The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008

[WindsorIII]

IMO I don't think that Diana used Dodi in the manner these latest stories say. However I would see it understandable that she would want to flaunt her new found love and happiness for Charles to see.

Its obvious that she did feel scorned and mistreated, and did go through a period of having to watch Charles happy with Camilla, which would be hard for any woman to watch. I know there are the arguments that she was just as much at fault and she should have known, and on and on, but often there is no logic when you talk about love and emotions and hurt, etc. Even the most logical person can turn into a raving lunitic over love or break ups. Not that everyone does, but my point is that people act irrationally sometimes in these types of situations. The logic goes right out the window.

So I can see why she would want to show both Charles and Camilla, hey I am happy too, I have found love in my life too.

I think this is more the case. I believe that she really had genuine feelings for Dodi.

 

[georgiea]

Diana probably couldn't bare not being the centre of attention. Like many ex's she probably thought she was entitled to have what she wanted taken into consideration. If Camilla was becoming accepted, where would that leave Diana.

This is a true thought Skydragon. And Princess Diana did use the media for her purpose and wanted a purpose for her life. But, I also think she compartmentalized her friendships she told many of her close women friends one thing and another thing to Dodi. She had the press follow her and in her once said, "with all these reporters following me why do something for a good cause." So, if anything I think she wanted to be an Ambassor(sp?) for Great Britian. And what Lucia said was what Diana wanted her close friends to see. Also, I think if we look at all sides Diana wanted an Ambassorship(sp), Prince Charles wanted to rule Great Britian and be married to Duchess Camilla, the Monarchy wanted peace, and Mr. al Fayed wanted to be accepted and the Press wanted readership-everybody had an agenda.

I don't know if this inquest will solve anything. I believe it is trying to really show everything possible. But to me it has open up questions like the white light, MI6 connections, a love blooming with Dodi, that up until now I just didn't know what to believe. I will still watch and make a judgement when the inquest is done just like the jury. And I hope that I have not offended anyone with all my ideas. I just love royalty and Princess Diana was special to me, I felt that I knew her and that life really is not a fairytale ending for anyone.

 

[ysbel]

But here's the flaw: if Lucia Flecha de Lima is correct in stating that Diana was attempting to upstage Camilla (and/or her birthday party), then she is inferring that Diana was merely using Dodi as a tool to draw media attention to herself.

The delicious irony, if the above is the case, is that Mohammed Al Fayed was using Diana for his purposes, while Diana was using his son for hers. Messy, isn't it? Poor Dodi!

To me it was always obvious that al-Fayed was using Diana to thumb his nose up at the British establishment that had refused him a British passport. What better revenge towards those pesky Anglo-Saxons than have his Muslim son marry the mother of the future British king?

I think its impossible that Diana was ignorant of al-Fayed's intentions. His animosity towards the British establishment was very well known by the time she met Dodi. So like you say, she may have had her own intentions. I think its entirely possible that Diana agreed with al-Fayed's intentions of sticking it to the British establishment and the BRF. I also think she may have wanted to take part in the revenge so she could hurt the institution that she believed hurt her so deeply.

But as you also say, its all so senseless and tragic. Dodi and Diana lost their lives because of this little case of revenge.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

But here's the flaw: if Lucia Flecha de Lima is correct in stating that Diana was attempting to upstage Camilla (and/or her birthday party), then she is inferring that Diana was merely using Dodi as a tool to draw media attention to herself.

The delicious irony, if the above is the case, is that Mohammed Al Fayed was using Diana for his purposes, while Diana was using his son for hers. Messy, isn't it? Poor Dodi!

And Dodi was for sure being used all his life, especially that summer by his father, so if Lima's theory is right, he was being double-used.

But in fact, the theory is not a new one. Long before Lima's testimony here, this theory of Diana wanting to upstage Camilla's birthday party has been discussed in print. The ilk of James Whittaker and like reporters treat it as fact that Diana's statement to the paparazzi ("wait to see what I do next") was a ploy to detract media attn. from the party onto Diana.

 

[Skydragon]

But here's the flaw: if Lucia Flecha de Lima is correct in stating that Diana was attempting to upstage Camilla (and/or her birthday party), then she is inferring that Diana was merely using Dodi as a tool to draw media attention to herself.

The delicious irony, if the above is the case, is that Mohammed Al Fayed was using Diana for his purposes, while Diana was using his son for hers. Messy, isn't it? Poor Dodi!

It is more than possible that they all had an agenda.

Diana is reported to have asked how Charles could prefer Camilla over her, as indeed did most of the media. The prancing and posing was Diana saying 'Look at me, look what you are missing'! Never perhaps realising that Charles wanted someone who understood him, had the same genuine interests, loved him despite his little foibles and was his equal intellectually.
---------------------
Half-empty contraceptive packets were seen among the belongings of Diana, Princess of Wales, when she sailed on a yacht days before her death, an inquest has been told.

Stewardess Saw Diana Contraceptives On Yacht Trip |Sky News|UK News

Diana, Princess of Wales was in possession of contraceptive pills while she was with Dodi Al Fayed, their inquest has been told

BBC NEWS | UK | Diana 'had contraceptive pills'

 

[PrincessofEurope]

"Diana is reported to have asked how Charles could prefer Camilla over her, as indeed did most of the media. The prancing and posing was Diana saying 'Look at me, look what you are missing'! Never perhaps realising that Charles wanted someone who understood him, had the same genuine interests, loved him despite his little foibles and was his equal intellectually. "

quote from Skydragon


Camilla - his equal intellectually

Diana herself admitted that she was not bright but Charles is not exactly the brain of Britain he only got into Cambridge because he was the Prince of Wales and future King by todays standards he wouldnt stand a chance of being there

 

[Skydragon]

Camilla - his equal intellectually

Diana herself admitted that she was not bright but Charles is not exactly the brain of Britain he only got into Cambridge because he was the Prince of Wales and future King by todays standards he wouldnt stand a chance of being there

Just because someone has passed exams, does not make them intellectual or intelligent. Charles may have only got into uni due to who he was, although I doubt it based on some of the students nowadays.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Diana herself admitted that she was not bright but Charles is not exactly the brain of Britain he only got into Cambridge because he was the Prince of Wales and future King by todays standards he wouldnt stand a chance of being there

How do you know that? Did you review his papers he submitted for academical review?

For me this is slander of the worst form. Cambridge has for centuries maintained the reputation for correct dealings when it comes to scientific research. I know of no case where a decision to name a student bachelor or master or even promote him to the degree of a doctor has ever been disputed. But if the academic world is content to name Charles as one of their fellowes, who are you to say that they would not longer accept him only because time has passed?

It is IMHO such an arrogance to go against the Cambridge judgement only because you have the idea that in the academic world a name could count more than research and quality! Please name one reknown fellow or chairholder at Cambridge to support your claim. If you can't, please refrain from throwing dirt at one of the most reknown sources for academic quality.

 

[Roslyn]

quote from Skydragon


Camilla - his equal intellectually

Diana herself admitted that she was not bright but Charles is not exactly the brain of Britain he only got into Cambridge because he was the Prince of Wales and future King by todays standards he wouldnt stand a chance of being there

Lack of an impressive degree does not necessarily signify that a person is not intelligent. Prince Charles may not be the "brain of Britain" but I'd venture to suggest that the total package of his intellectual abilities would place him in at least the top 25 percent or so of the population. He is a deep thinker with a disciplined mind and a range of intellectual interests and has become very knowledgeable about a lot of subjects.

ETA An interesting extract from the Dimbleby biography, page 146 of paperback edition:
"Lord Butler, the Master of Trinity, who had opposed the decision to interrupt the Prince's Cambridge studies by sending him to Aberystwyth, judged that in his final year he had been required to undertake far too many royal engagements. These, he thought, had handicapped the academic potential of a student who, he was reported as saying, was 'really very clever'".

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Lack of an impressive degree does not necessarily signify that a person is not intelligent. Prince Charles may not be the "brain of Britain" but I'd venture to suggest that the total package of his intellectual abilities would place him in at least the top 25 percent or so of the population. He is a deep thinker with a disciplined mind and a range of intellectual interests and has become very knowledgeable about a lot of subjects.

ETA An interesting extract from the Dimbleby biography, page 146 of paperback edition:
"Lord Butler, the Master of Trinity, who had opposed the decision to interrupt the Prince's Cambridge studies by sending him to Aberystwyth, judged that in his final year he had been required to undertake far too many royal engagements. These, he thought, had handicapped the academic potential of a student who, he was reported as saying, was 'really very clever'".

But who is the "Master of Trinity College" when compared to the opinion to some others..... Sorry, but I have helped quite some people to pass academic exams and I have a deep respect of the way of thinking and the research that is required there. Plus I have a deep respect of prince Charles and the way he is able to view the world which is not simple and aristocratic but intellectually and academically well based while being full of common sense.

 

[ysbel]

quote from Skydragon


Camilla - his equal intellectually

Diana herself admitted that she was not bright but Charles is not exactly the brain of Britain he only got into Cambridge because he was the Prince of Wales and future King by todays standards he wouldnt stand a chance of being there

I don't think skydragon meant to say that Charles is an Einstein; she simply said that Diana was not Charles' intellectual equal. I think that is a fair statement.

However I think what Charles missed when he married Diana is that he didn't get a companion to discuss the things that were important to him - like his books and his theories on the environment and healthy living. It was Diana's lack of interest in scholarly pursuits like this and not necessarily her lack of intellect which made things so difficult and she was simply dumbfounded that being beautiful and enticing was not enough for Charles. In Diana's opinion, she felt she had all that it takes to attract and keep a man and she couldn't understand why men kept on letting her down. She was dumbfounded by Charles' need for an intellectual companion; she was caught offguard by Hasmet Khan's need for a private life away from the celebrity limelight. She just couldn't understand that being beautiful and glamorous and needing love was not enough to hold on to and keep every man.

FWIW I'm not sure that Camilla is Charles' intellectual equal but I believe that she at least makes a pretense of being interested in the same causes and issues as he does.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

Camilla - his equal intellectually

I'm just a little bit confused. I don't understand whether you are saying Charles is not up to par with Camilla, or the vice versa? I don't understand how anyone can reach either conclusion, but if you are going by just the superficial academic credits, then I would say Charles must be the superior one, since Camilla does not have a university degree.

Diana herself admitted that she was not bright but Charles is not exactly the brain of Britain he only got into Cambridge because he was the Prince of Wales and future King by todays standards he wouldnt stand a chance of being there

Unfortunately, this argument is used against many people who are seen to have a certain amount of privilege that others' lack. Even if Charles were actually a genius and achieved perfect credentials, people would always say he got ahead by the advantage of his position.

 

[Roslyn]

But who is the "Master of Trinity College" when compared to the opinion to some others..... Sorry, but I have helped quite some people to pass academic exams and I have a deep respect of the way of thinking and the research that is required there. Plus I have a deep respect of prince Charles and the way he is able to view the world which is not simple and aristocratic but intellectually and academically well based while being full of common sense.

I'm not sure what you point is here, Jo. Charles attended Trinity College, Cambridge, and I would have thought that the Master of Trinity would have known him well and would have been in a position to know what extra-curricular demands had taken Charles' attention away from his studies at Cambridge and would be in a position to know that he was "really very clever". I was not challenging Charles' intellect, but defending it, and I cited Lord Butler in support of my opinion.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

I think I understand what Roslyn meant by the post about Butler's comment. I remember this particular extract from Dimbleby's book and I will just say that my impression is that Butler was simply expressing regret that Charles had too many royal engagements to juggle with his studies. Butler seemed (to me) to feel that Charles was indeed very clever but his exam results suffered as a consequence of having too many royal duties to detract from his course.

 

[Elspeth]

How do you know that? Did you review his papers he submitted for academical review?

For me this is slander of the worst form. Cambridge has for centuries maintained the reputation for correct dealings when it comes to scientific research. I know of no case where a decision to name a student bachelor or master or even promote him to the degree of a doctor has ever been disputed. But if the academic world is content to name Charles as one of their fellowes, who are you to say that they would not longer accept him only because time has passed?

Cambridge has very high academic standards in terms of the A-level grades it requires its applicants to have, and most students with Charles's A-level passes wouldn't have stood a chance of getting there. It's also the case (maybe less so now, but certainly in my time, and I'm only a handful of years younger than Charles) that people from some schools were accepted and people with equivalent qualifications from other schools weren't. At the school I attended, we were told at the beginning of our A-level studies that if any of us were interested in applying to Oxford or Cambridge, we'd need to transfer to the local private school because nobody from our school ever got accepted unless they had contacts (such as a parent who'd been a lecturer there or something). The A-level results at our school were usually better on average than the A-level results at the local private school, but they standardly got half a dozen students into Oxford or Cambridge every year and our school standardly got none. In my class there was a girl who had 12 or 13 very good O-level passes, was on track to get good A-level passes (she eventually got three A's and one B or something), and had been a member of the National Youth Orchestra for several years. She applied to Cambridge to study music and was turned down flat - didn't even get an interview. The prejudice of those two universities right up until the 1980s or 1990s was very well known.

 

[ghost_night554]

I don't think the fact Diana wasn't intellectually up there with Charles had anything to do with marriage problems IMO. As for being on "the pill" could they confirm it in any way?

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I'm not sure what you point is here, Jo. Charles attended Trinity College, Cambridge, and I would have thought that the Master of Trinity would have known him well and would have been in a position to know what extra-curricular demands had taken Charles' attention away from his studies at Cambridge and would be in a position to know that he was "really very clever". I was not challenging Charles' intellect, but defending it, and I cited Lord Butler in support of my opinion.

Roslyn, sorry, I was simply ironic in this first sentence - of course the Master of Trinity College knows problably even best of all what to think about Charles' academical merits - after all, it was him and his tutors who taught the prince how to think academically,work and do research scientifically and how to defend his findings and conclusions within the academical circle. So who else knows better?

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Cambridge has very high academic standards in terms of the A-level grades it requires its applicants to have, and most students with Charles's A-level passes wouldn't have stood a chance of getting there. It's also the case (maybe less so now, but certainly in my time, and I'm only a handful of years younger than Charles) that people from some schools were accepted and people with equivalent qualifications from other schools weren't. At the school I attended, we were told at the beginning of our A-level studies that if any of us were interested in applying to Oxford or Cambridge, we'd need to transfer to the local private school because nobody from our school ever got accepted unless they had contacts (such as a parent who'd been a lecturer there or something). The A-level results at our school were usually better on average than the A-level results at the local private school, but they standardly got half a dozen students into Oxford or Cambridge every year and our school standardly got none. In my class there was a girl who had 12 or 13 very good O-level passes, was on track to get good A-level passes (she eventually got three A's and one B or something), and had been a member of the National Youth Orchestra for several years. She applied to Cambridge to study music and was turned down flat - didn't even get an interview. The prejudice of those two universities right up until the 1980s or 1990s was very well known.

Yes, that's surely right when it comes to getting into the university. But once you're there you have to be able to follow your courses and learn how to work academically, so that in the end you can write the required thesis for becoming a bachelor or master. It's at this point that I doubt Cambridge would lower its standards only to allow an intellectual not bright enough prince to boast of an academic degree from Cambridge - future king or not.

I'm sure there are still some standards in place, where name and title does not count but only the academic merit. A classmate of mine, son of a former German chancellor, got into Harvard, but that was all. he had to study, pass his exams and write his thesises all alone. And the funny thing is that my father as a librarian had helped his father, the former chancellor with the research for his PhD-thesis. When he became a sucessful politician a lot of people claimed that it hadn't been him but his best friend (later his general secretary of the party) who had written the thesis. Even though politically my father was attached to another party, he always said that this is not true, that from the way the research had been conducted there cannot be any doubt that it was the chancellor himself who had once thought up and written the thesis....

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I don't think the fact Diana wasn't intellectually up there with Charles had anything to do with marriage problems IMO. As for being on "the pill" could they confirm it in any way?

Interesting - for me it was clear form the beginning that this would cause problems. When I read the book by Penny Junor (or was it the Anthony Holden-book?) about Charles I told my husband immediately - how can he be happy being married to such a pretty dimwit? In the books it was described how Diana was not willing to read the information she was given about people she was going to meet, so she always just did smalltalk with them, that she was bored when Charles invited his friends and people he found intellectually attractive to Highgrove and that she even was proud of being a non-academic.

And that was way before the Morton-book was published. IMHO Diana "caught" Charles in exactly the same situation that CP Mary "caught" Frederick of Denmark. Mary told of it in her pre-wedding interviews: she told how the quality of their relationship changed after Frederick had lost his grandmother and she had been there to help him overcome the pain. Oh, Frederick had been attracted to Mary before but IMHO that was the moment he started thinking about sharing his life with her: for better or for worse. The same with Charles: I think he started thinking about marrying Diana after she comforted him when Lord Mountbatten had been murdered. The difference between Mary and Diana is that while both were honest in their dealings with their admirers, Mary was better suited to Frederick than Diana was for Charles and that Mary is a less-outgoing and emotional lady. So when Mary took Frederick in her arms, it was a very deeply felt care for him, a sign of deep commitment, while Charles was just another of those "straycats" Diana loved to embrace and shower with her compassion for a while before she turned to the next good cause. IMHO, of course.

 

[Roslyn]

Roslyn, sorry, I was simply ironic in this first sentence - of course the Master of Trinity College knows problably even best of all what to think about Charles' academical merits - after all, it was him and his tutors who taught the prince how to think academically,work and do research scientifically and how to defend his findings and conclusions within the academical circle. So who else knows better?

Oh, good! That bashing-head-against-brick-wall smilie confused me. This medium for communication does have its limits.

 

[Roslyn]

I don't think the fact Diana wasn't intellectually up there with Charles had anything to do with marriage problems IMO.

I have always thought it had a lot to do with their marriage problems. I think that difference in intellectual ability, combined with other differences, operated to make them quite incompatible. If they had similar interests and similar attitudes and similar personalities, it may not have mattered much at all.

And I also happen to think there was a big difference in their intellectual abilities.

 

[WindsorIII]

Princess Diana letter: 'Charles plans to kill me'


By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter

Last Updated: 1:38am GMT 20/12/2007


A handwritten letter in which Diana, Princess of Wales claimed that the Prince of Wales was plotting to kill her so he could marry Tiggy Legge-Bourke, the former nanny to Princes William and Harry, has been shown at the inquest into her death.
Full coverage of the inquest

Princess Diana letter: 'Charles plans to kill me' - Telegraph

 

[Warren]

To put this into perspective the other headline would be:

Princess Diana letter: 'Charles plans to marry Tiggy!'

Both are equally absurd.

 

[WindsorIII]

To put this into perspective the other headline would be:

Princess Diana letter: 'Charles plans to marry Tiggy!'

Both are equally absurd.

Oh Warren, I am dying over here. LOL

You need to write this one on the comments page of the article.

 

[georgiea]

A SENSATIONAL handwritten letter by Princess Diana claiming Charles wanted to kill her in a car crash was revealed in full for the first time yesterday.



In the page shown to the jury at her inquest, she wrote: “I am sitting here at my desk today in October, longing for someone to hug me and encourage me to keep strong and hold my head high. “This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous – my husband is planning ‘an accident’ in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for him to marry Tiggy. “Camilla is nothing but a decoy.”

To me guys, this letter given to Paul in 1996 shows that Lucia was compartmentalized in the Princess's life. Lucia said that it was a fake, but others like Lord Miscon(sp?) were told by Princess Diana that she would died in an accident. So to me this letter is not a fake and shows me that Diana's close girlfriends' are protecting her sons and Diana's reputation. I don't think Paul would want to be in another crime. I think he got enough of a taste of that with his other falsely accused crime. What I know of this letter is tha Paul wanted an inquest, so he brought the letter to the attention of the public. But, again it did help book sales too. I say lets test the letter.

I think Diana got the info from one of her psychics. Has anyone gone to psychics? They usual get some of the info correct. I sure don't think Prince Charles would kill Diana, and we all know that Charles' married Camilla and Diana died not of a head injury but because of her heart and bleeding. So to me again the letter just shows 20% correct of a psychics reading and that Diana compatmentalized all her relationships.

Let's see what happens at the inquest today.

 

[georgiea]

I have always thought it had a lot to do with their marriage problems. I think that difference in intellectual ability, combined with other differences, operated to make them quite incompatible. If they had similar interests and similar attitudes and similar personalities, it may not have mattered much at all.

And I also happen to think there was a big difference in their intellectual abilities.

Yes Roslyn - Princess Diana would never be up to the Prince in intellectual abilities. But Prince Charles from what I know of him started to love Diana for her compassion and mothering skills. (He thought she would be taught everything else that she needed to be a Princess). I think he like those qualites and I believe if Diana did not start on her bulemia(sp?) and her obcession with Charles and Camilla and taken psychotic medication early in the marriage, and as Diana said "if the BRF knew how to help someone mentally sick, I truly believe they would be married today and have a wonderful, loving and friendship type of marriage.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I say lets test the letter.

That's a good idea - if it was written by Diana, it should have her fingerprints all over it.... which would put the letter in its right place: either the princess wrote it and meant it or she didn't.

 

[ysbel]

I don't think the fact Diana wasn't intellectually up there with Charles had anything to do with marriage problems IMO.

Not necessarily her abilities but her interests and attitudes. Her schoolteachers continually said that while she had a native intelligence, she did not have the discipline or desire to apply that intelligence.

Diana constantly belittled Charles and his interests both in front of him and in front of others. She thought his reading, solitary walks in the country, deep discussions with old friends were all stupid and pointless and Diana took great delight in pushing Charles off the front page when he was scheduled to make a speech on one of the topics that mattered most to him.

And this came from a woman who complained that Charles and the Royal Family didn't appreciate her and her contributions to the monarchy. She thought that being beautiful and the most adored woman on the planet was enough. When truth be told the fan-dom of Diana enhanced Diana's popularity with the public but Diana's reputation caused the Royal Family's reputation with the public to go down and Diana had an active part in that. And she still was incredulous that the Royal Family did not appreciate her contributions.

Whereas she didn't appreciate them and the lifetime they had spent in service to the monarchy.

Of course, she made sure that everyone knew her version of the Charles Camilla story was that Charles took Camilla into the marriage with them. I rather suspect the reason that she was so keen to make sure everyone knew that was because it would give Diana an excuse for any nasty behavior towards Charles and the Royal Family at any time during the marriage.

Of course, so the saying goes, if her husband was bringing his mistress into the marriage, what normal big-hearted woman wouldn't be hurt and vindictive - right from the beginning? This simple statement of Charles bringing Camilla into the marriage seemed to excuse a lot of really bad behavior from Diana that I truly doubt that Camilla was actually Charles' mistress in the beginning. It was simply too convenient for Diana several years after the fact to say that they were.

Whereas the real truth I think is that in the beginning Diana realized who she married and realized she married a scholarly man with intellectual pursuits that she not only didn't share but she thought was worthless.

Diana thought scholarly, studious people were worthless and so could not tolerate her husband's intellectual pursuits much less encourage them.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

Bah humbug! Is anyone else sick to death of Diana, Dodi, etc. and this stupid Inquest?


I don't care that Diana was secretly married to JFK Jr. or that she had lesbian fantasies about Tiggy, or that she was really Camilla's brother with a sex change.

 

[cressida]

Not necessarily her abilities but her interests and attitudes. Her schoolteachers continually said that while she had a native intelligence, she did not have the discipline or desire to apply that intelligence.

I am sorry but this is such utter rubbish! I am sure there were faults on both sides - Diana was very young and wanted Charles to be with her all the time, which he could not be. He entered in to the marriage knowing that it was his duty and that he could still do all the bachelor things he had done before. Diana took it far more to heart, she was in love with Charles. I don't think she ever thought he was worthless, I think she admired him and loved him and was very jealous of anything or anyone who took him away from her, due to her own low self-esteem.

I would also like to add that Diana was not thick, she had an enquiring mind and was a wonderful communicator - which Charles is not. He isn't that bright you know - he got a terrible degree!

I think it is a real shame that they weren't encouraged to stay together because Diana would have been a wonderful consort for Charles. Camilla will never be accepted by the majority of the British people and frankly - who can be surprised by that? The whole thing has been a terrible tragedy - for us and for them.