The Diana Inquest: October 2007 - April 2008

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Polly

I understand that, according to law, this inquest was compulsory, hence Fayed is in no way responsible for the cost.

An inquest is held for any Brit dying abroad, we don't normally have an (expensive) investigation here, if a perfectly satisfactory one has already been held.

[Martha]

This inquest is very complex, and maybe difficult.

[Polly]

Originally Posted by Warren

According to ther Paget report (chapter 6, pages 419-426) the car was examined by David Price, Principal Consultant with the Incident Investigation & Reconstruction Group at the Transport Research Laboratory.
He "consulted with technical representative of Daimler-Benz (Mercedes)".
Only the right rear seat belt was jammed, and the report concludes that the mechanism was displaced after the collision.
The summary concludes with "There was no evidence of tampering or interference with the vehicle" [which was stolen in April 1997].
There is no mention of the air bags in this chapter of the report other than the statement that they were examined.

Thanks for this information, Warren. I haven't seen the Paget report. However, I do know that the car manufacturer was disappointed and remains unhappy that they have been denied their own access. In the first instance, as I understand it, the overwhelming damage to the car was seen as a PR disaster for them. Only because a near family member is an employee of Daimler-Benz, I drive a C200 Elegance, and I know what is expected to happen to the car in a high-speed crash - i.e. the car is engineered in such a way as the damaging engine and parts are supposed to slip under the car, not intrude into the passenger's space. Of course, what is supposed to happen isn't always what does happen, but it's why I think that the car's engineers should have had untrammelled access and permitted to make their own investigation and draw their own conclusions.

Last year, a drunk driver drove into my car while travelling at a very high speed. My car was very badly bashed and dinted indeed but the airbags deployed instantly and all us, including the dog who wasn't properly strapped in, were unscathed. The other car was almost completely demolished (it was an insurance write-off) and the stupid young man driving it was hospitalised for many months. This safety factor is one of the major reasons that people drive Mercedes. And yes, Elspeth, Mercedes-Benz cars did indeed have side airbags 10 years ago; well, the ones in Australia did.

The bottom line for me is that every single, possible aspect and nuance of this tragedy be open to public examination. It is only then, I believe, that this whole distressing mess will go away. To be honest, I'm sick of all of the wild speculation and its inherent slanders and would prefer that even the tiniest detail or criticism be met head on so that it can be examined, explained then summarily dismissed, rather than dragging on and on forever, thus giving outrageous claims some sort of credence to the credulous.

[Polly]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

An inquest is held for any Brit dying abroad, we don't normally have an (expensive) investigation here, if a perfectly satisfactory one has already been held.

But surely that's the point, Skydragon, i.e. that too many did not believe that the earlier inquest was perfectly satisfactory? Nor should we forget that a royal hasn't died in such controversial circumstances before. I think, therefore, that the inquest is entirely appropriate.

I will only think it a waste of time and money if any detail, claim and counter-claim, accusation etc. is not fully addressed so that it can publicly be dismissed. To the conspiracy die-hards, it's a matter of justice being seen to have been done. If not, the rumours and sheer spite surrounding the BRF will continue well into history's record, and I, for one, don't believe that they deserve this.

[selrahc4]

Originally Posted by Polly

But surely that's the point, Skydragon, i.e. that too many did not believe that the earlier inquest was perfectly satisfactory? Nor should we forget that a royal hasn't died in such controversial circumstances before. I think, therefore, that the inquest is entirely appropriate.

There wasn't a separate earlier inquest. This is a continuation of the one and only inquest.

[Polly]

Originally Posted by selrahc4

There wasn't a separate earlier inquest. This is a continuation of the one and only inquest.

Yes, thanks for correcting me (it's very early in the morning here). I should have said the French and Steven's official investigations and the French appeals court's decisions. Doesn't alter my opinions or arguments, however.

Does anyone know, by the way, if all of the Diana investigation files which went missing in Paris have been found?

[sirhon11234]

How long were they missing Polly?

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Polly

Yes, thanks for correcting me (it's very early in the morning here). I should have said the French and Steven's official investigations and the French appeals court's decisions. Doesn't alter my opinions or arguments, however.

Does anyone know, by the way, if all of the Diana investigation files which went missing in Paris have been found?

Actually, the French court said the files weren't missing. Although the lawyer of one of the paparazzi present on the crash scene wasn't able to get those files. He was told that they were missing but the computer of the archives concluded that it was impossible. Since then, I didn't find anymore information ...

[Polly]

Originally Posted by TheTruth

Actually, the French court said the files weren't missing. Although the lawyer of one of the paparazzi present on the crash scene wasn't able to get those files. He was told that they were missing but the computer of the archives concluded that it was impossible. Since then, I didn't find anymore information ...

Accordingly to what I read (Le Figaro/The Times/the BBC), the originals were stored in 2002, then, allegedly couldn't be found, but I have just read that they were relocated last month (September 2nd).

"I wanted, out of curiosity, to see the original file a month ago," Mr Pelletier told The Times today. "They said it couldn't be found. The appeal court didn't have it. The registrar didn't have it and nor did the law courts' archives. It's very troubling that a file of this importance could disappear. The authorities responsible for keeping it could not tell me where it went."
Several complete photocopies of the case file exist, but the originals are legally necessary for future proceedings, such as the new British inquest that is opening on October 2.

Thanks for the advice, The Truth. I'm relieved that there's not yet another 'suspicious' happening to cloud the issue.

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

The problem with airbags is that they're only good for one collision. Apparently in this case the car hit the pillar and the airbags deployed, but the car then bounced off the pillar and hit the wall, and the airbags had already been deployed when it first hit the pillar so there was no protection for the second collision. And ten years ago I don't think they were fitting cars with all these other airbags at the sides which they use now, so the people in the back wouldn't have had any protection.

From Huth's account, the airbags seem still to be inflated, some 2-3 minutes after the collisions, which suggest to me that they would have provided at least some protection for the impact with the wall - which can't have been more than a second or so after the collision with the pillar - even if they had started to deflate. That first photo indicates they were still inflated at that stage. Or is it the case that the protective pressure only lasts a fraction of a second?

There's a suggestion, supported by Huth's account, that there were three impacts, which seems to support the suggestion of an initial collision with another vehicle, either a dark car or the white Fiat. Perhaps the airbag first deployed when the Mercedes hit the first car, which would have meant Paul couldn't have controlled the car after that. If the airbags deployed in response to a relatively minor impact (with the car), rendering him unable to control the car and avoid further collision, Mercedes should have been able to know that 10 years ago so they could make adjustments. It would indeed be a tragedy if the airbags which were designed to save lives were a major contributing factor to the fatal second and third collisions.

Of course if the two people in the back seat had been wearing seat belts they wouldn't have been thrown around inside the car as they were.

I agree with the later poster who said that all this must be made public. I hope that if that is done, and everyone knows precisely what happened, the matter can be finalised once and for all, and that all the bereaved can finally close this sad chapter in their lives and move on.

[pinkie40]

I can't imagine a M-B that had been previously reported to have been stolen, stripped and rebuilt to be allowed to be part of a fleet of cars used for high profile, high level celebrities.

What is strange to me in all the photos of the M-B in question is that it seemed there was no blood ever shown (did I miss this maybe???)...I can assume, with the injuries sustained by the bodyguard alone, the amount of blood in the car and around the car (especially on the white airbags) would be a substantial amount...

Also, it was mentioned in a report on CNN hosted by Anderson Cooper, a couple from New York saw Diana thrown upon the dashbooard with her face towards them....then I would also surmise Diana would have sustained a bloody scalp (one can make out dark shadows from the "black and white" photocopied images on certain websites) from her crashing into the windshield.


So where is all this blood and would this be the reason, as mentioned by Simone Simmons, as to why the tunnel was washed clean??

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by pinkie40

So where is all this blood and would this be the reason, as mentioned by Simone Simmons, as to why the tunnel was washed clean??

I don't think you'd necessarily get cuts from being hurled against the dashboard, and even if there were cuts, they might not bleed much. I thought Diana's injuries were mainly internal. I would expect there to have been a good deal of blood from Rees' injuries, but there might not have been any spurting if he didn't sever arteries. I don't know details of the injuries to Paul and Dodi, but if they were killed instantly, the blood flow would follow the course of gravity, wouldn't it? The one colour photo I have seen does show some reddy-brown stuff, but as it was a black car, and had black interior, I think, blood mightn't have shown up anyway.

I'm not sure what you mean about Simmons. Did she say the tunnel was washed clean because there was blood, or because there was no blood? I would expect it to have been washed clean of any blood as a matter of course. Apart from the need to remove the blood in the interests of good taste, there would also have been brake fluid and oil and maybe petrol and other car fluids to remove in the interests of safety.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Polly

But surely that's the point, Skydragon, i.e. that too many did not believe that the earlier inquest was perfectly satisfactory? Nor should we forget that a royal hasn't died in such controversial circumstances before. I think, therefore, that the inquest is entirely appropriate.

I will only think it a waste of time and money if any detail, claim and counter-claim, accusation etc. is not fully addressed so that it can publicly be dismissed. To the conspiracy die-hards, it's a matter of justice being seen to have been done. If not, the rumours and sheer spite surrounding the BRF will continue well into history's record, and I, for one, don't believe that they deserve this.

This is the one and only inquest, there have been two investigations so far and if the inquest doesn't return the verdict Fayed wants, he will push for another one. It doesn't matter what the full and detailed investigation showed, the theorists will continue to believe she was murdered. Already I can hear them saying, 'they didn't call this witness' and 'they didn't take that into account'.

The investigation and inquest will do nothing to convince those that want to believe that her death was so mundane.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by pinkie40

Also, it was mentioned in a report on CNN hosted by Anderson Cooper, a couple from New York saw Diana thrown upon the dashbooard with her face towards them....then I would also surmise Diana would have sustained a bloody scalp (one can make out dark shadows from the "black and white" photocopied images on certain websites) from her crashing into the windshield.

I watched the documentary on Ch4, which showed pictures of Diana after the crash and there was no major impact mark to be seen. I also remember Eve Pollard telling us that she (her paper) had been offered 'crash pictures' and all they showed was a small trickle of blood. I would doubt the authenticity of a couple seeing Diana thrown against the dashboard, when every other witness has said she was in the back, do you have a link to this story?

[GillW]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

I watched the documentary on Ch4, which showed pictures of Diana after the crash and there was no major impact mark to be seen. I also remember Eve Pollard telling us that she (her paper) had been offered 'crash pictures' and all they showed was a small trickle of blood. I would doubt the authenticity of a couple seeing Diana thrown against the dashboard, when every other witness has said she was in the back, do you have a link to this story?

Everything I've read - including the Paget Report - states Diana was found slumped behind the front seats. Anyone who saw her impacting the windscreen had to have been inside the tunnel at the time of impact and seen that happen before she slumped back into the foot well - and I doubt she would have done that from a position above the two front seats. I think we can safely disregard the account...

[Gita]

Diana jury told that snappers expected key announcement

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Gita

Diana jury told that snappers expected key announcement

Good old rumour to blame then! "He told me there was a rumour of an announcement".
Had she been with Dodi long enough to get engaged or be pregnant enough to know? Why has no doctor come forward to say she saw him, or shopkeeper to say she bought a diy kit?

[Polly]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Good old rumour to blame then! "He told me there was a rumour of an announcement".
Had she been with Dodi long enough to get engaged or be pregnant enough to know? Why has no doctor come forward to say she saw him, or shopkeeper to say she bought a diy kit?

You know, Skydragon, I don't really understand this last post. Perhaps I'm dense?

What her relationship was or wasn't with Dodi is of no interest to me and probably not to anyone else except Dodi's father. I couldn't care less who Diana might or might not have wanted to marry and so far as I'm concerned, a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc. would never have exercised my mind. All are honourable religions, and not the only ones, for that matter, in my humble opinion.

What does exercise me, nonetheless, is the adamant refusal to allow Mercedes' engineers to examine the car. They are brilliant and gifted men and women, and by golly, they can tell, precisely, what duress the car was placed under. As I've indicated above, something really untoward must have occurred to destroy Diana's car so comprehensively. I speak from personal experience.

I thought the lovely Diana an ill-advised and silly young woman in many ways. However, she contributed to this world in significant ways, she did a great deal to combat ignorance and prejudice and she worked very hard to bring the wretched of this earth to our compassion and understanding. No matter her agenda - she was a humanitarian success, and I honour her for that: always will.

I believe that it's our bounden duty to examine every tiny detail of her death. First, we owe it to her; second, we owe it to our beloved Queen and her family.

Refusing to acknowledge any or all possibilities in this Inquest, and leaving any little pebble of dissention unaddressed, will not exonerate those who do not deserve (in my opinion) the opprobrium of culpability in Diana's death.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Polly

don't really understand this last post. Perhaps I'm dense?.... What her relationship was or wasn't with Dodi is of no interest to me and probably not to anyone else except Dodi's father.....
....However, she contributed to this world in significant ways, ....
I believe that it's our bounden duty to examine every tiny detail of her death.

My post was about the photographers, yet again trying to find an excuse for their inexcusable behaviour that night, the pathetic 'we heard a rumour so we pursued her', when in fact they pursued her, sometimes with her help, regardless of any rumour. < ed >

As regards the rest of your post, do we really need to have her reputation further sullied by the acceptance by many, that this woman had leapt into another bed at the first opportunity and got herself pregnant? Do we need to know anything but the absolute facts regarding the crash.

I hadn't given any thought to which religion any of her male friends were and I don't understand your reference to it when replying to my post.

[TheTruth]

Diana jury shown receipt for Dodi engagement ring - Yahoo! News UK