Paul Burrell, Diana's Former Butler

[Denville]

Probably Burrell was given a warning, that if he was saved by the queen, he should be a bit more restrained in his public babbling. He hasn't stopped talking about Diana, but he has refrained from attacking Charles or the RF as a whole as far as I know. And he would have had to give all the property back so he could not sell anything further

 

[Elan]

Burrell knew after her act, he had to toe the line. Because there was no other reason for the late Queen to interfere with the judicial process of a case so unconnected to her

Her act ??

By extension, she didn't really give a hoot about jurisprudence or the case itself, just took it upon herself to impose personal and privacy matters above all else. ..I don't think so.

 

[Denville]

Her act ??

By extension, she didn't really give a hoot about jurisprudence or the case itself, just took it upon herself to impose personal and privacy matters above all else. ..I don't think so.

what are you saying? Of course the queen cared about the case, but she probaby was more concerned that her grandsons were not embarrassed by the testimony of an unstable and odd minded man who had stolen their property.

 

[Toledo]

I just realized Paul Burrel is the only royal ex-Buttler that has a running news thread in here since October 23rd, 2005. I've seen him on TV and never liked him taking things that didn't belong to him from her belongings.

 

[Elan]

what are you saying? Of course the queen cared about the case, but she probaby was more concerned that her grandsons were not embarrassed by the testimony of an unstable and odd minded man who had stolen their property.

Did you read anything I wrote ? You and others have put across the idea that her 'primary' motivation was not the charges to Paul or his case, but simply looking out to prevent royal family discomfort.

who? the queen. Certainly not. the queen didn't want him coming up with a lot of anecdotes about Diana's and Charles' sex lives, with each oher and outside the marriage. She didn't want her grandsons upset by the trial going on.

 

[Denville]

I just realized Paul Burrel is the only royal ex-Buttler that has a running news thread in here since October 23rd, 2005. I've seen him on TV and never liked him taking things that didn't belong to him from her belongings.

well I dont quite see how anyone coudl like him stealing esp on such a scale.

 

[Denville]

Did you read anything I wrote ? You and others have put across the idea that her 'primary' motivation was not the charges to Paul or his case, but simply looking out to prevent royal family discomfort.

I dont know what you are saying. THe police were keen on pursuing the case, and I think the Spencers were too, until they realised that Paul would use the case to prattle in public about Diana, Charles and their own family. of course everyone would rather he had been properly punished for it, but there were other issues, the protection of the grandchildren from embarrassing tlak about their parents, attacks on Charles and the ROyal household and family... and so on. Paul had to give back all he had stolen, and it did not do his reputation any good though he has enough cheek to go on talking about Diana even now over 20 years later. But he has not as far as I know gone on talking critically of Charles or the rest of the family. He has been pratttling about Harry who has not been exaclty polite about him

 

[Rayal]

For me it is not what is being said, but what is 'NOT' being said about Paul Burrell.



Diana's closest friends never spoke glowingly about Burrell, and as I have read their books not one occasion did they mention that she really admired him. He was a confidant, there is no doubt as her butler, and he spent several hours around her beyond what was expected for his position. His wife Maria was even angry about it. However, his remarks after her death I feel were embellished of how much they were close and very close friends. In Sarah Bradford's book, 'Diana, Finally The Complete Story', she writes the following, "Even Burrell was not exempt from Diana's suspicion and, in some cases, understandably. On one occasion David Griffin (Princess Margaret's chauffeur) was passing her front door when Diana came out. 'She slammed the door with such ferocity that I thought "Oh!!" and I said, "Good morning, we're not in a very happy mood today, are we?" "No we're not," she said. "Oh," I said, "what's happened?" And she said, "He'll have to go." And I said, "Who's got to go?" She said, "He (Burrell) will", and I said, "Who?' "I caught him going through my letters," she says. Later, Diana seriously intended to sack him when she discovered that he was running up huge telephone bills on her account."


She left no will giving Burrell her personal possessions, which should have gone to her son's and not him. The royal household management controlled her two apartments #7 and #8, and had removed all her furniture, lighting, and even the bulbs and paintings after her death. They also reported that several of her personal belongings had mysteriously disappeared. It is believed the amount of '300 items' came from their accounting and was reported to the police.



Did Burrell steal them? We shall never know since the queen acquitted him, but we are no fools. Yes, she did trust him somewhat but I have always felt he 'embellished' their relationship in order to profit from his personal knowledge of her private life. Too bad the Spencer's didn't demand a 'gag order' on him after her death, if that was even possible. He was a servant or in a sense an employee of the royal family, but his constant spewing of her private life is a betrayal. I have to believe, that Diana would have told him to shut up. May she rest in peace.

 

[Denville]

Not sure what your overall point is. Its not really at issue that Burrell did take a lot of Diana's things...
I tahink that Diana's relationship with a lot of people was up and down, and with Burrell, it was the same. She depended on him a lot, esp after her divorce, she cut down on her staff and he was someone she turned to and used as a general factotum. and he was in his way devoted to her and worked hard for her, so she probably had some affection for him. But there are stories that she had rows with him, and may have considered sacking him.

 

[Rayal]

Not sure what your overall point is..

I never liked him...which is just an opinion of course.

 

[Elan]

It's clear he never anticipated he would have to portray himself one day as a simple dyed in the wool butler, in order 'not' to offend the public in Diana's memory. With her front and center, disparaging remarks toward him were few, but what many don't seem to condone is the idea of someone who matched up well with her individual traits, not just professionally, but got on well personally.

You have to ask why there's this need to disparage him in light of everything, events, times together, not just a row that happened on some occasion. For a guy of humble family and background, few credit him for his ability, personality, that most butlers tend not to possess often. In that sense, why not just tip your hat to someone that was able to have an extraordinary experience that others in the profession might not, could not, do as well ?

 

[Denville]

what on earth do you mean? HIs ability was to steal things. That's hardly admirable.

 

[Lilyflo]

You have to ask why there's this need to disparage him in light of everything, events, times together, not just a row that happened on some occasion. For a guy of humble family and background, few credit him for his ability, personality, that most butlers tend not to possess often. In that sense, why not just tip your hat to someone that was able to have an extraordinary experience that others in the profession might not, could not, do as well ?

I think his 'ability' was fawning, flattery and undivided attention, which was irresistible to lonely and emotionally vulnerable Diana. He bolstered her confidence, cheered her up, waited on her and sorted out lots of mundane aspects of her life. After her death, he exploited his position by stealing her possessions and carving out a media career as her spokesperson in the afterlife, 'The Princess would think this, say this, do this'. I think his actions are despicable and a betrayal of her sons.

 

[Denville]

I think if he had been a genuine help to Diana, if the boys (or at least William) felt that he had been a good and loyal friend and staff member and had made her life easier, they would have kept up some kind of friendly feeling with him. But the way he has gone on and on talking about her, saying embarrassing things, and most of all the taking of massive amounts of her property, have destroyed any trust or friendly feeling that they might have had for him.
I think the Spencer aunts and Frances SK wanted him to be punished for his thefts, and the police were keen to make a case, but they did not take into account that he might use the trial to reveal private matters in the Wales household which would be embarrassing and painful for Charles and the boys.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I think if he had been a genuine help to Diana, if the boys (or at least William) felt that he had been a good and loyal friend and staff member and had made her life easier, they would have kept up some kind of friendly feeling with him. But the way he has gone on and on talking about her, saying embarrassing things, and most of all the taking of massive amounts of her property, have destroyed any trust or friendly feeling that they might have had for him.

Amen to that.

 

[rominet09]

So tired of his comments, as if he had been Diana's best friend and not her servant.

 

[Prinsara]

All you have to do is compare him to Darren McGrady, the chef. He has a YouTube channel and other things on the strength of cooking for the Royal Family, he talks about Diana very fondly, had a great relationship with her, and was very supportive to her about her food and health issues (to the point it's been portrayed in Spencer).

And he's never crossed the line once or been involved in anything remotely suspicious. So it IS possible to have done all of the former without getting into the latter.

 

[Denville]

Well I hope that most royal servants can do their jobs without getting sticky fingers.

 

[Hallo girl]

I think if he had been a genuine help to Diana, if the boys (or at least William) felt that he had been a good and loyal friend and staff member and had made her life easier, they would have kept up some kind of friendly feeling with him. But the way he has gone on and on talking about her, saying embarrassing things, and most of all the taking of massive amounts of her property, have destroyed any trust or friendly feeling that they might have had for him.
I think the Spencer aunts and Frances SK wanted him to be punished for his thefts, and the police were keen to make a case, but they did not take into account that he might use the trial to reveal private matters in the Wales household which would be embarrassing and painful for Charles and the boys.

Also inferring that he still knew more that he could tell. I hate that attitude. Dropping hints that you could really let out the big secrets if you wanted to.

 

[TLLK]

All you have to do is compare him to Darren McGrady, the chef. He has a YouTube channel and other things on the strength of cooking for the Royal Family, he talks about Diana very fondly, had a great relationship with her, and was very supportive to her about her food and health issues (to the point it's been portrayed in Spencer).

And he's never crossed the line once or been involved in anything remotely suspicious. So it IS possible to have done all of the former without getting into the latter.

I absolutely agree about Darren McGrady. He typically includes a little story about the dish and the BRF member who enjoyed it. Sometimes you'll hear about a little kitchen mishap but apart from what he's shared about Diana, he remains very discreet.

 

[Elan]

what on earth do you mean? HIs ability was to steal things. That's hardly admirable.

Alleged. And yet it took all of a few minutes to reverse course after Queen Elizabeth conferred with them. What some said was an iron clad case, withered.... in 5 minutes time ?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliza...etouched)_(cropped)_(3-to-4_aspect_ratio).jpg

 

[Denville]

Its not alleged. He stole the stuff, the queen just got the case stopped because she did not want him talking about Diana's sex life.

 

[Rayal]

On 30 January 2023, Burrell announced that he had been diagnosed with prostrate cancer in 2022 and was receiving treatment.


https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/paul-burrell-prostate-cancer-diagnosis-b2271840.html

 

[Rayal]

The original list of what was allegedly stolen:


https://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123835&page=1


What an angel.

 

[Denville]

thanks for this. I hope He gets over the cancer.....

 

[An Ard Ri]

The original list of what was allegedly stolen:


https://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123835&page=1


What an angel.

That's quite a list and a lot of it is very personal too!

 

[Denville]

He took things that were easily portable and small enough to store easily and dispose of easily.

 

[Elan]

Its not alleged. He stole the stuff, the queen just got the case stopped because she did not want him talking about Diana's sex life.

Lacking a certain amount of expertise in how the legal system works in Britain, whether one is obligated to prove innocence. There was no opportunity to address the court, two weeks of proceedings highlighted the evidence gathering.. When it was about to happen to defend himself, Elizabeth arrived with a recollection whereupon the entire case crumbled, in very little time.

It seems possible -- the Queen recalled relevant facts at the moment she did without our construing or reading into, a personal need to maintain family privacy. His character is often assailed, yet during the scandal he didn't share or discuss the exculpatory incident w/ the Queen.. to his own council.