The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/)
-   -   Diana's Friends, Lovers and Bodyguards (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/dianas-friends-lovers-and-bodyguards-13135.html)

adelgal_36 01-03-2006 01:43 AM

Diana's Friends, Lovers and Bodyguards
 
for years i have always wondered what has become of diana's flatmates. the flatmates: carolyn bartholomew(nee pride), ann hill(nee bolton) and virginia pittman. i am interested to know what has become of them . last i read about carolyn was according to 'friend' of diana's simmone simmons diana apparently had a fallout with carolyn. as for ann i do know she is still married to noel hill and still lives here in australia. prince harry stayed at their farm when he was in australia a couple of years ago. virginia pittman i have no idea what has become of her. does anyone know? be interested to know what they have done in regards to careers etc

maryshawn 01-07-2006 03:08 PM

I'll try and research the others. I knew she was close to Ms. Bartholemew but Ms. Simmons says Diana became angry when she borrowed a dress than waited awhile to return it and when she did, it was in shabby condition. It was auctioned off by Christie's however (it was on page 116 in the catalogue), the Catherine Walker lliac dress with the mult-coloured jacket. IF it had been ruined, it certainly didn't look in bad shape in the photo where Diana models it. I don't know how much to believe about this "rift"; perhaps Diana was in a bad mood that day (parting with all her dresses and thinking about their history could lead to sadness and disappointment). As far as I know, Carolyn and Diana were very much on speaking terms when Diana died--which is more than Ms. Simmons can say.

Lady Jean 01-08-2006 05:54 PM

Has anyone seen a photo or video of any of them at her funeral? I dont' recall any.

maryshawn 01-13-2006 08:40 PM

I'd read at the time Carolyn Bartholemew was definitely there but as for the others, I don't know. I don't know how true it is but several books have stated the "guest list" for her funeral was created from Diana's address/phone book.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Jean
Has anyone seen a photo or video of any of them at her funeral? I dont' recall any.


smg9295 03-01-2007 08:31 AM

Diana and Anne Beckwith-Smith
 
Does anyone have information on Anne Beckwith-Smith and what she has been doing since Diana's death? She is one who has never spoken yet was with Diana since the very beginning.

sassie 03-02-2007 06:46 PM

I believe Anne Beckwith-Smith works for a prestigious art gallery in London. I imagine she's getting close to retirement, though-she is ten years older than Diana.

Christo's Girl 03-03-2007 02:08 PM

I believe that Harry stayed with either Virginia or Ann during his time in Australia that is correct. It was these three ladies that appeared to have had the longest lasting friendships with Diana. Anne Beckwith-Smith was I am sure very much missed by Diana when she left as LIW.

Sammy 03-03-2007 02:47 PM

If you look at some of the pictures from June 3, 1997 - Sotheby's I believe, Anne Beckwith-Smith is with Diana.

Charlotte1 03-04-2007 01:14 AM

When Harry came to Australia he stayed at the property in Northern NSW (?) that belonged to Diana's former flatmate Ann Hill and her husband. Ann married the son of one of Charles's friends who owns large stations ( ranches) in Australia. He's Australian, so she lives in Australia and obviously there is some contract with Diana's children but probably more due to her husband's family connections with Charles.

Lord of Cowley 05-22-2007 11:48 PM

Hello - I think this is a most interesting thread. Someone had mentioned that they did not know what had happened to Virginia Pitman. Well, I am pretty sure that she is married to Andrew Parker-Bowles, first husband of Camilla!

Weird, eh?

Charlotte1 05-23-2007 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of Cowley
Hello - I think this is a most interesting thread. Someone had mentioned that they did not know what had happened to Virginia Pitman. Well, I am pretty sure that she is married to Andrew Parker-Bowles, first husband of Camilla!

Weird, eh?


Ummm Andrew Parker Bowles's second wife's name is Rosemary! She was his long term mistress that he married after his divorce from Camilla.

Elspeth 05-23-2007 12:10 AM

The BBC seems to have got things wrong, because Virginia Pitman is mentioned as his second wife.

BBC NEWS | UK | Profile: Camilla Parker Bowles

Wikipedia has Rosemary Pitman:

BBC NEWS | UK | Profile: Camilla Parker Bowles

TheTruth 07-02-2007 07:51 AM

Diana's friends, lovers and bodyguards
 
Hi there,

I wanted to start a new thread talking about the bodyguards of the princess and showing some photos. Which one did you like the most ? Which one would you have trust or fired ? Do you think that the resignation of Ken Wharfe in 1993 leaded directly to the death of Diana ?

:flowers:

Warren 07-02-2007 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTruth (Post 635001)
Which one did you like the most ? Which one would you have trust or fired ?:flowers:

Do you want a factual thread or a "fan" thread? How many members would be in any position to have a basis for a like or dislike of any of Diana's bodyguards? You may as well ask "who do you think was the most cute?"

If you want to have a thread discussing Diana's relationships with her bodyguards, that's a valid area. But to ask members "which one did you like the most?" just reinforces the increasing trivialisation and reduction to the absurd of so many things to do with Diana. Next up we'll have someone suggesting "Diana - The Board Game".

TheTruth 07-02-2007 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren (Post 635009)
If you want to have a thread discussing Diana's relationships with her bodyguards, that's a valid area. But to ask members "which one did you like the most?" just reinforces the increasing trivialisation and reduction to the absurd of so many things to do with Diana. Next up we'll have someone suggesting "Diana - The Board Game".

No lol, what I meant was "Who do you think fufilled his work of bodyguard perfectly?" so it concernes their relationship with Diana. Sorry for making an ambiguity :flowers:.

TheTruth 07-02-2007 08:38 AM

Some pics :
Barry Mannakee
ImageShack - Hosting :: barrymannakeeym1.jpg
ImageShack - Hosting :: barrymannakee1kb3.jpg
Dave Sharp
ImageShack - Hosting :: davesharpne1.jpg
Graham Smith
ImageShack - Hosting :: grahamsmithcn6.jpg
Ken Wharfe
ImageShack - Hosting :: kenwharfelg2.jpg
ImageShack - Hosting :: kenwharfe1xj9.jpg
ImageShack - Hosting :: kenwharfe2sm7.jpg
ImageShack - Hosting :: kenwharfe3ti4.jpg
ImageShack - Hosting :: kenwharfe4if7.jpg
Trevor Rees-Jones
ImageShack - Hosting :: trevorreesejonesjf2.jpg

2 videos of Ken Wharfe talking of Princess Diana on CBS
A British report purportedly found that not only was Princess Diana and Dodi al-Fayed's driver drunk, but that the U.S. was spying on Diana. Ken Wharfe, a former bodyguard, speaks with Rene Syler.

Ken Wharfe, Princess Diana's bodyguard at the time newly-revealed tapes were made, spoke to The Early Show about the latest wave of scandals and rumors surrounding her life and marriage.

Lily97 07-03-2007 01:40 PM

Well I can definately say who not and that would be Trevor Rees-Jones. He allowed those crazy antics to go on that fateful night!

If I were to pick a favorite I would say Barry Mannakee because I think that was her favorite and she trusted him the most. He was also there during the time when she probably needed someome to trust at the very beginning when she was feeling like a duck out of the water.

Lily

AuroraB 07-03-2007 02:29 PM

Sorry to disagree, but Dodi and his father were in control that night in Paris, not Trevor Rees-Jones. Rule number one: don't argue with the boss.

TheTruth 07-03-2007 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuroraB (Post 635730)
Sorry to disagree, but Dodi and his father were in control that night in Paris, not Trevor Rees-Jones. Rule number one: don't argue with the boss.

Yes, I agree with you AuroraB. Trevor Rees-Jones couldn't go against the will of his boss. Although some bodyguards, when they have the trust of their boss, dare to suggest what would be better for them. If Trevor did see the inhability of Henri Paul to drive, he would have probably told Diana not to get in the car. But when you look at the videos of the Ritz, Henri Paul didn't seem to be drunk. How could Trevor possibly prevent this car crash ?

Skydragon 07-03-2007 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lily97 (Post 635707)
Well I can definately say who not and that would be Trevor Rees-Jones. He allowed those crazy antics to go on that fateful night!

Trevor Rees-Jones was not Dianas bodyguard, he was Dodi's.

TheTruth 07-03-2007 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon (Post 635747)
Trevor Rees-Jones was not Dianas bodyguard, he was Dodi's.

Oh yes, you're right SkyDragon. Sorry for making a mistake. Well, my point of vue doesn't change. He would have told Dodi if he had found something strange. I mean, the idea of being almost killed in a car crash and being disfigured doesn't attract me at all :ermm:.

umbrellagirl 07-04-2007 01:17 PM

Alan Peters always impressed me. In photos, he looked so alert and totally concentrated on his job. And he was so big; I would have found that comforting.
In the last picture in this series, he actually had to go into action when Diana was assaulted by a man in the crowd.

https://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j1...oadlands-3.jpg

https://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j1...Apr18_NZ_c.jpg

https://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j1...83Apr22_NZ.jpg

https://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j1...1/1984Nov8.jpg

https://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j1...protecting.jpg

Lily97 07-04-2007 02:10 PM

I wondered about Trevor Rees-Jones but figured I was wrong. Even if he was Dodi's bodyguard in my opinion, boss or not, he should not have let them get in that car and allowed Henri Paul to drive like a madman. A professional bodyguard should not have allowed that!

Lily

AuroraB 07-04-2007 04:28 PM

Then TR-J better have a great resume ready because he would be looking for a new job. Find me one employee who would countermand Al-Fayed (father or son).

Skydragon 07-04-2007 04:43 PM

All bodyguards seem to walk a tightrope. If they tell their charge they wouldn't advise them to do such and such, the charge can and often does ignore them. They then have to go along with whatever inappropriate action their charge undertakes, or lose their job.

ysbel 07-04-2007 05:04 PM

It depends on the position of the bodyguard.

Ken Wharfe, Diana's royal bodyguard, was an employee of Scotland Yard not of the Royal Family, so he could and did counteract his employer. He heavily criticizes Rees-Jones for not counteracting against al-Fayed but he doesn't realize that Rees-Jones was a private employee of the al-Fayeds and so had less leverage to go against his employers.

However, neither al-Fayed, Rees-Jones, or Henri Paul had ever had any experience of dealing with the kind of press madness that surrounded Diana. The only person in the car with that sort of experience and exposure to the types of security measures that would be effective was Diana herself.

helenw 07-04-2007 07:43 PM

Trevor Rees-Jones should have at least insisted they fasten their seat belts.
I'm not blaming him (I blame Fayed and Dodi for their poor decision making that night), and the crash may still have happened, but with a different outcome.

ysbel 07-04-2007 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helenw (Post 636448)
Trevor Rees-Jones should have at least insisted they fasten their seat belts.
I'm not blaming him (I blame Fayed and Dodi for their poor decision making that night), and the crash may still have happened, but with a different outcome.

Do we know that he didn't? Or maybe he did tell them to wear seatbelts and they ignored him. But I read in the coroner's report that he didn't have his seatbelt on either so I don't know.

Ken Wharfe heavily criticized his actions that night and indicated he would have done things differently. I wonder what they were and if he had been Diana's bodyguard for a long time, I wonder why she didn't speak up when some of the security measures weren't up to what she was used to? However, maybe she did speak up and was ignored.

helenw 07-04-2007 11:05 PM

That's true, ysbel, he may have asked them to put them on and they ignored him.

I guess we'll never know.

TheTruth 07-05-2007 01:06 PM

I don't think he did ask them to put seat belts on. His attention was probably on the paparazzi near the car. Ysbel is right, he wasn't wearing a seat belt then. Actually he was kind of ejected from his place, that's why his face was so damaged. Experiences were made to see if the seat belt could have saved their lives. Some scientists said her heart wouldn't have stand the choc and it would have been the same thing. Some think otherwise. I don't know what to think, I'm not a doctor. When she was found she didn't seem to have internal wounds, only external like on her forehead. Rees-Jones seem, in fact, more alarming than her. He was screaming and holding his head. If they'd knew her internal injuries were so important they wouldn't have waited too long. But how could they possibly knew...

sesa 07-05-2007 01:21 PM

I had read in one report that TRJ was the only one wearing a seat belt and that is why he is the only one that survived. True or not? I don't know. and at the time she was dating Dodi, she had already given up her personal security, which is why Dodi and his father supplied the body guards. who knows, if she had not given up her personal security, would they have noticed that the driver was intoxicated? Would they have insisted that she put on her seatbelt? Hard to say. But I think when she gave up her personal security, she made a huge mistake.

Does anyone know the name of the body guard that Diana had that was transferred and he was killed something like a month later in a motorcycle accident? I guess she "was supposed" to have had an affair with him, which was why he was transferred.

TheTruth 07-05-2007 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sesa (Post 636788)
Does anyone know the name of the body guard that Diana had that was transferred and he was killed something like a month later in a motorcycle accident? I guess she "was supposed" to have had an affair with him, which was why he was transferred.

I think that's Barry Mannakee. He was transferred for being (too) close of the Princess but I doubt it was made as an 'official' reason :rolleyes:. I've never really thought about that relationship. I don't know very much about it too. Does anyone have more information ? :flowers:

Barry Mannakee and Diana

Elspeth 07-05-2007 05:23 PM

I think it's one of those things where it depends on who you ask. Mind you, since Tina Brown seems to know in infinite detail what went on behind closed doors, perhaps we should ask her.:biggrin:

TheTruth 07-05-2007 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth (Post 636905)
I think it's one of those things where it depends on who you ask. Mind you, since Tina Brown seems to know in infinite detail what went on behind closed doors, perhaps we should ask her.:biggrin:

Lol, I'm sure I'll find more reliable info on Wikipedia ;). Tina Brown, no offense, is not someone I would trust :rolleyes:.
BTW here's a link to some infos on Barry Mannakee by Wikipedia. As the text on him doesn't look very detailed, I doubt anyone could tell us more since he and Diana are dead and that gossips still remain as speculations.

TheTruth 07-27-2007 02:14 PM

This photo was taken a few moments after Diana had learnt by Charles that Barry Manakee was killed in a motorcycle accident. I don't know how she found the strength to smile and get out of the car.

Corbis: photography, rights, assignment, motion.}

GillW 07-27-2007 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lily97 (Post 635707)
Well I can definately say who not and that would be Trevor Rees-Jones. He allowed those crazy antics to go on that fateful night!

If I were to pick a favorite I would say Barry Mannakee because I think that was her favorite and she trusted him the most. He was also there during the time when she probably needed someome to trust at the very beginning when she was feeling like a duck out of the water.

Lily

Trevor Rees-Jones was not ever bodyguard to Diana. He was employed by Mohamed Al Fayed to protect his son Dodi. Diana just happened to be part of Dodi's party, but Trevor's remit was to protect Dodi, NOT to act as bodyguard to Diana.

He was under direct orders from MAF and acted to the best of his ability according to firm and direct instructions from him alone - MAF even over-ruled his son's requests to change the situation.

The best way to understand this is to read the book The Bodyguard's Story by TRJ.

GillW 07-27-2007 03:34 PM

I've seen Alan Peters up close on duty - he was scary!! Tall & sturdy, he never let his concentration slip & if he looked at you it made you want to hide!!

aria753 09-07-2007 09:44 PM

Diana's Friends?
 
I noticed that the Duchess of Westminster and Emilie van Cutsem attended both the Concert for Diana and The Memorial for Diana. From what I have heard Diana never really like these two women, especially van Cutsem who she thought provoked the relationship between Charles and Camilla. I know Harry and William are friends with their children, but with all the talk of how Camilla should not be involced, should these two have been involved in the services? I don't think so.

georgiea 09-07-2007 10:28 PM

Remember Diana has been gone for ten years. The princes have been raised by Prince Charles. These are their friend.:ohmy:

gfg02 10-12-2007 06:13 PM

Photos - Diana and Rosa Monckton

Bild.T-Online.de

GillW 10-13-2007 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sassie (Post 578695)
I believe Anne Beckwith-Smith works for a prestigious art gallery in London. I imagine she's getting close to retirement, though-she is ten years older than Diana.

Yes, she is a fund raiser for Tate Modern. Hers is the one story I would love to read but I believe she will never write it....

Lady Karen 10-13-2007 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlotte1 (Post 615765)
Ummm Andrew Parker Bowles's second wife's name is Rosemary! She was his long term mistress that he married after his divorce from Camilla.

Hi everyone!

Regarding Virginia...I remember reading in a magazine an article and photo about Diana attending the wedding of Virginia. If I remember right, it stated that Virginia was the last of Diana's flatmates to marry and her new husband had a young son...there may have been more children, but I just cannot remember.

I know that I read it in either the Royalty or Majesty magazines and I remember that she as wearing the green and white dress that she wore on her arrival for her official visit to Nigeria with Charles, so it was before their separation.

That is all I can remember...if anyone has these magazines from about 1989 to 1992, you may be able to find the article.

Hope this helps!!

Lady Kare

gfg02 11-04-2007 08:54 AM

Sunday Express...New role for Diana minder


FORMER policeman Ken Wharfe – the man who says he could have saved the Princess of Wales’s life if he had been in charge of her protection on her ill- fated trip to Paris – is putting his years of being a royal bodyguard to lucrative use in a new venture.Mr Wharfe, 59, who was by Diana’s side for six years and later looked after the Duke of Kent until he resigned from Scotland Yard, has set up a Belgravia-based business hiring out bodyguards to the rich and famous.He is recruiting former colleagues in the Metropolitan Police’s royal and diplomatic unit to provide private protection services, particularly aiming at the highly rewarded demands from Russian and Middle Eastern clients.“The idea is to have a database of people who are properly licensed and, depending on what demands are made on us, we can provide that individual,” Wharfe tells me. “Many of our clients operate in high-risk arenas where kidnap and assassination are a real threat. We know what to do in hostile situations because our agents have dealt with these sort of things in their careers.”Unfortunately his fledgling business has hit an early hitch. The name he has chosen for his enterprise, Diplomatic Services, has already been taken by a website offering rather more lurid services than Wharfe’s – www. diplomaticservices.org – is an adult movie site selling ***ographic DVDs.But Ken is no stranger to controversy. After 34 years in the police, he nearly forfeited his inspector’s pension for publishing a book about his time with the Princess. His writing collaborator, newspaper reporter Robert Jobson, is a director of the new security business.

daisygoogles 11-04-2007 09:45 AM

I think that ken Wharfe was the bodyguard who lasted the longest . He was also there when the private matters of the prince and princess of Wales marriage started to become public.
I think he finally left a few weeks after the panorama interview.

TheTruth 11-05-2007 07:28 PM

Barry Mannakee and Diana
Getty Images - Unsupported browser detected

zembla 11-05-2007 07:33 PM

Every royal usually gets 2 bodyguards, right?

TheTruth 11-05-2007 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zembla (Post 689183)
Every royal usually gets 2 bodyguards, right?

I don't know for the others but Princess Diana only had one at the time except maybe on some rare occasions when the crowd was really dense or during a risky event abroad, other bodyguards could be assigned to protect her. The Queen probably has more than one due to her status but I can't tell you much more ...

zembla 11-05-2007 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTruth (Post 689185)
I don't know for the others but Princess Diana only had one at the time except maybe on some rare occasions when the crowd was really dense or during a risky event abroad, other bodyguards could be assigned to protect her. The Queen probably has more than one due to her status but I can't tell you much more ...

I think the princes both have 2...I read that somewhere...especially when they go to clubs. That has to be awkward for the guards...

TheTruth 11-28-2007 06:41 AM

Diana's Men
 
During the inquest, Mr Mansfield made 'official' the presence of five men in Diana's lovelife but somehow took the liberty to add this scornful "and so on" at the end of the statement. The choice of naming these five men, Mannakee, Hewitt, Gilbey, Hoare, Carling ; marks the defense's will to involve them or at least include their personal stories with the Princess into a public matter.

Sophie Heawood: Diana's exes - the good, the bad and James Hewitt - Independent Online Edition > Commentators

Duchess 11-28-2007 07:39 AM

although i don't see the need to have brought up these relationships during the inquiry, i also don't see the harm as all this was already public knowledge. as was mentioned in another thread, i just don't understand why all the men weren't mentioned.

Panicgrl 11-28-2007 08:19 AM

This whole naming of her lovers really has me irked. The lady is gone, and unless the lovers have anything to specifically do with the inquiry, they should have remained nameless. It shows a complete lack of respect for The Princess, and her sons. The "and so on" is really tacky. She wasn't a saint who took a vow of chastity, she was a woman, a human being.

I don't hear them naming Dodi's list of lovers, which I'm sure was much longer than hers. I am truly baffled by what purpose this served.

Sorry, I'll step down from my soapbox now.

TheTruth 11-28-2007 08:43 AM

What's really amazing is that the "and so on" includes Mr Al-Fayed's son. Does it mean he doesn't need to be named because of his "minor" presence in Diana's life or because it's obvious that he was her lover? I don't know. What I don't agree with, is that these men will have to go through the whole thing again (press, scandals, rumors, etc.), all this because of a statement that was unnecessary to the progress of an inquest as such.

mrsbugman 11-28-2007 09:00 AM

:bang:I agree let the poor thing go. Everybody has secrets! Do all these "investigators" want their "dirty laundry" aired in public? I had never thought about "them" having more curtesy over Dotys past.....but why am I surprised?

Duchess 11-28-2007 02:02 PM

but that's just it...none of this was a secret. it was all public knowledge. now if they'd outted someone then it would have been bad but all these names have already appeared in anything written about her. blame the authors who've written about her, blame her for making her affair with hewitt public, but don't blame the people that carrying out the inquiry.

sirhon11234 11-28-2007 03:35 PM

But what is the point of bringing up all of her past relationships with these men; will it prove that she was murdered or it was just an accident.

Panicgrl 11-28-2007 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234 (Post 698815)
But what is the point of bringing up all of her past relationships with these men; will it prove that she was murdered or it was just an accident.


That's what bothers me about this. The only relevant lover would be Hasnat Khan, as he was also a Muslim, if they truly had to bring up lovers. I firmly believe this is just additional icing on the cake to discredit Diana.

I don't believe that there was a conspiracy to kill Diana, but I do believe that there has been a campaign to discredit her since her marriage to Prince Charles started to fall apart.

selrahc4 11-28-2007 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Panicgrl (Post 698866)
That's what bothers me about this. The only relevant lover would be Hasnat Khan, as he was also a Muslim, if they truly had to bring up lovers. I firmly believe this is just additional icing on the cake to discredit Diana.

Why would Fayed's lawyers bring this up to discredit Diana? Why do you believe Fayed wants to do that?

mrsbugman 11-28-2007 07:37 PM

I guess I feel like they are just dragging her name through the mud. Like you say this is all public knowledge. I don't know, in reality, what has been said, I only know what is published in the American press. As has been said, she was a young, vibrant, and beautiful woman. Who was human. I just wish "they" would let her rest in peace. This is just my opinion, but I bet her sons wish that too...

LOSSEAN 11-28-2007 07:53 PM

Time to vilify my favourite princess for whatever reason anyone may care to have. She cannot defend herself now against these allegations but if it serves their agenda to discredit her then nothing will stop them. Freedom minus discretion reigns.

princess olga 11-28-2007 11:00 PM

I agree with all of you. What purpose did it serve indeed, to drag her name over the coals like this? Poor woman. And you know what, it's not even proven that all these men were indeed her lovers! Especially Barry Manakee is/has been disputed, by his own colleagues at the time. (wonder what his poor wife, or all the poor wives of these alleged lovers think of this. I.e. the wife of Oliver Hoare for example. Who is still married to the guy..)

Bad form all around but I don't think there's some sort of conspiracy behind it all.

Warren 11-29-2007 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LOSSEAN (Post 698914)
... but if it serves their agenda to discredit her then nothing will stop them.

[my bolding] Not "their" or "them" but Mohammed Al Fayed and his legal team. Yet another example of the grubby manner in which Al Fayed conducts his agenda.

LOSSEAN 11-29-2007 09:55 PM

Thanks Warren. I agree with your correction.

Warren 11-30-2007 05:24 AM

I've taken out a couple of posts discussing Charles and Diana's marriage.
As this thread was prompted by the Al Fayed lawyers naming Diana's alleged "other men" at the Inquest, we should confine the discussion to that subject.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator

Jo of Palatine 11-30-2007 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren (Post 699458)
I've taken out a couple of posts discussing Charles and Diana's marriage.
As this thread was prompted by the Al Fayed lawyers naming Diana's alleged "other men" at the Inquest, we should confine the discussion to that subject.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator

I don't like the title of this thread at all... It makes Diana into a lind of maneater and while I'm known to have only very little respect for the late princess I still don't believe she was such a callous and promiscuous person. She had a difficult character and was unfortunate in the choice of her male companions but a whore she was not, I believe.

Duchess 11-30-2007 08:08 AM

my point is that i don't think this information drags her name thru the mud or discredits her character. how could it do all that now if it didn't do it when she was alive. this is old information.

Warren 11-30-2007 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine (Post 699472)
I don't like the title of this thread at all...

The thread title was made by member TheTruth and is the heading of her opening post.

BeatrixFan 11-30-2007 09:13 AM

I think the given is that it's not allowed to talk about Diana's other partners is an old one and is increasingly frustrating. It's long been a double standard that every detail of Charles's life has been played out in the press whilst Diana was protected - we knew about these men but excuses have always been made. What the latest story does is openly admit that there were lovers who were simply that - lovers. And the fanzines can't handle it. As to whether their names should be included in an inquest, well, yes they should. The claim by Al Fayed is that the Royal Family killed her because they disapproved of her lifestyle and plans to marry his son. Therefore, the court needs to know what her lifestyle was and that includes her relationships. It's a matter of course.

ysbel 11-30-2007 09:55 AM

That may be what al-Fayed says but I think his real reason is to bring Diana down a notch.

A lot of people were angry that the dirty al-Fayeds defiled their favorite fairytale princess. I think al-Fayed is just going to show that the fairytale princess that he and his son supposedly brought down wasn't as pure as driven snow when they met her and therefore he doesn't look so bad.

I don't think he's making a strong case that the Royals really did away with Diana.

BeatrixFan 11-30-2007 09:58 AM

He isn't making a strong case at all but the allegation is there and if they're doing this inquest, they may as well do it properly and entertain every nutter's theory.

ysbel 11-30-2007 10:10 AM

Right. If this were Diana No-Name we were talking about rather than Diana, Princess of Wales, everything would have been much more low-key and the inquest wouldn't have had a jury. It would have all probably been over sooner than 10 years after the death.

All this inquest is doing is causing a needless distraction for Diana's loved ones and making some lawyers a lot of money.

TheTruth 11-30-2007 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine (Post 699472)
I don't like the title of this thread at all... It makes Diana into a lind of maneater and while I'm known to have only very little respect for the late princess I still don't believe she was such a callous and promiscuous person. She had a difficult character and was unfortunate in the choice of her male companions but a whore she was not, I believe.

I'm sorry Jo if you understood this title like an accusation or an insult, I didn't mean it this way. Like Warren said, it was just to illustrate the article and the subject. I don't mind if you want to change it, perhaps you'll have to ask a Moderator. It was not my intention to shock by calling the thread like that, I actually wanted to express the scorful tone which was used to state them. :flowers:

Moonmaiden23 11-30-2007 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine (Post 699472)
I don't like the title of this thread at all... It makes Diana into a lind of maneater and while I'm known to have only very little respect for the late princess I still don't believe she was such a callous and promiscuous person. She had a difficult character and was unfortunate in the choice of her male companions but a whore she was not, I believe.

You read my mind, and took the very words out of my mouth. I cringed when I read the title of this thread!

TheTruth 11-30-2007 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin (Post 699583)
You read my mind, and took the very words out of my mouth. I cringed when I read the title of this thread!

I apologize if my choice of title disturbs so many of you :neutral: but that's what came to my mind while reading the report of the shocking (IMO) statement. Like I said below, we can always change it. :flowers:

Moonmaiden23 11-30-2007 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTruth (Post 699586)
I apologize if my choice of title disturbs so many of you :neutral: but that's what came to my mind while reading the report of the shocking (IMO) statement. Like I said below, we can always change it. :flowers:

Please don't apologize to me. I am sure you were not being spiteful at all.

jcbcode99 11-30-2007 12:48 PM

There is no need to change the title of thread--it conveys the point of what we are discussing here very accurately--whether or not the inclusion of Diana's lovers has relevence in this context. I have to agree with BeatrixFan because the claim is that due to Diana's lifestyle the Royal Family had her murdered; her relationships with men were part of her lifestyle so there is relevance in bringing it up.
That being said, she was unhappy in her marriage, she and her husband couldn't work it out, both had extramarital relationships, they divorced, and then had relationships after that. We can't really discount or discredit this information because it is true. I think that what so many people are upset about is that for long everyone has made Prince Charles and Camilla out to be the ones who were sneaky and furtive in their relationship, and now it has come out that Diana was behaving similarily and everyone's view of her being the victim is being shown to be not quite true.
All that being said, it must be hard on the boys to hear these things about their mother, who regardless of her personal life, was an exemplary mother.

ghost_night554 11-30-2007 03:12 PM

I apologize for my previous post and having to refer to Charles I did not mean it in any negative way but my point that I was trying to make was as many have said she wasn't perfect and I agree with many here that naming all these men in my opinion has nothing to do with the inquest.

jcbcode99 11-30-2007 03:30 PM

I"m sure I'm going to get flogged for this, but why is this inquest still going on? Does anyone out here really, truly, honestly believe that the Royal Family had the mother, beloved by all, of a future Monarch killed? It boggles my mind that everything has come this far.

BeatrixFan 11-30-2007 03:57 PM

It's something I've said for yonks Janet. And as if this will stop conspiracy theories. Those who say she was killed will just say the jury were bribed or the court was ordered to give an accidental death verdict by the establishment.

sirhon11234 11-30-2007 04:13 PM

Al Fayed refuses to put some blame on the accident on himself. He' made outrageous claims against the royal family including Prince Philip, I don't think he's going to stop.

Jo of Palatine 11-30-2007 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTruth (Post 699576)
I'm sorry Jo if you understood this title like an accusation or an insult, I didn't mean it this way. Like Warren said, it was just to illustrate the article and the subject. I don't mind if you want to change it, perhaps you'll have to ask a Moderator. It was not my intention to shock by calling the thread like that, I actually wanted to express the scorful tone which was used to state them. :flowers:

TheTruth, really, it was not meant as an accusation.:flowers: But just as a statement of emotion and nothing personal at all. :flowers::wub:

I know you're much more positively inclined towards the late princess than I am - so how could I have blieved for a moment that you meant it the way I described? :flowers:

But it's true that I feel that way when it is presented at the Inquest as it is, as if the late princess was a Royal whore whose history now can be submitteld to scaveninging...

I have the feeling we're in accord when it comes to this so I send greetings to France! :flowers:

TheTruth 11-30-2007 04:54 PM

LOL :biggrin:, and I send mines to Germany :flowers:. I know you didn't mean anything toward my view of the princess but it bothered me that people could think it was my opinion of Diana through the title I chose.:flowers:

BeatrixFan 11-30-2007 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234 (Post 699677)
Al Fayed refuses to put some blame on the accident on himself. He' made outrageous claims against the royal family including Prince Philip, I don't think he's going to stop.

Well, surely once the verdict is in, any claims against the RF amount to libel?

ghost_night554 12-01-2007 12:11 AM

Quote:

Al Fayed refuses to put some blame on the accident on himself. He' made outrageous claims against the royal family including Prince Philip, I don't think he's going to stop.
Exactly and the thing that drives me nuts is that he changes the story 100 times so it's even more obvious that he doesn't know what he's talking about. Anyways back to the topic.

Duchess 12-01-2007 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel (Post 699541)
That may be what al-Fayed says but I think his real reason is to bring Diana down a notch.

A lot of people were angry that the dirty al-Fayeds defiled their favorite fairytale princess. I think al-Fayed is just going to show that the fairytale princess that he and his son supposedly brought down wasn't as pure as driven snow when they met her and therefore he doesn't look so bad.

I don't think he's making a strong case that the Royals really did away with Diana.

but that doesn't make any sense. MAF's dream was to get his ticket to the upper echelons of society, hopefully thru the Queen. when that didn't work the next best thing was to go thru the mother of the future king...why would he want to bring her down a notch. diana was at the top of heap, bringing her down a notch would make her look less important and that would go against everything he wanted. no, mentioning her lovers doesn't bring her down a notch, i agree with the earlier post that it only serves to say that were other lovers.

Warren 12-01-2007 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duchess (Post 699898)
but that doesn't make any sense.

That's exactly the point. The fact that Diana may have had other lovers is hardly new, so the question that has to be asked is why did the Al Fayed legal team raise this as an issue at the Inquest? Since most of the named men had involvement with Diana prior to the divorce, it seems odd to be using former lovers as a reason for the Royal Family wishing to kill her after the marriage had legally ended. As with so much from the Al Fayed side, there appears to be little logic involved.

TheTruth 12-01-2007 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren (Post 699900)
That's exactly the point. The fact that Diana may have had other lovers is hardly new, so the question that has to be asked is why did the Al Fayed legal team raise this as an issue at the Inquest? Since most of the named men had involvement with Diana prior to the divorce, it seems odd to be using former lovers as a reason for the Royal Family wishing to kill her after the marriage had legally ended. As with so much from the Al Fayed side, there appears to be little logic involved.

It's like saying the Spencer would have killed Prince Charles because he had an affair with Camilla. It's crazy. And why killing her after all the bad was done ? It wouldn't have erased the affairs she had with her lovers nor the press scandals.

Duchess 12-01-2007 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren (Post 699900)
That's exactly the point. The fact that Diana may have had other lovers is hardly new, so the question that has to be asked is why did the Al Fayed legal team raise this as an issue at the Inquest? Since most of the named men had involvement with Diana prior to the divorce, it seems odd to be using former lovers as a reason for the Royal Family wishing to kill her after the marriage had legally ended. As with so much from the Al Fayed side, there appears to be little logic involved.

i'd already pointed out that these names had been public knowledge for years. but saying that they were trying to bring her down a notch doesn't make any sense. yes the question is why would they bring them up again? we'll have to wait and see where that line of questioning goes.

georgiea 12-16-2007 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duchess (Post 700002)
i'd already pointed out that these names had been public knowledge for years. but saying that they were trying to bring her down a notch doesn't make any sense. yes the question is why would they bring them up again? we'll have to wait and see where that line of questioning goes.

Now after the letters from Princess Diana and Dodi have come out it makes no sense to bring up all those other men. I don't know what al Fayed's lawyer were trying to accomplish, but to me it her hurt her family and fans. I just don't understand why they did it.:flowers:

CasiraghiTrio 12-22-2007 01:15 AM

Richard Kay and Geoffrey Levy have written an interesting article about Hasnat Khan. I read it word for word and found it.... to be .... well, I suppose, one of those things that you go :hmm:
A very tragic affair: The true story of Princess Diana and her heart surgeon lover | the Daily Mail

princess olga 12-22-2007 01:30 AM

Interesting article Casiraghi trio. Couple of things that strike me about it:
Diana's insecurities (combined with plain arrogance/selfishness, the result of always being treated 'royally'??) which manifested itself in her constant need for affirmation and attention. And that it was this combo that Khan eventually tired of. Can't say I blame him.

The fact she'd insist on speaking to him when he's busy fixing a patient's heart...can't say I'm surprised as it somehow squares with the very selfish seeming, self-occupied woman who talked to that rat of a Bashir in that infamous interview in 1995. In which she said her sons were the most important thing to her...the irony being the harm that was undoubtedly done to these same sons by giving such a revealing interview full of mud slinging to said sons' father, but anyhow.
That interview was when my personal 'love' affair with Diana died. She seemed like an insecure hollywood-star, who can't stand having been told to vacate the stage.

What I'm saying is...makes me realize Charles had a point to run for the hills being married to someone like that!

The other thing though that struck me in that article is that it claims that by the time Diana died, Khan no longer loved her. How would they know that? Khan being so discrete, he was hardly the type to vent these kinds of feelings.

I also don't like how he reportedly told his family he couldn't fathom marriage with her. So mean, coming from someone from his culture where courtship would lead to commitment, i.e. marriage. So if marriage was out of the question, what on the planet was he doing hanging out with her? Not fair to her, it seems to me.

ysbel 12-22-2007 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duchess (Post 699898)
but that doesn't make any sense. MAF's dream was to get his ticket to the upper echelons of society, hopefully thru the Queen. when that didn't work the next best thing was to go thru the mother of the future king...why would he want to bring her down a notch. diana was at the top of heap, bringing her down a notch would make her look less important and that would go against everything he wanted. no, mentioning her lovers doesn't bring her down a notch, i agree with the earlier post that it only serves to say that were other lovers.

Sorry I just saw this post. I'm not sure whether al-Fayed was using Dodi's relationship with Diana to climb the echelons of British society or whether he was just thumbing his nose up at British society. I believe Diana's standing with the old guard and with the old aristocracy took a bit of a hit after the Panorama interview because she was seen as betraying her own kind to the masses. So a relationship with Diana I'm not sure would place the al-Fayeds in the upper echelons of society but it would be seen as a very good revenge.

However any good will the al-Fayeds ever drummed up in Britain disappeared when Diana died so I believe if al-Fayed ever had a reason to protect Diana's reputation before, he lost that reason when she and his son died.

But if the general impression was that Diana debased herself by associating with the al-Fayeds (and I have seen some reports that suggest that) then a good counteroffense to that accusation would be to assert that Diana wasn't that lofty in the first place. I think he's given up on being accepted by British society by now.

I hope that explains things a bit better.

Skydragon 12-22-2007 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel (Post 707663)
I think he's given up on being accepted by British society by now.

He hasn't given up, he is trying to insinuate himself into Scottish society at the moment, probably with a view to getting in through the back door, so to speak! Trust me, there is no funnier site than Fayed dressed in full highland dress! :rofl::rofl:

The only reason I can see for them mentioning Diana's other lovers, especially the 'and so on', is to show that as long as they were white English the RF had no problem with her affairs. The moment she looked 'serious' about an Egyptian muslim, they ordered her death.

CasiraghiTrio 12-22-2007 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by princess olga (Post 707659)
Interesting article Casiraghi trio. Couple of things that strike me about it: ...

Princess Olga, I think I understand exactly how you feel! Diana behaved like a spoiled brat if that article is true. I was annoyed with her by the end of it. I totally sympathize with Dr. Khan running for the hills. And worse about Diana, how she stalked him after he made it clear it was over between them! Like a spoiled child, she could not accept the reality that she did not like!

I felt Diana came across badly in the Bashir interview too. Self-centered, pouty, controlling, "look at me, boo hoo, Diana The Victim." It was Diana's worst public moment, imo.

A lot of things coming out in the Inquest are turning me strongly more and more against Diana. I am liking her less and less day by day. I mean, I give her points for being courteous to Philip in the letters, but even those letters showed her to be so self-occupied. I mean, it was so nice of Philip to take time to write to her about her marriage; sure he had plenty of other things to do with his time than console her childish need for attention!!!!

:bang:

ysbel 12-22-2007 02:03 PM

I think the fact that she was attracted to someone as unassuming and unpretentious as Hasmat Khan says a lot for Diana's growth. This tells me she was weaning herself away from flashy, suave men who would likely disappoint her and was willing to look for more than a title which she had as a young girl with Charles.

I think it shows that Diana was beginning to grow up and although the relationship with Hasnat didn't work out; that is not to say that she wouldn't have found later a similar relationship with a man who was not so shy of the limelight as Khan had been.

Khan may have loved Diana dearly but her fame would have killed his career as a heart surgeon and that is what he cared about more.

Jo of Palatine 12-22-2007 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon (Post 707683)
He hasn't given up, he is trying to insinuate himself into Scottish society at the moment, probably with a view to getting in through the back door, so to speak! Trust me, there is no funnier site than Fayed dressed in full highland dress! :rofl::rofl:

Oh dear! I was an acquaintance of late Lady Dunnett (the novelist, wife of Sir Alaistair) and through her got to know The Ross Herald, Mr. Charles Burnett. We had once a very interesting conversation (at least I was fascinated - maybe he just indulged me!) about the way heraldry is viewed in Scotland. Thinking about that I think there is nothing more embarrassing than seeing an Egyptian in highland dress. I understood you have to earn the right to wear this traditional dress with such an abundance of historical meaning - how dare he!

While I was delighted to see that HRH The Duchess of Rothesay, princess of Scotland is herself descended from two Scottish princesses (and thus: kings!) and I wonder if she ever wore the tartan or a reminiscence of that family at one of her dresses in Scotland?

CasiraghiTrio 12-22-2007 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel (Post 707802)
I think the fact that she was attracted to someone as unassuming and unpretentious as Hasmat Khan says a lot for Diana's growth.

She didn't grow up at all if that article is true. If the article is true, Diana was a stalker and obsessive with Hasnat Khan, and not a mature lover to him at all. This article, if true, would show a good reason why Charles and Hasnat both ran for the hills. I'd be scared of her too. You never know what a woman like that will do.

Warren 12-23-2007 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio (Post 707920)
You never what a woman like that will do.

Well, Oliver Hoare soon enough found out.

ysbel 12-23-2007 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio (Post 707920)
She didn't grow up at all if that article is true. If the article is true, Diana was a stalker and obsessive with Hasnat Khan, and not a mature lover to him at all. This article, if true, would show a good reason why Charles and Hasnat both ran for the hills. I'd be scared at that crazy person (Diana) too. You never what a woman like that will do.

You're so right, CasiraghiTrio. Diana was not grown up yet and she still had a lot of problems. And yes I probably wouldn't have been her friend because I'd be too worried of getting caught in her unhealthy obsessiveness.

But what I meant is that at least with Hasnat Khan she was gravitating to someone who was more stable and more trustworthy. Previously she tended to reach out to people as unbalanced as herself and with company like that , its harder to get a healthy lifestyle going on. Her obsessiveness with Hasnat Khan was scary but one hopes that she had at least a glimmer of what a healthy, well-adjusted life was like and grew up a little in the process; although like you said, not enough to keep from some pretty obsessive behavior. If she got turned down by more men like Hasnat Khan there is a chance that at some point she would had reached down inside herself to try and figure out why such great men were not interested in her but of course, her untimely death prevented us from seeing whether that would really happen.

Quote:

Quote:


You never what a woman like that will do.
Well, Oliver Hoare soon enough found out.
I'm missing something here. What did Oliver Hoare find out?

Skydragon 12-23-2007 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine (Post 707844)
Oh dear! I was an acquaintance of late Lady Dunnett (the novelist, wife of Sir Alaistair) and through her got to know The Ross Herald, Mr. Charles Burnett. We had once a very interesting conversation (at least I was fascinated - maybe he just indulged me!) about the way heraldry is viewed in Scotland. Thinking about that I think there is nothing more embarrassing than seeing an Egyptian in highland dress. I understood you have to earn the right to wear this traditional dress with such an abundance of historical meaning - how dare he!

While I was delighted to see that HRH The Duchess of Rothesay, princess of Scotland is herself descended from two Scottish princesses (and thus: kings!) and I wonder if she ever wore the tartan or a reminiscence of that family at one of her dresses in Scotland?

Wearing of the tartan is very important to the scots. There is nothing funnier but insulting than to see someone with very distant and unlikely heritage claiming he/she has every right to wear such and such a tartan because his/her great, great, great, great, great cousin 15 times removed was a scot. :rofl: We call them the plastic scots! :eek:

When it is proven that someone has true Scottish descent like Camilla, the Clan Chief will often gift an item in the tartan which would be worn privately, especially when there is the expectation of the Royal Tartans for public events.

Fayed feels no shame at anything he does, that is abundantly clear, in his efforts to 'hit out' at the Royal Family by using the death of Diana in his campaign.

Skydragon 12-23-2007 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ysbel (Post 708052)
I'm missing something here. What did Oliver Hoare find out?

Oliver Hoare was the chap who she pursued after the affair was over. She is reputed to have made over 300 nuisance calls to his home. "A police investigation showed they were made from phones in Kensington Palace, where Diana lives, from pay phones near the palace, from Diana's car phone and from the home of her sister, Lady Sarah McCorquodale". The calls only stopped, it was alleged when Hoare threatened to take out an injunction against Diana.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises