The Verdict of the Diana Inquest, April 2008, and Aftermath


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Duchess said:
i think mr. fayed will go to his grave publicly proclaiming what he believes to be the truth. i'm not saying he's right i'm just saying he believes it. the truth would be that people were killed because the person driving was intoxicated and they weren't wearing seatbelts. if he would come to terms with this then he might be able to find some peace.
Click to expand...
Were he to accept this he would have employed the driver responsible and the security team who failed to prevent an accident. That is it an accident. I dont think this is a man who is evil, he is just looking for someone/anyone to be responsible for the death of his son, and he will never stop pointing the finger and shouting and certain media outlets will always give him print.
 
pinkie40 said:
I don't feel the paparazzi care one bit..they are heartless, greedy vultures. They made Diana's life miserable and now officially have blood on their hands because of her death. They are worse a decade hence. My heart goes out to the brides of William and Harry...I can't imagine how they will cope.
Click to expand...

I agree with you wholeheartedly about the paparazzi. What I'm hoping is that as a result of these findings in future the laws might be changed (or enforced, as the case may be) so that when these creatures behave like they did around Diana they might suffer, either by being arrested and stuck in gaol or penalised financially. Their cameras and/or film could be confiscated, and they might incur huge fines. If the papers and magazines were subject to huge fines if they publish paparazzi pics taken by intrusive means, it would surely take away the paparazzi's market and might put an end to the practice. I have a feeling some good could come of that finding about the role of the paparazzi.
 
I know I've said this before but I have to say once again that I think this inquest was good it showed that even if something was planned (which again I highly beleive that the MI6 and Prince Phillip had absolutly nothing to do with it, it was just a simple car crash) no one will ever know. All areas were explored nothing came out and in the end we got the correct verdict.

Well this verdict proves that the paparazzi told the truth atleast once, the Mercedes did take off quickly at the stop light all because of them, they must be so proud of themselves (if you can't tell I'm being sarcastic)

I do have to say the begining of the inquest confused me alot thankfully due to the help of you guys and further investigation of the crash on my part(the Pagat report was a huge help especially when I finally came to fully understand it!)it came together and seemed to simple to me in the end.
 
Last edited:
pinkie40 said:
They don't ask for their mother to be left to rest in peace...how odd...imo
Click to expand...

Princes asked for that at their mother's memorial service last summer.

What I thought was significate was their complete agreement to the verdict today.:flowers:
 
Last edited:
Roslyn said:
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the paparazzi. What I'm hoping is that as a result of these findings in future the laws might be changed (or enforced, as the case may be) so that when these creatures behave like they did around Diana they might suffer, either by being arrested and stuck in gaol or penalised financially. Their cameras and/or film could be confiscated, and they might incur huge fines. If the papers and magazines were subject to huge fines if they publish paparazzi pics taken by intrusive means, it would surely take away the paparazzi's market and might put an end to the practice. I have a feeling some good could come of that finding about the role of the paparazzi.
Click to expand...
Just what I thought. I could see the Princes using the courts for justice for their future wives if the paparazzi gets out of hand.:flowers:
 
Thought as much

Thought as much, that it was an accident and as I said before Speed kills. I'm actually am surprised that Trevor Reese-Jones actually survived that accident although he had his seatbelt (or not - rumours that he didn't) on may have saved his life he could have broken his neck from the impact. The impact of that merc after hitting that pillar shows you that it was pure speed and with such impact plus not safety belts one is thrown about, that merc backend lifted turned and flung almost into the wall would kill anyone. I work for our Department of Transport and have seen graphic images from accidents and I mean grim.

Mr Fayed should let this rest but I have a feeling he won't do this. I feel for William and Harry, the Spencer family and even the Royal family to let this rest.
 
Maybe this verdict makes anybody happy: the princes and Diana's family because it signals the end to all that - Case closed.
For Fayed because he can twist it in his crazy mind like he wants to and believe that he finally was heard and got a verdict of unlawful death.
Okay, the family of Henri Paul, they must be disappointed but I thought the evidence about him having drunk two Ricards before he drove was enough to explain his part in the accident. Because it is still an accident that happened, the verdict only tells that it is possible to pinpoint the reason for the accident to the behaviour of two parties: Henri Paul's drinking and speeding and the pursuit of the paparazzi.

So may Diana rest in peace now.
 
I don't like Harry and William mentioned Dodi in this statement about inquest. They try to be so "politically correct" and "nice". Dodi might be a nice guy etc, but he was just a short time lover, never family member, it's sort of tacky to mention him even if they think it is gesture towards Al-Fayed family.
I always believed it was just a fatal crash, and I always blamed paparazzis.:mad: I agree some laws should be changed so "reporters" would know that they would be punished for stalking. Such behavior has nothing to do with freedom of press.
 
The various news channels here, all discussing and dissecting the verdict, have said that

'as Mr Al Fayed's spokesman has made clear, he has left open the possibility that he will challenge the verdict'

(Remembered from the best of my ability).

The BBC also had the ex editor of the NotW and Arthur Edwards on, both were saying, when asked why they published pictures taken by these packs, ..... "well we had to, if we didn't they were published in foreign papers and came to us through other means anyway. Of course we would rather not have published those that were clearly pursuit pictures, but if we allowed other publications to get the lead, we would not be very popular" OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT.

Oh right, as if any of them would be welcomed to my table based on that excuse!

Al Fayed 'considering options' - Yahoo! News UK

Diana Butler Paul Burrell Avoids Perjury Probe Over Inquest |Sky News|UK News

Michael Cole, spokesman for Mohamed al Fayed, immediately responded to the remarks.

He told Sky News the Harrods boss also wanted to "move on" but was nevertheless meeting his legal team today to examine his options.
"Don't you think I do (want to move on)? Don't you think I do?" he said.
"This last six months has been like going through a very, very dark tunnel and the whole of the last 10 years has been terrible.
"Of course we all want to move on but I think there can be no untied up loose ends, but all we're doing today is trying to see if there is anything more that can be done."


Mr Cole went on: "Mohamed doesn't want to perpetuate this thing, he has got no interest in that, it actually takes a great deal out of him.
"But he feels he owes it to his son, he feels he owes it to the Princess and he feels he owes it to the world to actually make every effort to get all the facts out."

Diana Butler Paul Burrell Avoids Perjury Probe Over Inquest |Sky News|UK News
The Princess of Wales's former butler Paul Burrell looks set to escape a perjury probe after the coroner at Diana's inquest said he had no plans to refer him to police
 
Last edited:
It seems that Paul Burrell is a non-issue. Yes, he may have committed perjury but is more likely that he did not. In in his own self important mind, he was perpetuating his own ego and ability to make money off of Diana, nothing else.
 
Of course he committed perjury. This sends out a message that you can be sleazy, trade off a dead woman, lie in a court and get away with it. Burrell should go down.
 
BeatrixFan said:
Of course he committed perjury. This sends out a message that you can be sleazy, trade off a dead woman, lie in a court and get away with it. Burrell should go down.
Click to expand...

Somewhere I read that any citizen of the Uk could go to the police and report Burrell for having committed perjury. It need not be the coroner and while I understand that the Lord Justice does not want to bring up charges against Burrell I wonder if noone else will do it. I would if I could.
 
Mr. Fayed confuses me, the fact almost every single conspiracy theory can be proven false by the evidence and information we have should be proof enough. I truly hope Fayed doesn't appeal the verdict.

I'm actually am surprised that Trevor Reese-Jones actually survived that accident although he had his seatbelt (or not - rumours that he didn't) on may have saved his life he could have broken his neck from the impact.
Click to expand...

I too am still really surprised even to this day that he survived. I guess it was just meant to be.
 
Last edited:
My goodness is this Fayed cheap! And he obviously believes the whole world to be stupid or what?

from the Times: Brown warns Mohamed Al Fayed not to challenge Diana verdict - Times Online

Mr Al Fayed, who has so far spend £15 million of his own fortune pursuing his theories, had told the inquest during his sworn testimony that he would abide by the verdict of the jury.
Today, however, Mr Cole said: "When he made that declaration, it was on the assumption that the jury would be allowed to hear everything. They weren't."

He said that the jury had not been allowed to consider a verdict of murder, and had not heard evidence from either the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh. The paparazzi who chased the black Mercedes limousine at high speed through the streets of Paris also refused to come from France to testify.

"He had no way of knowing so many key French witnesses would refuse to come forward," said Mr Cole."

End of quote.

Now come on, when Fayed said that on oath, he knew exactly that a lot of the paparazzi had refused to testify. That had been known for a long time then... what does he think?

But I'm glad that even the Prime Minister now steps forward and tries to spare the British taxpayer yet another show of Fayed's crazyness at the expense of his voters... Is about time, IMHO:
 
Lakshmi said:
I don't like Harry and William mentioned Dodi in this statement about inquest. They try to be so "politically correct" and "nice". Dodi might be a nice guy etc, but he was just a short time lover, never family member, it's sort of tacky to mention him even if they think it is gesture towards Al-Fayed family.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I find it normal. Of course, there's no possible comparison between their mother and a man they barely knew but it's very important to mention all the victims. It was reproached that at the time of their death, Dodi was put out of the picture and that only talked about Diana.

BeatrixFan said:
Of course he committed perjury. This sends out a message that you can be sleazy, trade off a dead woman, lie in a court and get away with it. Burrell should go down.
Click to expand...

I share your opinion. It's too easy to let Burrell walk out like that. It's very understandable that this Inquest has been a real headache for the ones taking care of it but now it's like they are in a rush to close it.
 
I truly feel sorry only for Mr.Paul's family. He will be known as a drunk driver, who contributed to Princess Diana's death. This may not be true. We shall never know what really happened in the Pont de l'Alma tunnel. I believe that the whole accident happens to be just a chain of unfortunate events.
 
I feel badly for Henri Paul's parents. A jury has decided that their son's negligence caused the death of the world's most famous woman. This must be a terrible blow to them.
 
It's always unfair when other people must face the blame instead of the true guilty person. In this case, Henri Paul's parents had to receive the verdict and they are the ones to pay for their son's mistake. And all the paparazzi are paying the price for only a few who went too far.
 
I for one think that Mr. Paul's parents did in fact expect that their son would be the one to blame as he was the driver. Miracles of exoneration from any charges in cases involving public rich people happen in films only.:flowers:
 
I agree with what you say, Al bina and TheTruth, about Henri Paul's parents being in some way prepared for the verdict. I think, though, that to see their son's name in print as being responsible for the accident would bring things home to them in a whole new way.
 
I certainly hope so, Roslyn. It's definitely up to the papers and magazines not to publish paparazzi photos, because people will buy whatever's published.


Roslyn said:
I have a feeling some good could come of that finding about the role of the paparazzi.
Click to expand...
 
"Don't confuse me with facts, I know how I feel..."

Sigh. Not surprising, but still.
 
I'm glad it is over--officially. Whether or not Al Fayed chooses to pursue this doesn't change that the verdict is in, and it is what I expected. Drunk driving, no seatbelts and the paparazzi were responsible for the deaths that night. I hope that the boys are able to put this behind them.
 
He has officially accepted the verdict and says he's done!(I hope!) Wow that's surprising, he still sounds absolutly insane in this interview but maybe someday down the road he'll realize there was no conspiracy to it and it was just a simple accident.I think Fayed started this in a sense to divert attention away from him and getting the blame after the accident and it ended up becoming something he trutly beleived in, he beleived the conspiracy theories were real in the end, atleast in my opinion. I do wonder though, those conspiracy theorist followers at the inquest verdict, did they actually follow the inquest or are they delusional, my mind for some reason won't let the murder thing go even though I know from everything I read that it was 100% not murder on the Establishment's part, though I can't help but always go back to that thought, I guess that's what 10 years of listening to the media does to you. But that's there job now isn't it? I do have to say though I am so glad the jury found it to be a combined factor of impared judgement and the paparazzi in pursuit because putting full blame on Mr. Paul isn't fair, we don't know if his alcohol consumption was the main reason to him speeding that night. I guess Mr. Cole was right when he said we'll never know the meaning behind the Repossi ring,(I have to add as well as many other things) 'cause I'm still confused, although I doubt Diana would have gotten re-married. Anyways, Diana may your familly finally find happiness over what has been a crazy 10 years.

'God will get revenge for me,' says tearful Mohamed al Fayed as he admits defeat in decade-long Diana battle | the Daily Mail
(Read the article it's not what you think. Don't judge it by the headline.)
 
Last edited:
I think that people are open to conspiracy theories because there have been real cover-ups in the past and there's a lot of conspiracy-based fiction out there. If a person reads enough murder mysteries and political thrillers, anything seems possible after awhile. I've read enough of them to know that a person can get into that did-he-fall-or-was-he-pushed way of thinking.


ghost_night554 said:
He has officially accepted the verdict and says he's done!(I hope!) Wow that's surprising, he still sounds absolutly insane in this interview but maybe someday down the road he'll realize there was no conspiracy to it and it was just a simple accident. I do wonder though, those conspiracy theorist followers at the inquest verdict, did they actually follow the inquest or are they delusional, my mind for some reason won't let the murder thing go even though I know from everything I read that it was 100% not murder on the Establishment's part, though I can't help but always go back to that thought, I guess that's what 10 years of listening to the media does to you. But that's there job now isn't it? I do have to say though I am so glad the jury found it to be a combined factor of impared judgement and the paparazzi in pursuit because putting full blame on Mr. Paul isn't fair, we don't know if his alcohol consumption was the main reason to him speeding that night. I guess Mr. Cole was right when he said we'll never know the meaning behind the Repossi ring, cause I'm still confused, although I doubt Diana would have gotten re-married. Anyways, Diana may your familly finally find happiness over what has been a crazy 10 years.

'God will get revenge for me,' says tearful Mohamed al Fayed as he admits defeat in decade-long Diana battle | the Daily Mail
(Read the article it's not what you think. Don't judge it by the headline.)
Click to expand...
 
I think that people are open to conspiracy theories because there have been real cover-ups in the past and there's a lot of conspiracy-based fiction out there. If a person reads enough murder mysteries and political thrillers, anything seems possible after awhile. I've read enough of them to know that a person can get into that did-he-fall-or-was-he-pushed way of thinking.
Click to expand...

That's true, I've said this many times but I'm probably a little guilty of being the same way in the early stages of the inquest, I doubted every little piece of evidence, but soon I came to understand more about it and realized I was wrong all these years, this was no cover up and if it was they sure did a good job at it. lol

Okay, the family of Henri Paul, they must be disappointed but I thought the evidence about him having drunk two Ricards before he drove was enough to explain his part in the accident
Click to expand...

I can't find the transcripts right now I can't remember what date it was but I beleive one the experts had said that by the time of the crash the 2 Ricards would have been out of his system. If it was one of the people Fayed hired though I take it back. But anyways I get the point your trying to make I just wanted to point that out ....for some odd reason.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

iceflower
  • Sticky
The Royal Family of Brunei: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
Replies
4
Views
863
Biri
B
Somebody
The Princess of Orange, News and Events Part 2 (Jan 2024 - present)
2
Replies
59
Views
11K
Somebody
Somebody
J
Diana closed casket?
Replies
0
Views
674
Jamesy
J
Marengo
Princess Alexandra of Luxembourg and Nicolas Bagory: 22 and 29 April 2023
4 5 6
Replies
169
Views
32K
claypoint2
claypoint2
iceflower
The Princess of Wales's Daytime Fashion Part 3: July 2023 -
7 8 9
Replies
241
Views
26K
Susan D
S

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom