Last Hours, Death, Transfer from France, Funeral and Interment

[Dman]

Ken Wharfe says the blame for Diana's death lies with her bodyguard | Daily Mail Online

 

[Curryong]

Of course the bodyguard should have insisted on safety procedures being followed like seatbelts clipped on for everyone, speed limits being kept to and a sober driver. However, as we know, there are limits to what a private employee can insist on if the employer's son and his companion want to do their own thing. Diana specifically got rid of her RPOs in order that she do exactly that, and we all know the tragic consequences.

I don't know why Mr Wharfe insists on flogging dead horses in this way. I bought his book on Diana, 'Closely Guarded Secret' and it was very entertaining and so forth, but that was decades ago, and the last time he guarded Diana was even further in the past. Please Ken, give the dead Diana, and us, a break!

 

[Dman]

Of course the bodyguard should have insisted on safety procedures being followed like seatbelts clipped on for everyone, speed limits being kept to and a sober driver. However, as we know, there are limits to what a private employee can insist on if the employer's son and his companion want to do their own thing. Diana specifically got rid of her RPOs in order that she do exactly that, and we all know the tragic consequences.

I don't know why Mr Wharfe insists on flogging dead horses in this way. I bought his book on Diana, 'Closely Guarded Secret' and it was very entertaining and so forth, but that was decades ago, and the last time he guarded Diana was even further in the past. Please Ken, give the dead Diana, and us, a break!

Diana died because she didn't have the proper security around her. Diana wasn't in control of that security detail in Paris. Dodi and his father was. She was put in a bad position, which Ken and other security officers who worked for her understood. Mr. Wharfe is just highlighting that part.

Now, I don't understand the need to dive back into Diana's love life like he's doing though. Leave it in the past where it belongs.

 

[Iluvbertie]

It is history and so will be debated and discussed for centuries to come. She put it into the public domain and the consequence is that it will be analysed and people are entitled to do just that with a public figure, especially one who is dead and has been dead for close on a generation now (students leaving school now weren't born when she died remember).

 

[Roslyn]

Diana died because she didn't have the proper security around her. Diana wasn't in control of that security detail in Paris. Dodi and his father was. She was put in a bad position, which Ken and other security officers who worked for her understood. Mr. Wharfe is just highlighting that part.

Now, I don't understand the need to dive back into Diana's love life like he's doing though. Leave it in the past where it belongs.

I agree. As far as I can tell there is nothing new here. All the details of the events leading up to and immediately after the accident were worked over at the inquest and a finding about causation made. We all know what happened. (I am ignoring the conspiracy theorists.) All the available information about Diana's love life are set out in various books. We all know about it. There is nothing to be achieved by publishing Wharfe's old book in a newspaper now. Diana's sons don't need this and neither does anyone else. Anyone who wants to know about the accident or Diana's love life can read the books already published or the transcript of the inquest. It doesn't need to be in the newspaper. I find it most distasteful.

 

[Duchessmary]

This is news?

 

[Osipi]

Perhaps to a lot of us here that avidly take an interest in royalty, royal history and royal personages it seems like dredging up old and stale tidbits that we've heard about and have discussed until the cows come home but there is an upside to it. Keeping the information alive and available (the good, the bad and the ugly) serves as what could be a springboard into a very deep pool for someone just starting to be curious about Diana, for example, and the many facets of her life.

 

[Dman]

Perhaps to a lot of us here that avidly take an interest in royalty, royal history and royal personages it seems like dredging up old and stale tidbits that we've heard about and have discussed until the cows come home but there is an upside to it. Keeping the information alive and available (the good, the bad and the ugly) serves as what could be a springboard into a very deep pool for someone just starting to be curious about Diana, for example, and the many facets of her life.

I understand that part, but what troubles me, is that when people dredge up her past, a lot of the stories are brushed over by years and years of false information. It becomes harder for newcomers, who have an interest in Diana, to get to the truth.

Even the circumstances around her death has caused enough speculations to last for generations.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I understand that part, but what troubles me, is that when people dredge up her past, a lot of the stories are brushed over by years and years of false information. It becomes harder for newcomers, who have an interest in Diana, to get to the truth.

Even the circumstances around her death has caused enough speculations to last for generations.

There is no "truth" but there are lots of versions of it. There was no "truth" back then; there was just a pile of baggage that did not make things black and white. The best any of us can do is decide what we believe about the whole mess and be kind to others as we interact. And good luck with that as well.

 

[Denville]

Of course the bodyguard should have insisted on safety procedures being followed like seatbelts clipped on for everyone, speed limits being kept to and a sober driver. However, as we know, there are limits to what a private employee can insist on if the employer's son and his companion want to do their own thing. Diana specifically got rid of her RPOs in order that she do exactly that, and we all know the tragic consequences.

I do, and us, a break!

Of course he is "flogging dead horses" because he's Selling a story. he did the same several years ago and I dont believe he shoudl have done so. He was making money then adn he's making money now.
As for the wretched security men, he knows very well that they were not able to do their jobs because Dodi interfered all the time and MAK I think woudl not pay for more staff...So it was just 2 of them trying to manage a lot of press attention, something they were not used to..and They were working for a notoriously difficult spoiled man like Dodi who changed his plans, kept them out of the loop and messed everyting about.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

I like this reading done by Lady Jane Fellowes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsZKQkVED_I

 

[wonderland31]

What it really all boils down to is one word. Family. At the time of her death, Diana, Princess of Wales was a private citizen and although she had ties through her sons to the British Royal Family, she was no longer a member of that family and the BRF no longer had ties to her except through her sons.

All in all, I think her burial on the island at Althorp was the best move the Spencer family made as by observing the reaction of the people to her death, the outlying cause of her death (paparazzi) and the frenzy of the days following her death, they wanted some modicum of privacy for a very public person. I do think that Charles acted admirably in doing what he could for his sons by showing deep respect for his ex-wife by doing what he could to honor the mother of his boys by escorting her body back to the UK and walking with his sons in the funeral procession. At Balmoral, away from the public eye, Will and Harry were able to have their space to take in, process and come to grips with what perhaps was the most horrific moments of their young lives before having to be gawked at and photographed and such by people all over the world. HM made the right move at this time. She was a grandmother before a Queen. Her family rightly mattered more at that time than the multitudes of people clamoring for her to express what they were all feeling.

I feel that most of the blame for any problems that arose during that time did not point to the Spencers or to the Windsors but to the Prime Minister of the day, Tony Blair, and the media itself. It was his office that coined the phrase "people's princess" and it was the media that jumped on this adding fuel to the fire creating a frenzy where it became next to impossible for either the Spencers or the Windsors to handle this tragedy within their families.

I do agree with much of what you've stated, except that I've always believed that the "grey suits" at BP were the ones who got it wrong. Blair was batting clean up and took advantage.

As I recall, the first "people's princess" reference actually was in Andrew Morton's 1990 book Diana's Diary: An Intimate Portrait of the Princess of Wales.

 

[Osipi]

As I recall, the first "people's princess" reference actually was in Andrew Morton's 1990 book Diana's Diary: An Intimate Portrait of the Princess of Wales.

IF I'm not mistaken, that what Diana stated that she wanted to be was "Queen of people's hearts". Not exactly sure when that was. Panorama interview maybe?

 

[wonderland31]

IF I'm not mistaken, that what Diana stated that she wanted to be was "Queen of people's hearts". Not exactly sure when that was. Panorama interview maybe?

I was watching some Youtube program that focused on the background/publication of Diana: Her True Story by Andrew Morton. I had always thought poorly of Morton when he re-released the book after her death. Well, this show clarified that Morton's publishers wanted the book re-released (with additional material? not sure if I remember it all), but that Morton himself opposed it. I had a change of heart about him as I watched the show (for the better). I think this is when I learned about the light-weight book Diana's Diary that he had published in 1990 prior to working with her on Her True Story. I hadn't read the Diary book, so checked it out at the library. It was sort of interesting, considering when it was published...but I remember being shocked when I came across his reference to her as "the people's princess." I had always thought that Blair had created that reference.

Diana did say she wanted to be queen of people's hearts in the Panorama interview.

I highly recommend watching the show about how Her True Story was developed, written and published. It's a well-written, well-produced behind-the-scenes view of the collaboration between Diana and Morton. Good stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mz2IDFFiE_A

 

[Curryong]

The person first referred to in Britain as 'the People's Princess' was Queen Mary's mother, the Duchess of Teck. In spite of her size she was very vivacious, philanthropic and unostentatious, and the public absolutely loved her.

By coincidence KW Jackman's biography of this forgotten royal, titled 'Mary, the People's Princess,' was published in 1984 at the height of Di-mania. The book was reviewed in several magazines, newspapers etc and I wouldn't be surprised if it stuck in the minds of Morton and then Blair and others, and they borrowed the phrase for Diana. I can remember it being used long before Diana's death, so it may have been Morton who first resurrected it.

 

[Jamesy]

Interesting quote

"Diana's butler, Paul Burrell, was so stunned when he first laid eyes on the dead Princess, he refused to believe she was dead. ``He had to touch her skin to believe it,'' Anderson says. The faithful servant placed a simple rosary given to the Princess by Mother Teresa in her hands and a photograph of her sons and a picture of her late father in her coffin."



Why do you think Burrell refused to believe she was dead?

 

[Osipi]

Perhaps this question would be better in one of the many Diana threads and I'm sure the moderators will move it if deemed a good idea to.

As far as Burrell's reaction, I think it is perfectly normal. When someone leaves life so suddenly, its not an easy thing for a person to process. My mother said she kept expecting my dad to walk through the door still and his death was one that was expected even. Looking at Diana's body, it probably did look like she was just sleeping as I don't believe (correct me if I'm wrong?) that she had any serious bang ups and lacerations so that could have given the impression of sleeping.

Burrell knew Diana was dead but he just hadn't fully processed it, I think.

 

[Jamesy]

According to an undertaker Diana had a bit of a bump on her head

 

[Daenerys Targaryen]

Given the fact that she had her chest cracked, been intubated, flogged for hours, etc it's not like she had been made up and 'laid out' by an undertaker to look 'life like'. I am sure it was just shock and disbelief that made him emotionally deny that she was in fact dead.

 

[Jamesy]

Given the fact that she had her chest cracked, been intubated, flogged for hours, etc it's not like she had been made up and 'laid out' by an undertaker to look 'life like'. I am sure it was just shock and disbelief that made him emotionally deny that she was in fact dead.

Her body was already going downhill because of the Paris heat. So they wanted too do everything in there power to make her look like the beautiful woman she was before Charles etc came to view her.

I am sure they probably did a VERY good job in making her look like the woman she was when alive.

 

[AdmirerUS]

"Diana's butler, Paul Burrell, was so stunned when he first laid eyes on the dead Princess, he refused to believe she was dead. ``He had to touch her skin to believe it,'' Anderson says. The faithful servant placed a simple rosary given to the Princess by Mother Teresa in her hands and a photograph of her sons and a picture of her late father in her coffin."

Why do you think Burrell refused to believe she was dead?

Well, it's Anderson's interpretation that he refused to believe, right? So, a great example of hyperbole an Anderson's part?
Or if Burrell told Anderson he could not believe it - he was just like a lot of other people who need time to process the loss of someone we know or think we know. Denial is a stage of grief, after all.

 

[Jamesy]

Night before Dianas funeral

The night before Diana's funeral her body was moved too Kensington palace accompanied by Charles and her 2 sons


https://youtu.be/mRueXVaHnSk

If you could guess what do you think happened that night when they all arrived at Kensington palace? Prior to them going to Kensington palace Charles and his sons visited the chapel royal where there mothers coffin was.

 

[Denville]

I wouldn't dream of speculating

 

[Lee-Z]

If you could guess what do you think happened that night when they all arrived at Kensington palace? Prior to them going to Kensington palace Charles and his sons visited the chapel royal where there mothers coffin was.

the only guess i'm willing to make is that whatever they did they want to remain private

 

[Osipi]

Only thing I have heard about that night that I remember is that in Paul Burrell's book "A Royal Duty", he wrote about spending the night when Diana's coffin was at KP in kind of a vigil. He may have mentioned what Charles and the boys did earlier when the coffin was moved there but I don't remember specifics.

 

[Denville]

Only thing I have heard about that night that I remember is that in Paul Burrell's book "A Royal Duty", he wrote about spending the night when Diana's coffin was at KP in kind of a vigil. He may have mentioned what Charles and the boys did earlier when the coffin was moved there but I don't remember specifics.

I hope not. that's private. I read in a book that one of the staff went to pay his tribute and when he said that the casket was placed lower than it had been, he was told "that's for the boys, they're waiting till you finish, to say goodbye"..and that made the man cry, when it hit him..

 

[Osipi]

I would think that, at the time, all measures to totally shield the boys in the private minutes they did have with family and even seeing Diana's coffin for the first time as getting the news of their mother's death was very traumatic to begin with but also, at that time, was intangible. Viewing the coffin for the first time presented the stark physical reality that she was really dead.

I still cannot begin to imagine what those two boys went through at such a young age with losing a beloved parent.

 

[Denville]

Well it is something that I certainly would nt want to know about...

 

[Curryong]

The two brothers were incredibly brave IMO in deciding to follow their mother's coffin with the public eye and TV cameras on them all the time. That's a pretty extraordinary thing to do at just twelve and fifteen. It was so quiet, really. I remember, just every now and again someone wailing Diana's name from the crowd, though for the boys I expect much of it was a blur.

 

[Denville]

Harry was very young but I think William was at an age where he could show his love and repsect for his mother by walking with her on her last journey. and Philip is said to have said that if he didn't do it, he would probably regret it later, and that he'd walk iwht him,...

I Viewing the coffin for the first time presented the stark physical reality that she was really dead.

I still cannot begin to imagine what those two boys went through at such a young age with losing a beloved parent.

I think that they had seen her before that event described I Tina Brown's book but at that day they were waiting to say their last goodbyes before the funeral