The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/)
-   -   The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008 (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/the-diana-inquest-october-2007-april-2008-a-14241.html)

sirhon11234 10-01-2007 06:02 PM

The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008
 
Inquest Into Princess Diana`s Death Finally Begins
Javno - World

AFP: Diana inquest to open as murder theories linger

georgiea 10-01-2007 06:42 PM

I hope the inquest can finally put closure to the whole sad situation of Diana's and Dodi's deaths!:angel:

Skydragon 10-02-2007 02:19 PM

Support For Diana Conspiracy |Sky News|UK News

Diana Inquest Is 'Like No Other Before' |Sky News|UK News

pinkie40 10-02-2007 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgiea (Post 673787)
I hope the inquest can finally put closure to the whole sad situation of Diana's and Dodi's deaths!:angel:

Unfortunately, the long wait for the inquest itself bears some responsibility for the enduring dialogue amongst conspiracy theorists.

Had not Prince Harry himself voiced his thought of that he probably will never know what happened in the tunnel in the Matt Lauer interview this past June, then I would have not have revisited some of my concerns.

selrahc4 10-02-2007 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkie40 (Post 674120)
Unfortunately, the long wait for the inquest itself bears some responsibility for the enduring dialogue amongst conspiracy theorists.

Had not Prince Harry himself voiced his thought of that he probably will never know what happened in the tunnel in the Matt Lauer interview this past June, then I would have not have revisited some of my concerns.

Saying he'd never know what happened is quite different from saying he thinks there was some kind of conspiracy or that it was anything but an accident.

Duchess 10-02-2007 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by selrahc4 (Post 674142)
Saying he'd never know what happened is quite different from saying he thinks there was some kind of conspiracy or that it was anything but an accident.

i wonder why he would say this? it could almost be interpreted to mean that he questions the "official" version?

CasiraghiTrio 10-02-2007 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by selrahc4 (Post 674142)
Saying he'd never know what happened is quite different from saying he thinks there was some kind of conspiracy or that it was anything but an accident.

Definitely. He could well be satisfied with the police report, but still have questions, i.e. "What the hell was my mum thinking, going all over Paris like that instead of staying put in a safe place and having a full night of sleep?" Or how about, "Why the hell didn't they have a better decoy plan in place, one that would have succeeded in fooling all paparazzi?" Or try this on for size: Why was Henri Paul drunk? Why was he driving so damn fast? Why weren't any of them except the bodyguard wearing a seatbelt?

COUNTESS 10-02-2007 07:31 PM

We really don't know what he thinks. Perhaps, he has some questions about all of the happening. We will never know.

pinkie40 10-02-2007 10:02 PM

When there is an accident where there should not have been an accident...considering the high level of degree of training that goes into to protection high profile guests of the Ritz or the fact that the Al-Fayed private security services should be more than adequate (thus the reason for Diana to feel secure and safe in the company of Dodi)..the fact that there have been questions is only "normal" and expected.

I don't think it is sinister or in any way disrespectful to want to know what happened or theorize what might have happened as there have been direct assassinations of members very close to the Royal Family (Lord Mountbatten). I do think it has been wrong and unkind for Mr. Al-Fayed, despite his immense grief, to lay blame upon certain members of the Royal Family since he has been cagey in bringing forth any evidence to the general public.

This juried, semi-public inquest will cause a course to be established where certain evidence can be presented in a legal, legit way.

It is far from over.....We will be talking about the inquest for decades to come.....(sigh)

pinkie40 10-02-2007 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by selrahc4 (Post 674142)
Saying he'd never know what happened is quite different from saying he thinks there was some kind of conspiracy or that it was anything but an accident.

People like Prince Harry who live with a cocoon of safety built around them 24/7/365 might have even more questions that we do.

He might even now have a good grasp of the reality of how intensely Diana was detested by the people surrounding his father...and stepmother.

Warren 10-03-2007 04:38 AM

A deepening conspiracy...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkie40 (Post 674261)
He might even now have a good grasp of the reality of how intensely Diana was detested by the people surrounding his father...and stepmother.

[my bolding] Now there's a thought! Since Al Fayed has pointed the finger of blame at both the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales, how long will it be before Camilla is accused of being a co-conspirator? :biggrin:

Skydragon 10-03-2007 04:48 AM

Princess Diana told her solicitor that both she and Camilla Parker Bowles were going to be "got rid of" so Prince Charles could marry Royal nanny Tiggy Legge-Bourke, her inquest heard.
In a meeting with Lord Mishcon two years before her death, Diana claimed she would be “put aside” in a car accident involving “brake failure” and also insisted the Queen was about to abdicate in favour of Prince Charles.

Princess Diana said she would be 'got rid of' - Telegraph

fanletizia 10-03-2007 06:21 AM

The last image of Lady Diana

http://estaticos02.cache.el-mundo.ne...403626_g_0.jpg

First on scene

Fotobanka isifa image service

CasiraghiTrio 10-03-2007 08:46 AM

It's bizarre if Diana actually took it into her head the idea of Charles marrying Tiggy. I mean, when was the last time a Prince of Wales and Heir Apparent to the Throne married the royal "social secretary"/nanny? I know times change, but do they change that much? And whatever made Diana think Charles had those kind of thoughts about Tiggy? By 1996/97 he had been going strong with Camilla for many years and didn't seem to have apparent plans of changing that. The idea of him hooking up with Tiggy seems rather random and odd, considering the context of everything that was happening, doesn't it?

But back to the topic of this Inquest news, I have a thought about the "last photos" from the car of them all alive. What does Henri Paul look like a triumphant maniac, smiling like he's enjoying driving like that? Dodi cowers in the back no doubt hoping they get to his apt. fast and it'll be over soon. Trevor is blinded by the bright lights from the motorcycle headlights and the camera flashes. But Henri Paul is the strangest person in these pics.... He looks like a kid delighting in a chase. :eek:

Skydragon 10-03-2007 10:19 AM

As you might imagine, there are already some people looking at that last photo and saying that Diana was egging Henri-Paul on to drive faster, like a game and that's why she is watching the media and HP is laughing.

CasiraghiTrio 10-03-2007 10:40 AM

Lord Justice Scott Baker Royal Coroner

Michael Burgess Coroner for Surrey
http://www.surreycoroner.info/

Michael Mansfield QC representing 'Mo' al-Fayed
Who are the 11 other barristers representing 'Mo' and "other interested parties?"(Cited: Raynor, Gordon of The Telegraph, 3 Oct'07)

Eleven jurors

Lady Sarah McCorquodale leaving the court, and the Daily Mail says it's Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton behind her but that man does not look like him to me. :huh:

The Telegraph: Full Coverage links to articles, videos, and news relating to the Inquest

abz78 10-03-2007 11:07 AM

re:the inquest
 
this is what really happened that night, no need for an inquest!

Who Killed Diana? DVD=

Al_bina 10-03-2007 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon (Post 674318)
Princess Diana told her solicitor that both she and Camilla Parker Bowles were going to be "got rid of" so Prince Charles could marry Royal nanny Tiggy Legge-Bourke, her inquest heard.
In a meeting with Lord Mishcon two years before her death, Diana claimed she would be “put aside” in a car accident involving “brake failure” and also insisted the Queen was about to abdicate in favour of Prince Charles.

Princess Diana said she would be 'got rid of' - Telegraph

The predictions or suspicions of Princess Diana were more or less accurate in describing her own fate.

Martha 10-03-2007 01:24 PM

I read that Princess Diana had an accident car in 1996

pinkie40 10-03-2007 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren (Post 674312)
[my bolding] Now there's a thought! Since Al Fayed has pointed the finger of blame at both the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales, how long will it be before Camilla is accused of being a co-conspirator? :biggrin:

I am not pointing the finger at Camilla as a "co-conspirator" but I do believe Camilla, and many other people, would not have minded being rid of a pesky Diana. I rather believe Camilla had enough self assurance in her role in Charles' life for her not to worry at all about Diana.

Prince Harry was a mere child of almost 13 when his mother passed away and now has a much more candid view of his mother and her behaviour and how that behaviour was not deemed suitable by many in his royal midst.

Prince Harry might also have questions of how his mother could perish in the security forces equal to those he has lived in every day of his life.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises