Run-up to the inquest into Diana's death


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
A camera is not a gun. Yes, the paparazzi can be intrusive, rude, and verbally abusive, but there is no direct physical danger from them unless the pursued decides to react recklessly. If Henri Paul had driven sedately to Dodi's apartment, the couple could have gotten out of the car and walked inside without putting themselves or anyone else at risk. Yes, the paparazzi would have followed and taken pictures, but it would have caused no harm to anyone and Diana would still be alive.

The decision to react recklessly was encouraged by Dodi Fayed and carried out by Henri Paul. The paparazzi did not force them into that situation. They had a choice.

The paparazzi takes a great many photos of a great many celebrities that are published in magazines that people buy. Yet, how many of those celebrities have died because they made the choice to react recklessly? Think about it.
 
sassie said:
A camera is not a gun. Yes, the paparazzi can be intrusive, rude, and verbally abusive, but there is no direct physical danger from them unless the pursued decides to react recklessly. If Henri Paul had driven sedately to Dodi's apartment, the couple could have gotten out of the car and walked inside without putting themselves or anyone else at risk. Yes, the paparazzi would have followed and taken pictures, but it would have caused no harm to anyone and Diana would still be alive.

The decision to react recklessly was encouraged by Dodi Fayed and carried out by Henri Paul. The paparazzi did not force them into that situation. They had a choice.

The paparazzi takes a great many photos of a great many celebrities that are published in magazines that people buy. Yet, how many of those celebrities have died because they made the choice to react recklessly? Think about it.
Click to expand...

After reading the operation paget report, I'm more and more convinced that the last minute changes in vehicles and drivers and plans that night at the Rtiz were Dodi's pitiful efforts to impress Diana with how well he could organize things, take care of her, and protect her from intrusion.
 
i would agree with posts

im sure paparazzi would not so CLOSE to the Diana,Princess of Wales when have camera lens forwards and close on Diana,Princess of Wales.

if Diana would alives today and she not pleasant by paparazzi when have accident in 1997 and taking pictures on Diana lay in the mercades when happened.

im sure paparazzi would learn lesson not get close on the royals like Diana had it.

im sure William and Harry would getting more upset about his mother got dying photos in the mercades dues respect the Wales brothers i dont blame but both makes statesment for not show of his late Mother in the magazine its so digusting!

when become 10 years of her death and not dwell about Princess Diana's accident and lots of more makes William and Harry more upset in the magazines and newspaper.
 
chrissy57 said:
very interesting part ..... and

If we truly want to criticise the media then we must look at why they publish what they do and take responsibility for the consequences of our actions in causing their actions.
Click to expand...

I agree with all that you have said in this post. :flowers:

selrahc4 said:
I'm more and more convinced that the last minute changes in vehicles and drivers and plans that night at the Rtiz were Dodi's pitiful efforts to impress Diana with how well he could organize things, take care of her, and protect her from intrusion.
Click to expand...

Which he wouldn't have needed to do but for the insatiable desire for more and more pictures.
 
Skydragon said:
Which he wouldn't have needed to do but for the insatiable desire for more and more pictures.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. As much as she complained about paparazzi intrusion, Diana had no qualms about manipulating the paparazzi when it suited her purposes, i.e. "The Kiss" pictures. With that, she helped to fuel that insatiable desire. She couldn't change the rules of the game every day and expect the pap to play along.

What Dodi failed to realize is that a few pictures of the couple in the car/walking into his apartment building would have satisfied everyone and harmed no one. Personally, I think the 'cat and mouse' game excited him and led him into reckless judgement.
 
Skydragon said:
Which he wouldn't have needed to do but for the insatiable desire for more and more pictures.
Click to expand...

Isn't that an interpretation already? Just acting devil's advocate: what if Dodi has annoyed Diana with something he said during that dinner at the Imperial suite and now wanted to make up for it on bribing her with the infamous ring?

We could read on the report that Diana's friend Lucia Flecha de Lima said she could tell from the CCTV-recording at the Ritz that Diana was angry. We presume it's because of the paparazzi-trouble in Paris. But who knows that and who says that this is the fact? The only peopüle who could know it besides the people who died are the service personell at the dinner in the Ritz. But they won't talk, obviously, because they could have done so already.

If I stick to this scenario, then Diana was angry with Dodi and he was afraid to have botched the relationship and thus wanted to get to the apartment close to Etoile to give her the ring. Remember - the ring was there and Dodi obviously wanted to get to that appartment no matter what the costs.
BTW - it emerged in my reading of the report that there is some substance to the claim by Paul Burrelll that Diana used Dodi as a means to make Hasnat Khan jealous and to win him back. If so, for her the whole paparazzi -thing was good for her aim. Why should she be so annoyed? I personally think that the fact that the paparazzi awaited Diana and Dodi at le Bourget airport speaks for a leak. Why not the princess herself?

Another point that interests me: the reports views the events only in view of Al-Fayed's claims of murder. Things that might hurt or embarrass the princess are left out - eg the question who tipped the paparazzi off etc.
Maybe it just happened because the investigation didn't lead to these questions or they were considered unimportant. But it makes me wonder...
 
sassie said:
Yes and no. As much as she complained about paparazzi intrusion, Diana had no qualms about manipulating the paparazzi when it suited her purposes, i.e. "The Kiss" pictures. With that, she helped to fuel that insatiable desire. She couldn't change the rules of the game every day and expect the pap to play along.
Click to expand...

I can't hold the consumer responsible for the way Diana was hounded by the paparazzi. This particular consumer never bought any publication to see photos of Diana, so I don't hold myself in any way responsible, but I don't think the average consumer would be influenced to buy a magazine merely by the promise of seeing Diana fleeing up the street escaping a photographer.

Yes, there was a demand for photos of her, but I think most of the people who were interested would buy the magazines for pics of her no matter what those pics depicted. What I mean is that staged photo-call pics would have been just as enticing to most consumers as lens through the window pics, and probably more so to most. Diana looked a lot better in the staged pics than the hunted prey look we got from the unwanted-attention chase pics.

I'd like to know who constituted the vast insatiable audience who snapped up the mags containing the paparazzi's photos. Surely her fans would want to see her looking good, not looking distressed and dishevelled or thrusting her bag in front of the camera and running up the street. They might have been keen on the pics of Diana holidaying with the Fayeds but weren't most of those pics initiated by Diana announcing to the photographers that she would be doing something at a certain time?

I think Diana's relationship with the media was a one-off phenomenon that arose due to the particular set of circumstances that applied to her and her alone, and for which she was in many ways responsible, and that is unlikely to be repeated, in the foreseeable future anyway.
 
Last edited:
oh lord, can the woman rest in peace? Inquest after another continues without anything of substance being produced, rather it only adds on to the raging conspiracy :closedeye

PS. the so-called kiss between doddi & diana was doctored, the Sun admited it was fake. Let's atlease get our facts before jumping on Diana-bashing wagon!

Jo of Palatine said:
Another point that interests me: the reports views the events only in view of Al-Fayed's claims of murder. Things that might hurt or embarrass the princess are left out - eg the question who tipped the paparazzi off etc. Maybe it just happened because the investigation didn't lead to these questions or they were considered unimportant. But it makes me wonder...
Click to expand...

The inquest was on her accident, not an open can of warm of the sick triangle of a marriage Charles & Diana had, whether it was Camilla's relation with Stuart Higgins supposedly releasing ""dirt" on C&D marriage, Charles with Sun & Magesty editors or Diana with Richard Kay of Daily Mail & Andrew Morton. If we are talking about playing games with the british press, let's be balance shall we. No legitimate intelligent investigation would even dare to play such a twisted game over who manipulated the press more :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I think Jo was asking who let the press know where they were going to be that night.

The investigation has just concluded, the inquest (that has to be held as she was a British citizen who died on foreign soil) was adjorned to allow for the investigation and will restart shortly! So yes, lets get our facts right.
 
somebody read about will be represented at diana hearings?
 
The procedural hearings - to determine whether or not a jury will be needed and whether or not to hold one inquest for both Diana and Dodi or to hold separate inquests - will be held next Monday and Tuesday.

If the decision is two inquests they could reach different conclusions, one have a jury and one not, have different coroners etc. That would cost the British taxpayer a lot more, IMHO. I think one inquest should be sufficient as they died in the same accident but I suspect that Al Fayed will push for two inquests and hope to get two different results thus causing more conspiracy theorists to abound.

According to the following link the Queen will be represented at the precedural hearings but not at the inquest itself, which will be heard later this year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/05/ndiana05.xml
 
Last edited:
the queen will be represented because diana was a member of the royal family?
 
Skydragon said:
I think Jo was asking who let the press know where they were going to be that night.
Click to expand...
The Report touches on this question, and alludes to information being passed to the paparazzi by Al Fayed operatives/employees. I think at this stage of her 'holiday' Diana had had enough of the intensive press intrusion into her private life, and had nothing to gain by being surrounded by paps flashing cameras into the windows of her car. However, Mr Al Fayed may have thought there was some advantage for himself, and/or his son, in the public association with the Princess at the Ritz Hotel. The business about the former Paris home of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor was hardly subtle.
 
Diana: Fayed wants full disclosure of royal interviews, correspondence

LONDON (AFP) - The father of Princess Diana's last boyfriend, Dodi Fayed, reportedly wants confidential interviews with Prince Charles to be made public when a coroner's inquest opens on Monday.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070107/wl_uk_afp/britainroyalsdiana_070107005848

Charles's fear over Diana interviews
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Fayed lawyers will demand release of Stevens inquiry transcripts[/FONT]

Confidential interviews with Prince Charles by detectives who investigated the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, could soon be made public.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1984512,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=11

The press at work! :rolleyes:
 
I know that she means a lot to a lot of people. I admire the devotion to her, almost 10 years since her death. However, can't this poor woman just rest in peace? She's dead, it was a horrible tragedy, but don't you think it is time to move on?


I don't understand the press' insistence on dragging this out.
 
Sister Morphine said:
I don't understand the press' insistence on dragging this out.
Click to expand...

Don't you? ;)
Diana was and is a source of money. The Press is just cashing on her memory, that's it.
 
Avalon said:
Don't you? ;)
Diana was and is a source of money. The Press is just cashing on her memory, that's it.
Click to expand...


:lol:

I figured as much, but I guess what I meant is ASIDE from money, what else could be gained for them by doing this? I think there's other ways of keeping her memory alive.
 
Sister Morphine said:
:lol:

I figured as much, but I guess what I meant is ASIDE from money, what else could be gained for them by doing this? I think there's other ways of keeping her memory alive.
Click to expand...

I guess her memory will live in her children, in her legacy and in the things she did during her life.
But for the press Diana is money (in my opinion). They hardly care to keep her memory alive. They just want to sell the newspaper.
In my opinion only.
 
Avalon said:
I guess her memory will live in her children, in her legacy and in the things she did during her life.
But for the press Diana is money (in my opinion). They hardly care to keep her memory alive. They just want to sell the newspaper.
In my opinion only.
Click to expand...


I agree. I guess I'm just of the mindset that this "inquest" isn't really going to garner any new information and that it's going overboard.
 
Sister Morphine said:
I agree. I guess I'm just of the mindset that this "inquest" isn't really going to garner any new information and that it's going overboard.
Click to expand...

The British officials are completing the inquest as they are legally required to do. They don't have a choice, and the press isn't driving them to it.
 
Warren said:
The Report touches on this question, and alludes to information being passed to the paparazzi by Al Fayed operatives/employees. I think at this stage of her 'holiday' Diana had had enough of the intensive press intrusion into her private life, and had nothing to gain by being surrounded by paps flashing cameras into the windows of her car. However, Mr Al Fayed may have thought there was some advantage for himself, and/or his son, in the public association with the Princess at the Ritz Hotel. The business about the former Paris home of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor was hardly subtle.
Click to expand...
What a great point, I'd never thought about it that way, but boy, does it make sense. This would explain why Al Fayed wants everyone's finger pointing squarely at anyone, but himself.

He is either completely delusional or he must, deep down, feel some responsibility for what happened that night.

<He> provided the chauffeur
<He> had insisted on switching cars at the last minute

..which would have made it difficult for any assasination plan to be carried out at that point, with all these moving , changing components.

And of course, do we really still believe that the princess was to be murdered because of who she was dating? Please.
 
princess olga said:
That man is becoming predictable. It is about time someone says it like it is: Fayed bears more responsibility for the death of Diana than any secret service.
Click to expand...


Who knows - that is just what the inquest might find - accident caused by ineptitude of the Al Fayed staff!!!


I do suspect that the verdict will be accidental death and then, unless conclusive new evidence comes to light that will be an end of the official legal matters.

Then the civil law suits can begin!!!
 
'No Royal Jury' For Diana Inquest

The coroner at the inquest into the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, has said she does not want to appoint a jury made up of members of the Royal Household. Britain's former top female judge, Baroness Butler-Sloss, said it would be "inappropriate" to take the step during preliminary hearings at the High Court.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/08012007/140/royal-jury-diana-inquest.html

Inquests on Diana and Dodi to be held separately

LONDON (Reuters) - Inquests into the deaths of Princess Diana and her lover Dodi al Fayed in a 1997 car crash, one of the most thoroughly investigated events of recent times, are to be held separately but at the same time

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/08012007/325/inquests-diana-dodi-held-separately.html

Formal inquest on Diana death reopened

The judge overseeing official inquiries into the deaths of Princess Diana and her lover Dodi al Fayed in 1997 ruled on Monday that royal officials would not sit on any jury considering how they died.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/08012007/325/formal-inquest-diana-death-reopened.html
 
Last edited:
:shifty: Why does al-Fayed keep reminding me of Johnny Cochrane now? GRRR!
 
Skydragon said:
AL FAYED CALLS FOR ROYALS TO BE WITNESSES

MOHAMED AL FAYED has requested that British Royals Prince Charles and PRINCE PHILIP are called as witnesses at the inquest into the death of DIANA

http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/al%20fayed%20calls%20for%20royals%20to%20be%20witnesses_1018289
Click to expand...

Well, as both were not even close to the scene of the incident and can only give background information I don't think they will be subjected to an appearance in court where the lawyer's of Al-Fayed will surely try to tear them apart. Isn't there a kind of immunity for the Royal family which makes it necessary to have important reasons for calling them into the witness stand? In Belgium, prince Laurent (who is allegedly involved in an affair which will lead to a trial) is protected by his status as Royal senator of the senate of Belgium and they will need good reasons to strip him of this immunity. How's the situation in Britain?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Blog Real
Prince Aimone, 4th Duke of Aosta (1900-1948) and Princess Irene of Greece and Denmark (1904-1974), King and Queen of Croatia
Replies
2
Views
319
maria-olivia
maria-olivia
M
Laws of the House of Grimaldi
Replies
3
Views
501
Tatiana Maria
T
LadyFinn
Crown Princess Couple's Visit to Finland: September 20-21, 2023
Replies
11
Views
3K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
Marengo
Diana, Princess of Wales: Statue Unveiling - July 1st 2021
7 8 9
Replies
258
Views
27K
Denville
D
M
Orders and Decorations of the Prince and Princess of Wales
Replies
8
Views
331
Somebody
Somebody

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom