Oh, Charles would have married some, tidy, aristocratic lady, produced his heir and continued skulking around with Camilla. Diana was a fool and made a fuss, others might not have.
BBC NEWS | UK | Diana driver samples questioned
I find that what the BBC wrote about the inquest today interesting. It talks about Mr. Paul' blood test results not being accurate. I think that is a big win for the al Fayed team and opens up a question that Mr. Paul might not be responsible for the auto accident.
"I was not happy as Dodi was separating the two security officers, but I went along with the arrangement. It was also Dodi who decided that Paul would be driving the car," he said.
Under cross examination by Michael Mansfield QC, for Mr Al Fayed, he conceded it must have been Mr Paul who gave him details of the plan but insisted that it was still Dodi's idea. "Dodi would not listen to my reasoning," he added.
Mohamed Al Fayed's security chief ordered an employee to get into Trevor Rees's hospital bedroom to ensure that he was "briefed" before he spoke to police, the inquest heard.
Ben Murrell also claimed he was told to tell journalists that Dodi and Diana had planned to live in the former home of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor in Paris with their "new baby". Mr Murrell, who was giving evidence via video-link from Nigeria, said he refused.
Mr Mansfield, lawyer for Mr Al Fayed, was forced to admit that he had no evidence to back the allegations.
The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, demanded to know why Mr Al Fayed had not withdrawn his clearly unsubstantiated remarks, saying: "Because they are grave allegations I would have thought a man with any decency who was not going to pursue them would have withdrawn them."
I hope you're fond of Beatrice, then.
Oh dear, you made me really confused now. If Charles is this kind of husband, I am glad Diana was a fool.
Oh, Charles would have married some, tidy, aristocratic lady, produced his heir and continued skulking around with Camilla. Diana was a fool and made a fuss, others might not have.
Chances are that without her Mum looking over her shoulder for the first 80 years of her life, the Queen would have been tempted to modernize the monarchy a bit so that a 19 year old virgin with an aristocratic family would not be considered the only suitable bride for a 33 year old heir.
Quote :
Six people were detained on the night of the 1997 crash after taking more than 100 pictures of the crash scene.
Another point: How realistic is it that Diana honestly believed the queen would abdicate as long as Queen Mum was still alive? At least the problems of the naming of the former queen must have given Diana food for thought - two "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother" at the same time with a not-yet divorced king Charles and his separated queen Diana? It boggles my mind to believ that for a moment - but that's what Diana told her lawyers...
Diana paparazzi defend inquest no-show - Yahoo! News UK
How can they not be forced to go in court ?! As far as we know they are really likely to be the ones who created the crash.
It's not a court as such, it's an inquest. The coroner legally cannot force a non British resident to attend. The British foreign minister approached the French government officials to try and get the French citizens to testify and the French have refused to force them. They maintain that it's voluntary and up to each individual if they wish to testify at the inquest.
Yes, I know there won't be any sentence in its end but how come not one single paparazzi was condemn in 10 years ? I know 2 or 3 were forced to refund one symbolic euro but that's not enough. The most stupid excuse I've heard is that they were allowed to take pictures because Diana was in a 'private place' like in a car. It's non sense !
Perhaps they caused the crash in a general sense by creating the situation whereby the car was tempted to speed but I daresay if the courts did not charge them then its probably because the camera's evidence showed that they didn't do something immediate to directly cause the crash in the pillar which would be the only way they could be legally liable.
Yes, and that's such a shame to not be able to find an irrefutable proof that their aggressiveness pushed Henri Paul to accelerate. But if there's nothing done now to make these paparazzi talk and tell how the whole thing happened, we'll probably never know what exactly occurred in this tunnel.
I'm afaid you misunderstood me TheTruth. Even if the courts had had irrefutable evidence that the papparazzi caused Henri Paul to accelerate that wouldn't make them legally liable for the crash. Now if the evidence had shown that they directly caused Henri Paul to crash into the pillar, then that would have been evidence that they were legally liable. Say for example, Henri Paul had swerved into the pillar to avoid hitting a papparazzi motorcycle - that would have made the motorcycle liable for the crash. But just because the motorcycles chased the car and caused it to speed doesn't make them liable for the crash if it occurred just because the car was going too fast into the tunnel.
That's the reason the mystery red Fiat was important. The paint on the car indicated that the car had had a collision with a red Fiat that that's what could have made them crash into the pole.
Quote :
The former bodyguard, who suffered horrific facial injuries in the crash and still bears the scars, told the inquest into Dodi and Diana's deaths that while recuperating: "I felt the pressure to remember what had occurred."
"The fact that I could not frustrated myself and also obviously frustrated Mr al-Fayed," Rees told the court, concluding two days of dramatic testimony about the night that so nearly cost him his life.
Oh okay, sorry I didn't understand it this way. Wasn't the Fiat white ? I remember the story and the Fiat Uno was never found but the guy who could have been a potential owner was found burned in a car that someone had put on fire.
Diana paparazzi defend inquest no-show - Yahoo! News UK
How can they not be forced to go in court ?! As far as we know they are really likely to be the ones who created the crash.
Yes it was a white Fiat think there is footage of one when they were leaving the Ritz
No kidding ?! I never thought this allegation was verified and I didn't know they had actually captured a picture of the car !
I always suspected why the press toke such an active part in promoting the story Diana manipulated the press. .
You are perhaps right, TheTruth, I thought the color of the Fiat was red but I am not sure.
Possibly because they used each other and then when things didn't work out they blamed each other. Diana complained about the press; the press complained about Diana but only when things weren't working their way. When things were working their way, the complaints about each other dried up.
No kidding ?! I never thought this allegation was verified and I didn't know they had actually captured a picture of the car !