reference to it when replying to my post.

 

[TheTruth]

Diana jury shown receipt for Dodi engagement ring - Yahoo! News UK

 

[Skydragon]

Diana jury shown receipt for Dodi engagement ring - Yahoo! News UK

I'm not trying to be a snob when I ask if anyone can see Dodi offering an ordinary 'from the range' ring to Diana as an engagement ring. £11,600 is not what I would expect him to offer to Diana if he intended to propose.

Then there is the 2nd ring he apparently purchased - a £60,000 etoile - or star – ring of gold and 'gems' from the same line. If that is true he was offering her the cheaper ring, it just doesn't sound true, IMO.

 

[TheTruth]

I'm not trying to be a snob when I ask if anyone can see Dodi offering an ordinary 'from the range' ring to Diana as an engagement ring. £11,600 is not what I would expect him to offer to Diana if he intended to propose.

Then there is the 2nd ring he apparently purchased - a £60,000 etoile - or star – ring of gold and 'gems' from the same line. If that is true he was offering her the cheaper ring, it just doesn't sound true, IMO.

Yes, I agree. Anyway, I don't understand how Dodi passed from Kelly Fisher to Diana so fast only on the orders of his father. How could he disregard all his feelings for this woman ... I don't know but when you love someone (who you were going to marry by the way ...) you don't throw her away like that!

 

[GillW]

Yes, I agree. Anyway, I don't understand how Dodi passed from Kelly Fisher to Diana so fast only on the orders of his father. How could he disregard all his feelings for this woman ... I don't know but when you love someone (who you were going to marry by the way ...) you don't throw her away like that!

A possibility - perhaps Dodi knew full well that he was just a summer fling, and was actually buying the expensive ring for Kelly to apologize for having to neglect her while he entertained Diana on daddy's orders...? And that the cheaper ring (ah, would that I owned one that "cheap"!!!) was being considered as a simple gift to Diana as a token of their summer friendship (small change to him, after all...)

 

[TheTruth]

A possibility - perhaps Dodi knew full well that he was just a summer fling, and was actually buying the expensive ring for Kelly to apologize for having to neglect her while he entertained Diana on daddy's orders...? And that the cheaper ring (ah, would that I owned one that "cheap"!!!) was being considered as a simple gift to Diana as a token of their summer friendship (small change to him, after all...)

I agree with this theory, it's the only one that makes sense if it's true that he bought 2 rings.

 

[sirhon11234]

Jury sees video of Dodi Fayed shopping for jewelry
Jury sees video of Dodi Fayed shopping for jewelry

 

[bbb]

WAS Diana to wed? Jury see receipt for 'engagement ring' from Dodi | the Daily Mail

that theory makes sense to me, i think her true love was the doctor not dodi. i'm sorry thats the fugliest ring i've ever seen and not dianas style at all. it looks like what i call a "dinner ring" you wear it out to dinner but not as everyday jewelry.

 

[Skydragon]

Are they showing us the correct ring, because as you say, that is just a dress ring and hardly spectacular, which I believe Diana would have wanted if she was intending to accept him.

 

[Polly]

My post was about the photographers, yet again trying to find an excuse for their inexcusable behaviour that night, the pathetic 'we heard a rumour so we pursued her', when in fact they pursued her, sometimes with her help, regardless of any rumour. < ed >

As regards the rest of your post, do we really need to have her reputation further sullied by the acceptance by many, that this woman had leapt into another bed at the first opportunity and got herself pregnant? Do we need to know anything but the absolute facts regarding the crash.

I hadn't given any thought to which religion any of her male friends were and I don't understand your reference to it when replying to my post.

If Diana did indeed leap into another bed 'at the first opportunity' (what???) then we might, charitably conclude, that she was emulating her 'betters', perhaps?

To me, this remains an integral consideration which must be considered, if only to quell the damaging speculation.

As for religion - the issue is, it seems to me, and, I dare say, very many others, that Dodi's religion was, indeed, a major issue. Ergo: it's why the claims that Diana was 'murdered' have gained substance and credence.

These considerations form, for me, accepted 'facts' of the case as they're pre-eminent in the minds of many. All should be addressed if closure is ever to be reached. What I, as an individual, or you either, think, isn't the issue.

All implications, accusations, suppositions, etc. must be openly declared, discussed and then, hopefully,discounted.

I can't, for one minute, imagine the distress and angst that this whole sorry mess must be causing the Queen. She's not a young woman any longer and really doesn't need all of this.

 

[Warren]

As for religion - the issue is, it seems to me, and, I dare say, very many others, that Dodi's religion was, indeed, a major issue. Ergo: it's why the claims that Diana was 'murdered' have gained substance and credence.

If 'religion' really was an issue, why was no-one concerned with Diana's relationship with Dr Hasnat Khan? He was the one she wanted to marry, not summer-fling Dodi.

I know we have covered this before, but why would Diana marrying a Muslim gentleman have any impact whatsoever on the Royal Family or the Monarchy as an institution? Knowing as we do that the Prince of Wales has close links with the Islamic world makes the "murdered because she was planning to marry a Muslim" theory ridiculous. If she did have a child to a Muslim, and that child was raised a Muslim, then so what? Would a Muslim Diana or a Muslim half-sibling of Prince William make any difference to anything?

Sorry, I just don't see how or why a Muslim marriage (or a Muslim child) would be motive for murder to either the Royal Family or to 'the Establishment'. If anything, Diana detractors would have been quietly delighted to see her permanently tarnishing her image and reputation by marrying the very questionable and dubious Dodi.

Apart from Mohammed Al Fayed himself, has anyone else claimed that 'religion' was an issue at that stage of Diana's life?

 

[Duchess]

Are they showing us the correct ring, because as you say, that is just a dress ring and hardly spectacular, which I believe Diana would have wanted if she was intending to accept him.

i don't believe this is "THE" ring but one very similar. didn't the one he chose have emeralds in it? at any rate i agree, it's not an engagement ring in the traditional sense. i think any woman would describe this as a dinner ring. hard to say what diana's taste was though. anything i've read said she chose the one from charles because it was the biggest one on the tray of choices presented to her yet later i remember reading that she wasn't crazy about it because it was too big.

 

[Skydragon]

If Diana did indeed leap into another bed 'at the first opportunity' (what???) ....

We don't seem to understand one anothers post's at all, do we. To spell it out

I am horrified that many of Diana's 'fans' are, it seems, very happy to believe she was murdered because she was pregnant with Dodi Fayeds child, therefore claiming that she had sex with him at least once, within a few days of their 'romance' starting.

I as a non fan, find that assumption a disgrace... Diana may have been many things, but I don't believe for one moment she was a trollop!

 

[TheTruth]

We don't seem to understand one anothers post's at all, do we. To spell it out

I am horrified that many of Diana's 'fans' are, it seems, very happy to believe she was murdered because she was pregnant with Dodi Fayeds child, therefore claiming that she had sex with him at least once, within a few days of their 'romance' starting.

I as a non fan, find that assumption a disgrace... Diana may have been many things, but I don't believe for one moment she was a trollop!

LOL , I like Diana and I never thought she could be pregnant and never will. It's an horrible thing to suppose this of someone, especially when we know how important it was for her to be in love with the other person (referring to Hewitt, Hoare, etc.). Moreover, she could get every man in the world so why Dodi ? I know what you will say, love isn't something you choose but I can't believe she would have done it with a man like him.

 

[Russophile]

WAS Diana to wed? Jury see receipt for 'engagement ring' from Dodi | the Daily Mail

that theory makes sense to me, i think her true love was the doctor not dodi. i'm sorry thats the fugliest ring i've ever seen and not dianas style at all. it looks like what i call a "dinner ring" you wear it out to dinner but not as everyday jewelry.

That is a most ugly ring! My wedding ring is considered a "dinner ring" and I'm happy to say it's not ugly like that thing what so ever!
I am wondering what the motivation is with Mohammed Al-Fayed. Just why is he trying so hard to prove that there was some sort of "marriage" proposal to Diana? Why is it so hard for him to comes to terms that Dodi was just a summer fling. Ego?

 

[silver1]

I have one question for everyone out there...If Mi6 were given orders to carry out and therefore everything should be covered up, then what is the point of this trial?. Surely the judge and all involved are part of the same masonic group.The one that prince philip is head of. surely the outcome is already sorted out, but the inquest is just to please the public. And second thing is if the truth (if it is truth) that the accident was 'arranged' finally came out (but i really dont see how and who would go against the establishment in court/police/law or even church -as the queen is head of all that), then HOW WOULD THE PUBLIC REACT? i doubt that day would ever come, but just imagine IF THE VERDICT WAS MURDER then how would the british public accept prince philip or royal family anymore? It would be chaos on that day.

 

[Russophile]

I think Silver, your "theory" is just TOO FAR OUT THERE.
But that's my opinion.

 

[silver1]

Where there is smoke there is fire, and Diana knew how they operate better than anyone. she knew her time was coming. I personally believe things and facts do not add up and there is something not right. There was obviously something to cover up. Or she would not have been embalmed, tunnel would not have been opened so soon, camera footage would all be there rather than some missing here and there, and we would not be asking questions 10 years later. But lets look at the facts. Charles HAS married camilla and now we seem to accept her like she was not in anyway an adultress, and one day she will sit on the throne of england as our queen. Would that have ever happened if Diana was still alive? Funny how things work out isnt it.

 

[TheTruth]

Here we go again ... . I think we've made many speculations and for what ?! "If she had done this or that" ... with "if" you can change History. And why does Camilla need to be named here ?! From what I know, she isn't a member of the MI6 ( or maybe she was send by James Bond ... yeah, right ). I'm sorry to say but there's nobody to blame here, and certainly not Camilla or Charles. Since when an adultery leads to death ?

 

[silver1]

have just read the point about the doctor and dodi...Hasnat Khan knew a relationship with Diana would bring disaster and so he ended it (im sure he valued his life and nobody would protect him), but dodi was different. His fathers empire and money would be a wall around them and affer diana the security she needs (money, toys, homes,yachts, treated like she is used to) etc. And it was Moh'd al fayeds ambitions that pushed his son. He even bought the chateau in France that belonged to Mrs.simpson and Edward for his son and diana to live in, and in a way he was counting his chickens before they were hatched. You may think religion doesnt matter because Hasnat khan was muslim, but remember he ended it because he probably feared for his life and he has been silent since. Here it proves eductation to be valuable. he is a surgeon and was smart enough to know when to get out. Dont forget with the Fayeds, Mohammed -owner of Harrods, and pays God knows how much in tax- doesnt even have a British passport. Even the nobodys who have only been in uk for 5 or 6 years (and live off the government as they dont want to work)have passports. If after DECADES of being one of the richest businessmen in england, and well known to the royal family, they didnt give him a passport (one has to ask 'why didnt they'?) - DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD HAVE GIVEN HIM THE FUTURE KINGS MOTHER AS HIS DAUGHTER IN LAW?!!!! I rest my case.

 

[Russophile]

Sorry, but that's just too much speculation. This is quite like the "Bush did it 9/11" speculation. There would be just TOO many witnesses, TOO many bodies and SOMEBODY would talk.
I don't buy. But then again, that's just me.

 

[silver1]

Here we go again ... . I think we've made many speculations and for what ?! "If she had done this or that" ... with "if" you can change History. And why does Camilla need to be named here ?! From what I know, she isn't a member of the MI6 ( or maybe she was send by James Bond ... yeah, right ). I'm sorry to say but there's nobody to blame here, and certainly not Camilla or Charles. Since when an adultery leads to death ?

I am not a diana fan. I am a University lecturer. An eductated person who asks questions. Who sees things from all angles and i can say as a historian and as a person living in the west, i am not going to be spoonfed this story of a rather suspicious death being just an 'accident' and then have to act blind, deaf and dumb to all that is happening in this country. Why did we go into Iraq again after more than a million people demonstrated against it. where is the democracy in that? - just an example of the many).
Personally i believe that we all know what the verdict is going to be.It will be what they want it to be. Simple as that. And you ask the question 'since when has adultary led to death?' Look back in history, and see. One famous example is Henry viii even changed the religion of his country to suit his ways.beheaded his women.
I am not asking you to believe me - but i am just saying ask questions. We still have that right . The Royal families of Europe have conquered and taken by 'divide and conquer' rule of thumb. They murdered eachother, conspiricies and mysteries over the centuries have still not been solved and this has always been their way. Politics, money, power and human nature. The kind of humans with alot of power. not you and me. Its a whole differnt ball game. If Diana was a threat to them getting rid of her would be seen as a great benefit to the throne in the long run. And Camilla is the one who is laughing all the way to the throne. She waited a long time, and with Diana out of the way -she had the wedding she wanted. {personal insult deleted - Elspeth}