The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mermaid1962 said:
I think that this man will have a sad end. He'll be an old man without any credibility and perhaps few real friends, spinning his stories about Royal service to his caregivers in some nursing home. His life could have been so different had he just done his job and left it at that. :neutral:
Click to expand...
Will he though? There are quite a few who hang on his every word and believe that he 'did his duty' and covered things up. Poor Diana if she ever believed that he was someone to rely on in any capacity other than that of a butler. :ermm:
 
Is there no justice in the world. I sincerely hope I never meet Burrell 'cos it'd be so worth the assault charge.
 
BeatrixFan said:
Is there no justice in the world. I sincerely hope I never meet Burrell 'cos it'd be so worth the assault charge.
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. :rolleyes: Well.....maybe!

Silly man has done himself a mighty disservice. I used to think he was worth listening to because of his inside knowledge, but now I can't believe a word he says, so I have no interest in him. Except to hope he suffers financial ruin. Yes, I have a dark side! :D
 
Roslyn said:
No it wouldn't. :rolleyes: Well.....maybe!

Silly man has done himself a mighty disservice. I used to think he was worth listening to because of his inside knowledge, but now I can't believe a word he says, so I have no interest in him. Except to hope he suffers financial ruin. Yes, I have a dark side! :D
Click to expand...

Blimey...:hiding:
 
I believe that Paul Burrell was not being truthful when he said that he was "naughty" and threw in "red herrings" at the inquiry. He is very full of himself. He thinks that he must have a bit of mystery and convincing others that he still holds Diana's secrets keeps him interesting. He is all smoke and mirrors. Diana's confidence in him was misplaced.
 
judith14011 said:
Diana's confidence in him was misplaced.
Click to expand...

I think Paul Burrell gave Diana all the attention and assurances that she could have asked for and I think that was all she wanted in a friend. I don't think she was the type of person to question someone devoted to her and ask if he was neglecting his family instead; which he was. If she got the assurances and the undivided attention from him that she felt she needed, I think she was satisfied and didn't look further into the quality of the person that she made her friend.
 
He really should just keep to himself. When I listen to the original hidden video, I thought he had feelings of regret about not telling "the truth". After spending twenty years with the royals, I think it was drilled into him not to tell the whole truth about everything. Everyone has had moments when they just needed to "unload" their thoughts onto someone. For an ex-butler, the discretion that was drilled into him is all but gone after years in America.
 
judith14011 said:
I believe that Paul Burrell was not being truthful when he said that he was "naughty" and threw in "red herrings" at the inquiry. He is very full of himself. He thinks that he must have a bit of mystery and convincing others that he still holds Diana's secrets keeps him interesting. He is all smoke and mirrors. Diana's confidence in him was misplaced.
Click to expand...
I agree, he was saying it to try to keep himself important. He was certainly a rock, dense as and tied around her neck. For all we know, he was the one telling her of plots he had imagined. :ermm:
 
Skydragon said:
I agree, he was saying it to try to keep himself important. He was certainly a rock, dense as and tied around her neck. For all we know, he was the one telling her of plots he had imagined. :ermm:
Click to expand...

I'm always suspicious of people surrounding celebrities or Royalty who try to filter the way these people view the world. When Burrell told of his position at the "hub" of her life, being the one to compartimentalize her acquaintances, I thought I would hate to have someone like that feeling the right to interfere with my life. That was not a position of servant/assistant he described but of a master of ceremony - exactly what Diana hated so much about life at Court.

I like the idea of a perjury investigation - hopefully that will keep Burrell out of the UK for a while and make people aware that he simply is a liar overfull of his own importance.
 
The Queen will not have to answer questions over the death of Diana, Princess of Wales and the Duke of Edinburgh will not be called to give evidence at her inquest.

Princess Diana Inquest: Queen And Duke Of Edinburgh Will Not Give Evidence |Sky News|UK News


The Metropolitan Police has said it will not launch a perjury investigation into ex-royal butler Paul Burrell until the Princess Diana inquest concludes

BBC NEWS | UK | No Burrell probe during inquest

Also from the article -
At the hearing, Mohammed Al Fayed's former spokesman, Michael Cole, was met with silence when he asked for the withdrawal of an accusation he had tried to manipulate the truth.
"I do not ask for apologies but I would like that to be withdrawn. I was not and I am not," he said.
No-one in the courtroom spoke, and Mr Cole, a former BBC journalist, added: "I hear nothing."
Click to expand...
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Skydragon said:
The Queen will not have to answer questions over the death of Diana, Princess of Wales and the Duke of Edinburgh will not be called to give evidence at her inquest.

Princess Diana Inquest: Queen And Duke Of Edinburgh Will Not Give Evidence |Sky News|UK News


The Metropolitan Police has said it will not launch a perjury investigation into ex-royal butler Paul Burrell until the Princess Diana inquest concludes

BBC NEWS | UK | No Burrell probe during inquest

Also from the article -

At the hearing, Mohammed Al Fayed's former spokesman, Michael Cole, was met with silence when he asked for the withdrawal of an accusation he had tried to manipulate the truth.
"I do not ask for apologies but I would like that to be withdrawn. I was not and I am not," he said.
No-one in the courtroom spoke, and Mr Cole, a former BBC journalist, added: "I hear nothing."
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Hear, hear! :lol:
 
I hear nothing? Is the guy really Schultz from Hogan's heros?
 
Not surprising that the Queen and her prince consort will not be called to testify at the inquest but I find it odd that no charges will be brought against Burrell until the inquest has been concluded. Can there be an appeal by Fayad of the inquest if the verdict does not support his claims? I certainly hope not! By refusing to charge Burrell wih perjury upon his refusal to return I would think the door would be left wide open for an appeal by Fayad if an appeal is possible in this situation.

Cat
 
'Course Mr. Cole has no recollection of telling Mr. Murrell to exaggerate the story, because obviously he was heavily paid by Mr. Fayed.Wasn't he the one who withdrew his statement just days after the press confrence about Diana and Dodi not being in a serious relationship? Then all of a sudden he comes out saying she was having a baby. Hmm...me wonders is it just a coincidence...I think not. There is such a pattern forming with the witnesses I can't stress it enough. I'm so glad though coroner sees how insane all this is. I wish someone could just sew Mr. Fayed's mouth shut because I have sucha strong feeling they won't conclude the verdict as "inconclusive" but as an "accident" as it has been proven in the past 3 investigations. We certainly won't be hearing the verdict "murder" anytime soon. Mr. Fayed will certainly flip out when it doesn't come out his way....I wonder what he'll come up with next.
 
Last edited:
LadyCat said:
Not surprising that the Queen and her prince consort will not be called to testify at the inquest but I find it odd that no charges will be brought against Burrell until the inquest has been concluded. Can there be an appeal by Fayad of the inquest if the verdict does not support his claims? I certainly hope not! By refusing to charge Burrell wih perjury upon his refusal to return I would think the door would be left wide open for an appeal by Fayad if an appeal is possible in this situation.

Cat
Click to expand...

It's not a given fact that Burrell committed pergury at the inquest, in all likelihood as he wrote in the statement to the court, he was drunk, he was exaggerating. Refusing to come back and testify isn't that surprising as he was pretty much humiliated at the inquest and obvious that he over the years had exaggerated and 'gilded the lilly' as far as his importance and what he knew. He also used a lot of creative licence, and at the inquest he was exposed for the braggart that he is.
If Burrell did commit pergury at the inquest he wasn't the only one. Dodi's butler testified that he had only met Kelly Fisher twice, it turned out she lived in Dodi's Paris apartment ( where his butler worked) for a year. The jeweller from Monte Carlo testified that Dodi and Diana came into his shop to choose a ring. CCTV image proves they did not, also the testimony of the bodyguards. The ex-wife of the Villa Windsor security guard testified that Dodi and Diana visited there for 2 hours, security footage timed the visit at 28 minutes.
It will be up to the jury to decide what testimony to give weight to.

The Metropolitan police solicitor during al Fayed's testimony at the inquest got him to state that he would accept the ruling of the inquest. Although at the beginning of the inquest when things were not going his way, al Fayed told the press he would appeal the results of the inquest. His solicitors are planning on asking for a judicial review of the coroner now that he has ruled that Prince Philip doesn't have to testify and the Queen doesn't have to answer questions. So this whole legal side show could go on for years, he's got the money to keep it going. I wonder if all the people slandered by al Fayed would take legal action against him? Probably not as he's got the money to string it out for years, they don't.
 
LadyCat said:
Not surprising that the Queen and her prince consort will not be called to testify at the inquest but I find it odd that no charges will be brought against Burrell until the inquest has been concluded. Can there be an appeal by Fayad of the inquest if the verdict does not support his claims? I certainly hope not! By refusing to charge Burrell wih perjury upon his refusal to return I would think the door would be left wide open for an appeal by Fayad if an appeal is possible in this situation.

Cat
Click to expand...

In my understanding the problem with Burrell's statements are that while they were published by the SUn and seem to exist on video, they were not introduced as evidence into the inquest. Thus the coroner on bringing charges as long as the inquest has not finished would give the Sun article a legal position it does not have and he would influence the jury's opinion based on something that was not evidence. If he does that Fayed could challenge the outcome and cry for a new jury and if he was sucessful, all and sundry has to begin anew.

But after the verdict was passed in the correct mode, the Coroner can of course bring charges.
 
Jo of Palatine said:
In my understanding the problem with Burrell's statements are that while they were published by the SUn and seem to exist on video, they were not introduced as evidence into the inquest. Thus the coroner on bringing charges as long as the inquest has not finished would give the Sun article a legal position it does not have and he would influence the jury's opinion based on something that was not evidence. If he does that Fayed could challenge the outcome and cry for a new jury and if he was sucessful, all and sundry has to begin anew.

But after the verdict was passed in the correct mode, the Coroner can of course bring charges.
Click to expand...
The transcript of the Sun video was introduced as evidence, the transcript was read to the inquest on Thursday March 6th and then followed with the statement from Paul Burrell saying he did not lie to the inquest and he had been very drunk and exaggerated as he was trying to impress his audience on the video.
The coroner cannot bring charges, if the police think there had been pergury committed they could launch an investigation, it's up to the police not the coroner. If the police find evidence then they would hand it over to the Crown Prosecution Office who would decide whether or not there was enough conclusive evidence to bring it to trial. ( I don't think it's likely, Burrell was boasting not lying, questioning at the inquest showed how much self importance he gave himself but there was no substance to it)
 
Bit random but I wonder how many more weeks left in the inquest.Time sure has gone by quickly, although I am glad this happened, I'm glad everything was exammined in every way possible it could be that way no more speculation should arise. Although I do wish they were able to compell all the suspects to testify but you can't win them all can you.
 
I seem to remember seeing somewhere that the Inquest was supposed to be concluded by the end of March. However, since I don't remember where I read this, I could be way off the mark.
 
^Thanks, I'll be sad to see it over it's sorta my daily routine to check what news there is on it but I hope it lets Diana finally rest in peace.

If Burrell did commit pergury at the inquest he wasn't the only one. Dodi's butler testified that he had only met Kelly Fisher twice, it turned out she lived in Dodi's Paris apartment ( where his butler worked) for a year. The jeweller from Monte Carlo testified that Dodi and Diana came into his shop to choose a ring. CCTV image proves they did not, also the testimony of the bodyguards. The ex-wife of the Villa Windsor security guard testified that Dodi and Diana visited there for 2 hours, security footage timed the visit at 28 minutes.
It will be up to the jury to decide what testimony to give weight to.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it seems almost everyone has sorta changed their story over the years. There are those people who you can tell are clearly lying and there are those that it's quite obvious just don't remember.
 
Spent this afternoon slogging my way through the transcript of Al Fayed's "day in court"

All I can say is Lord Justice Scott Baker deserves a knighthood when all this is finished, how he managed to keep his cool I have noooooo idea:D

Oh by the way watched a movie this afternoon on TV or should say had the TV on while it was on. It was the lastest version of Peter Pan (2003)

I watched the credits.I wanted to see who some of the actors were. What should pop up was Executive Producer, yup our friend Mohammed and it was in memory of Dodi
 
Jo of Palatine said:
Thus the coroner on bringing charges as long as the inquest has not finished would give the Sun article a legal position it does not have and he would influence the jury's opinion based on something that was not evidence. If he does that Fayed could challenge the outcome and cry for a new jury and if he was successful, all and sundry has to begin anew.
Click to expand...
Yes, you have it in a nutshell, except the police will be able to conduct a full investigation and ask the CPS to prosecute! :flowers: We can but hope, whatever the outcome, Burrell has lost his 'crown' for very many people. :D
 
I must have had a blonde moment. I did not consider how perjury charges against Burrell at this point might influence the jury at the inquest. I can't say I ever gave much credence to Burrell anyway as I feel he has done nothng but use his association with Diana to place himself in the limelight and make a buck or two.

As the inquest draws close to completion and we all begin to anticipate the outcome, I can't help but think these latest developments might sow the seeds for an appeal by Fayad. Could anything be worse?

Cat
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wbenson
The Verdict of the Diana Inquest, April 2008, and Aftermath
9 10 11
Replies
325
Views
37K
Mermaid1962
M
Warren
  • Locked
Queen Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh Current Events 19: October 2008-March 2009
16 17 18
Replies
511
Views
76K
Warren
Warren
Warren
  • Locked
Queen Elizabeth & Prince Philip: State Visit to Slovenia & Slovakia - Oct 21-24, 2008
2 3
Replies
78
Views
17K
Jose
J
Warren
The Memorial Service: August 31, 2007
10 11 12
Replies
331
Views
93K
Denville
D
Warren
  • Locked
The Late Diana, Princess of Wales News Thread 7: October 2007-June 2008
6 7 8
Replies
237
Views
27K
Warren
Warren

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom