The Verdict of the Diana Inquest, April 2008, and Aftermath

[georgiea]

The inquest basically said that Diana's car crash was an accident. It ruled out conspiracy, which is what Mr. Mansfield is suggesting was actually behind the crash. He doesn't come right out and say that Diana was murdered, but he uses terms like "the hidden hand."

Did you read his book or just got the conspiracy theory from the article? I was wondering if I should buy his book. I remember the inquest ruled that it was an accident brought on by a drunk driver. I don't think they said too much about the press as a cause.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Inquest said she was unlawfully killed by the 'gross negligence' of driver Henri Paul and the paparazzi.

BBC NEWS | UK | Princess Diana unlawfully killed

 

[Mermaid1962]

I think that it's possible that Mr. Mansfield is acting as Dodi's father's mouthpiece. Mr. al Fayed has said that he, himself would no longer be speaking out about his ideas, but that doesn't mean that he can't speak through someone else.

The thing is, that night in Paris was absolutely chaotic; and that's why I think that there wasn't a conspiracy possible. No one knew what was going to happen at any particular time. A conspiracy means that things have to be under control. Conspirators have to be able to predict where people will be at a particular time in order to take action.

So no, I haven't read Mr. Mansfield's book, and I don't intend to. The Express was the paper of Mr. al Fayed's choice. They ran his point of view constantly up til the time that the inquest came up with its verdict.

Did you read his book or just got the conspiracy theory from the article? I was wondering if I should buy his book. I remember the inquest ruled that it was an accident brought on by a drunk driver. I don't think they said too much about the press as a cause.

 

[sirhon11234]

The thing is, that night in Paris was absolutely chaotic; and that's why I think that there wasn't a conspiracy possible. No one knew what was going to happen at any particular time. A conspiracy means that things have to be under control. Conspirators have to be able to predict where people will be at a particular time in order to take action.

Exactly if an assasination is going to be carried out it has to be controlled not chaotic.

 

[Osipi]

What I find sad is that these stories of conspiracy keep surfacing from time to time along with stories on Dodi and Diana's romance.

I never for once believed that there was or would be anything serious between Diana and Dodi no matter how much Mr. Fayed wished it to be. Diana I think was used as a pawn in this instance to furthur Mr. Fayed's dream of really fitting into British aristocratic society where doors kept slamming in his face.

The inquest determined its decision and things should just be left to rest.

 

[georgiea]

The thing is, that night in Paris was absolutely chaotic; and that's why I think that there wasn't a conspiracy possible. No one knew what was going to happen at any particular time. A conspiracy means that things have to be under control. Conspirators have to be able to predict where people will be at a particular time in order to take action.

I accept that the car crash was an accident. But a few things still bother me. First, the press was not held responsible for one of the factors of the crash in the verdict. Secondly, knowing that Henri Paul was an informant and he could give information to someone right before the group left the hotel. I always had this question in the back of my mind, because the inquest and the Pageit report did not answer it satisfactory to my liking. Does anyone else feel the same way? Or is there some information that I overlooked?

 

[sirhon11234]

Honestly I think that some of the questions people have about the crash might never be answered.

 

[georgiea]

Honestly I think that some of the questions people have about the crash might never be answered.

I know, that is why I will always wonder.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I accept that the car crash was an accident. But a few things still bother me. First, the press was not held responsible for one of the factors of the crash in the verdict. Secondly, knowing that Henri Paul was an informant and he could give information to someone right before the group left the hotel. I always had this question in the back of my mind, because the inquest and the Pageit report did not answer it satisfactory to my liking. Does anyone else feel the same way? Or is there some information that I overlooked?

The Inquest does put some of the blame on the paparazzi so the press does get some blame officially there.


I really have no questions about that night - Diana got in a car with a drunk driver, stupidly didn't put on her seatbelt even when the car was going at excessive speed being chased by the paparazzi and so died as a result of her own stupidity.

 

[sirhon11234]

I know, that is why I will always wonder.

Well atleast the ruling was conclusive that she was unlawfully killed as a result of a drunken driver.

 

[Naggi]

I once read that even if she would have put the belt on, there were very little chance that she would have survived the crash. The impact was simply too bad. So to say she died of her own stupidy is I think not appropriate. The princess and her consorts died because unfortunate circumstances that all came together in one night.

 

[MARG]

I fail to understand what is inappropriate about saying that Diana'a failure to fasten her seatbelt was an act of "stupidity". And when, as reported, the car was being driven at high speed it is even moreso. The fact that the only survivor was wearing a seatbelt speaks for itself.

Yes the driver was supposedly a functional drunk, yes he had been drinking, but fo me the biggest question, which will remain unanswered is, how much the passengers had imbibed to make their judgement so flawed.

 

[Naggi]

There were also rumours going on that the amublance came too late and wasted too much time while driving to the hospital. She was still alive at that time. It is also rumoured that the paparazi hindered the first helpers in their work and so forth and so forth. So maybe she died because help came too late? We simply don't know. For me it is very simple: She was at a wrong time at wrong place with the wrong people. Things like this happen sometimes. We don't really know happened, what the situation really looked like at the time of the accident. For me, this is not stupidity, it is unfortunate.

 

[Lumutqueen]

The first thing you do when you get into a car is fasten your seatbelt, to not do so and think you'll be okay is stupid.
Diana died because she didn't fasten her seat belt. IMO.

 

[Osipi]

The first thing you do when you get into a car is fasten your seatbelt, to not do so and think you'll be okay is stupid.
Diana died because she didn't fasten her seat belt. IMO.

I'm in total agreement here because I have seen first hand the difference it makes to have the seat belt on at the time of a crash. Without wearing a seat belt, Diana's body was jolted with such force that it displaced her heart. Had she been wearing one, her body would have remained more stationary and in place with less damage to the internal organs.

The first hand business is the fact that my brakes went out on me in rush hour traffic in downtown Detroit and my small Toyota car under bellied a huge semi truck. Because I was wearing my seat belt, all I suffered was a few bangs and bruises, a broken nose and a car that looked like a crushed tin can. (my husband wouldn't even let me see the shape the car was in when we "donated" it by signature to a junkyard) Without the belt, I wouldn't have survived the crash.

The law is sensible here. "Click it or ticket".

 

[sirhon11234]

I agree she would have walked away from the crash with only cuts and bruises. I don't think Diana purposely chose not to wear her seatbelt to be a daredevil. With all that commotion and the tunnel being less than 5 minutes away from the hotel I believe all the passengers just forgot to put their belts on. And Trevor was the only one to remember moments before the crash. It was a horrible mistake that costed her and two other people's lives.

 

[Osipi]

Its poignant that perhaps even now so many years later talking about that crash in Paris we will all be reminded that anything can happen in a split second and remember always to buckle up. Thank you Diana!

 

[georgiea]

I don't think just cuts and bruises, sorry. I believe one of her legs and arms where broken. But again that might have happen, because she was not using a seat belt and she was thrown against the car.Trever Rys-Jones took years to get better.

 

[sirhon11234]

Yes your right she probably would have had a broken arm or leg. But having a broken arm or leg is much better than having your heart displaced as what happened to the Princess.

 

[Naggi]

These are all assumptions. After all, we do not know what might have happened to her if she would have put her seatbelts on. I am strongly reluctant to say that she acted out of stupidity. We are talking about a very intense situation here where people unfortunately took the wrong decisions. It is always easier to tell what is right after something has happened. But when you are in the special situation things look different and you can't blame people or call them stupid because they could not foresee what was to happen. One accident is not like the other. You can't compare them as they are all different and unique in their circumstances. In some cases a seatbelt can even cause the death of a person instead of saving his life, I have read. It always depends on the accident. So no one can say for sure what would have happened. That is all what I am saying. But anyway, I wouldn't call anybody stupid or say they acted out of stupidity when thinking on the circumstances of that tragic night.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Based on the known statistics any person who doesn't automatically put on their seatbelt when entering a car is stupid and I do believe that Diana would have survived the crash had she used her seatbelt. The three that died weren't wearing seatbelts. The one who survived had his on. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realise that there was a greater chance of survival if the most basic of precautions in a car had been taken - putting on a seatbelt. Putting on a seatbelt shouldn't even be something you think about - it should be automatic.

There were a number of stupid things done that night - leaving the hotel for one. Henri Paul signalling to the paparazzi at the back of the hotel (shown on the CCTV shown at the inquest - he went outside and waved at the paps while waiting for the car to arrive), leaving from the back of the hotel making it more of a challenge for the paps anyway - all of these things were stupid and those that did them were stupid for going along with whoever made those stupid decisions.

I will always regard her as stupid for her actions that night. The main reason she died was she didn't put on her seatbelt and she and she alone has to take the blame for that stupid decision.

Yes she was stupid that night and it cost her her life and it cost her two sons their mother. I will always say that her actions were stupid because unless she was being held hostage and being taken somewhere against her will and forcibly stopped from putting on her seatbelt the only person to blame for her decision to get in a car with a drunken driver with the paparazzi wanting photos of her with Dodi, particularly after her teasing comment from the week before 'wait till you see what I do next' was Diana. She made the decisions and therefore she died.

 

[Naggi]

The bodyguard only survived the crash because he was sitting in a Mercedes S 280 which is a very stable car. Also he was sitting in the right or for him fortunate ankle as far as I can recall. A crash of this kind in another not so modern car would have killed everyone that night with or without seatbelt. As said circumstances play a role here. I always thought that actually it was the bodyguard whose survival can be seen as a miracle and who had a guardian angel on that night.

Oftentimes people die in car crashes even when they had the seatbelts on. I always put a seatbelt on, but do I believe that it can for 100% save my life when I get involved in a serious crash? Am not sure about this and hopefully will never get into that situation.

She trusted the wrong person on the wrong night and made the wrong decisions. This can happen to anyone regardless of them being stupid or not stupid.

 

[sirhon11234]

Wasn't it reported that despite Henri Paul was drunk, he didn't appear intoxicated to everyone else? From the paget it was said that he didn't appear drunk.

 

[georgiea]

Wasn't it reported that despite Henri Paul was drunk, he didn't appear intoxicated to everyone else? From the paget it was said that he didn't appear drunk.

I remember it was on the cameras in the hotel he did not appear drunk. Maybe it was in the Paget and inquest.

 

[Iluvbertie]

He didn't appear drunk but heavy drinkers can drink a lot more than a casual drinker before appearing drink as their system is used to it e.g. in the days after my mother's death my brother, father and I would go out for dinner each night (my parents' house was being renovated at the time). We would drink two bottles of wine and my brother would have some beer as well. I always drove home and yet to anyone looking at the three of us leaving the restaurant I would have appeared the most drunk but I had only had one drink while the other two drank all the rest but they drink regularly and I don't. They knew that I was perfectly capable of driving but I would have appeared, to a passer-by as being the least steady - not drunk mind you but a little bit tipsy.

As for surviving a wreck like that my brother walked away from a car that was totalled with the roof crushing down on the seats and he had a couple of scrathes because he was wearing his seatbelt so was stable and when the car stopped rolling - it went over on its top three times - the front windshield had gone and he was able to crawl out. There was way less of his car than of Diana's and he survived because he had on his seatbelt. It kept his body stable so he wasn't thrown around and he had no internal injuries. It was internal injuries that killed Diana - injuries she wouldn't have received had she been in a stable position and not been crushed by sliding down the seat. She wouldn't have been able to move into a position where she could have been crushed. She might have still died, she might have still had severe injuries but no seatbelt made death inevitable in that crash - stupid decision not to put on a proven life-saving device. Trevor Rees Jones was in the front seat that is statistically the most dangerous seat in a car but he survived because he had on his seatbelt at the time of impact - it kept him stable and so he didn't get thrown forward into the dashboard or throuth the windshield. Diana was behind him and with no restraint was thrown into and under his seat thus getting the injuries that killed her.

 

[Duchessmary]

Well, it's all speculation. Diana should've fastened her seat belt, but I think she may have been caught up in the moment, believing she was safe with Dodi whatever the circumstances. I don't think she was stupid.
You have to remember that the car hit the tunnel at a tremendous speed, and slammed into the pillar. If you have ever been in the Alma tunnel, you can see that those are basically pillars of death.

 

[sirhon11234]

I know! I was in Paris back in July of 07 and my tour bus drove into the tunnel and the driver was speeding not as fast as Henri but my heart was beating very fast. That tunnel is a death trap with those pillars and that slope.

 

[Jaya]

I don't know why you would feel safest in Harrods, I would think many of the best pickpockets favour that kind of shop.

Diana was killed in a car accident, why would she be a 'restless spirit'.

Being killed in an accident in Eastern religions makes you wander in Pitru lokh- on the earth plane until you find your way to another incarnation . In other words it is harder to find your way.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I'm not sure, but I think that the inquest found that Diana had a bit of alcohol in her system, but it wasn't very much.

but fo me the biggest question, which will remain unanswered is, how much the passengers had imbibed to make their judgement so flawed.

 

[MARG]

In that case their judgement was not impaired by alcohol and so we come down to chocies. I find it hard to believe that Diana, coming from a country where wearing a seatbelt is compulsory, could have made such a stupid and concious choice. It comes back to the old addage of "for want of a nail a war was lost".