Run-up to the inquest into Diana's death

[BeatrixFan]

But the sad reality is that thats exactly what will happen. And without sounding rude - why do you need to know what really happened that night? Will it change your life for the better or the worse? Surely it's time to forget it, move on and commemorate Diana if you want to and leave time to move on. I just find it odd that these people who "love" her, want her death to be played out every day for another decade until they hear what they want to hear.

 

[sirhon11234]

The reason why I would like to know the truth about that night is to put to rest any doubts I have about her death. And no it wouldn't change my life for the better but it would make feel good to know. BeatrixFan I respect your opinons on this inquest and on Diana we all have different views. Thats why its soo much fun to come on the royal forums and have debates on such controversial topics.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Well, I hope you get what you want. I don't understand what it is exactly you want - but I hope you get it. I think I can possibly liken it to a British actor called Kenneth Williams who is just my idol. He died in odd circumstances and his fans are now left wondering whether he killed himself or whether he accidentally overdosed. It shouldn't matter to me but in a ghoulish way it does. I try to analyze things a little too much - maybe the plain and simple fact is - we like death.

 

[sirhon11234]

I guess we the public do have a fascination with young celebrities who die before their time. Thats why there is a facination with Diana, Kurt Cobain, Marilyn Monroe and other late celebrities.

 

[sassie]

Well it didn't cross my mind that they would show any photos of Diana , Mr. Fayed and Henri Paul in their last moments. So you got me there. Buti don't believe Diana's popularity was waning. I remember alot people were questioning her future role. (And is Jayne some actress that was decapatated in a car accident 30 years before diana's death.)

Yes, Jayne Mansfield died in a car accident-no, she was not decapitated. That is an inaccurate urban legend.

 

[corazon]

this help for the people that loved diana can know wath really happend, if she was kiled of if was an accident, about william and hary their felling are very very private and olne they know the pain bout lost they mother.
Diana and dodi die and that is a fact that we can't change, but she was a public figure ver loved, and the people (she was that she was for the public's devotion to her) need to know wWHY diana die, for an accident or for a murder
Not reason for the veredit must be secret, noting in diana life was secret.
diana's death is a state question, she was the mother of a future king, nothing can change that ad this investigation was necesary for know the true.
but nothing can change the people felloing, very much people think she was killed and another think she sie in an accident, we will see, 9 or 10 years before the true
it's posible diana death be like kennedy o marylin, with or without ''last word'' anyway is present the question

 

[BeatrixFan]

But corazon, how will any verdict change things? If the verdict is accidental death people will say it's a cover up and it really was murder. If it was murder, who wins? Who goes to court? What does a murder or accidental death verdict change?

 

[Elspeth]

The way people are hoping it'll change things is for the verdict to somehow result in Prince Charles being knocked out of the succession and William becoming king in his father's lifetime. As you say, a verdict of accidental death won't make any difference to what they believe because they'll just say it was a coverup.

 

[Prim]

I agree that the verdict will not change anything. There will always be speculation no matter what. I think that when the world loses an icon suddenly, we automatically have to blame someone. Losing someone so carelessly is unacceptable to some people.

 

[Elspeth]

Hello, Prim - welcome to the Forums!

 

[Prim]

Hello, Prim - welcome to the Forums!

Thank you, Elspeth!

 

[Madame Royale]

What does a murder or accidental death verdict change?

That fact that if it were a murder (which I, like you and others, don't believe it was BeatrixFan), then those who orchestrated and executed the plot, would unquestionably be brought to trial (with sufficient evidence provided to support the outcome) and no doubt, convicted on three counts of first degree murder. You would be talking of persons(s) (comfortably assuming it envolved more than one person) who have continued to walk the face of the earth, having assassinated Diana, Princess of Wales, her male companion and the chauffer. Is that justice? Definitly not.

Hypothetically speaking, if it were the case, the truth needs, and deserves to be told, no matter how hurtful or confronting it may infact be. Has it already been told? I believe so but there are many who don't agree.

And perhaps 'they' have made it public to ease social suspicions? Providing access will surely show that there is, and never has been, anything to hide with the previous investigation(s)

 

[Skydragon]

Well BeatrixFan not every single member of the public has negative feelings towards Diana. Many fans of Diana including myself want to watch this final verdict. .

Can I just point out, that this is just a preliminary hearing to decide whether, for instance, the full inquest should be heard by a jury, what size room will be required, which people may be required to attend, etc, all the silly little 'party planner details'.

It is not the Inquest itself.

But i don't believe Diana's popularity was waning. I remember a lot people were questioning her future role.

The British press had already started turning against Diana and we all know how they can 'bring someone down'. This article appeared in an American Magazine which clearly, IMO, shows.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_4_oh_to_be.html

 

[sirhon11234]

Thanks SkyDragon for explaining that the preliminary hearing is not the actual inquest itself. This is the first inquest that I had ever heard about in my 17 years so I don't know that much about these things.

 

[corazon]

the veredict can or can't change many things, if was an accident was an accident but if was a murder WHO IS THE RESPONSABLE? this open another question different, is very complicated to analyze, in france an investigation, for me, ridiculous say that was an accident but many many things were never analyzed, know we know that, I say this again if this was an acident was an accident and point but if this was a murder the question is who and why.

here nobody said nothing about the british trone or if charles will be king or if this veredict change taht and william will be king before, this don't is the point here.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I can assure you 100% that the verdict will not alter succession in any way shape or form.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I wish people would realize that Diana would have survived if she had simply used her seat belt. There is no doubt about this fact. The belt has not been tampered with, it was okay and if she had worn it, experts say, she would not have died because she died of injuries she received due to being in a crash without using a safetybelt. Diana was known for her dislike of these belts, she often drove without wearing one and IMHO it was only a question of time till she would have had her first accident on driving without wearing the belt.

Whatever happened that night, it can't change the fact that Diana would still be alive if she had done what her better knowledge should have dictated her to do. She payed the price for not using all protection against accidents when travelling through a metropolis. IMHO that's all there is to know. And it seems that her eldest son inherited her carelessness and thus lost his place in the running-up to the sword of honour.

 

[sassie]

Diana was known for her dislike of these belts, she often drove without wearing one

While I don't disagree with you, would you cite your source for this particular piece of information? I've read almost all the biographies of the Princess, and I don't recall one of them mentioning a dislike of seatbelts.

In fact, the only time I recall seatbelts being mentioned in any book about the Princess was Paul Burrell's claim that he would always pull the seatbelt across her and latch it-and even, he made no mention of her like or dislike of them.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

While I don't disagree with you, would you cite your source for this particular piece of information? I've read almost all the biographies of the Princess, and I don't recall one of them mentioning a dislike of seatbelts.

In fact, the only time I recall seatbelts being mentioned in any book about the Princess was Paul Burrell's claim that he would always pull the seatbelt across her and latch it-and even, he made no mention of her like or dislike of them.

IIRC it was in the book by Ken Wharfe: [SIZE=-1]Diana. Closely Guarded Secret. In it he writes about what he personally thinks about the accident and says that if the Royal protection unit had still guarded Diana (she had refused their services after the divorce) she would still be alive, because they would have insisted on her wearing a belt in a chasing situation like this. He then tells of his experiences with Diana when it came to safety belts and says that she hated them. There are, again IIRC, some pics in the book showing her driving without her belt.

But - even if it was known that she'd prefered to drive without the belts (as one could claim after her death) it's so worlds apart from the kind of knowledge an assassin would need - so many chances taken, that I simply don't believe in murder. While I can perfectly imagine there were murder plots around.. people have been killed for far cheaper reasons but in this exact case - no, I don't believe in a murder, it was a chance killing due to an accident. IMHO, of course.


[/SIZE]

 

[Skydragon]

Diana driver drunk, tests 'prove'

DNA evidence appears to prove the driver of Princess Diana's car was drunk on the night of her fatal 1997 accident, a BBC documentary reveals.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6162041.stm

Public doubts over Diana accident

There is strong public support for the theory Princess Diana's fatal car crash was not an accident, a poll suggests.


Some 43% of people agreed it was an accident when asked in a poll for a new BBC TV series, The Conspiracy Files. Another 31% believed it was not an accident, with the rest unsure, the GfK NOP poll of 1,000 adults found.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6217136.stm

 

[BeatrixFan]

So it was an accident. Of course it's a cover up. The CIA are in league with MI6 and Prince Philip and they killed her so that Charles could get married and the driver was actually swapped with a dummy of Rustie Lee.

 

[Australian]

I remember reading about how someone read Diana's journal or something and it was about her apparent fling with a member of palace staff. She wrote of his death "I think he got bumped off". Is it reasonable to think that she meant that the royals bumped him off? If so, what was stopping them doing that to her? (if in the situation they were responsible)

This is just for thought.

 

[sassie]

I remember reading about how someone read Diana's journal or something and it was about her apparent fling with a member of palace staff. She wrote of his death "I think he got bumped off". Is it reasonable to think that she meant that the royals bumped him off? If so, what was stopping them doing that to her? (if in the situation they were responsible)

This is just for thought.

Well, it's something to consider-except that the staff member she was referring to was Barry Manakee, who was killed when the motorcycle he was riding postilion on was hit by a 17-year-old student driver. You would have to include in your consideration that whomever planned the assassination of Manakee went so far as to hire a 17-year-old girl and train her how to hit a moving motorcycle while making it look like an accident.

Of course, you'd also have to consider the motive. Manakee had left the royal protection squad over a year before, had kept his silence about his time guarding Diana, and there was no evidence that he was planning to reveal anything about Diana or the RF-so, if 'they' were going to bump him off, then what was the motive? If it was only that he might reveal something, well, then, the RF would have to bump off a whole slew of former employees. The fact that Paul Burrell is alive and well contradicts that the RF is in the practice of killing those who might reveal something.

So, it's probably not reasonable to think that he was murdered, because the evidence doesn't support that conclusion. And, it's the same with the accident in Paris. Conspiracy theories aside, the actual evidence supports the conclusion that Henri Paul momentarily lost control of the car and it crashed. There are too many variables that could have changed the outcome (i.e. the seatbelt issue) for it to have been a planned assassination. JMO.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I remember reading about how someone read Diana's journal or something and it was about her apparent fling with a member of palace staff. She wrote of his death "I think he got bumped off". Is it reasonable to think that she meant that the royals bumped him off? If so, what was stopping them doing that to her? (if in the situation they were responsible)

This is just for thought.

Yes, why wait till after the divorce? They should have given her a bit of Polonium or the equivalent of it produced in Sellafield (there surely is some radioactive poison) and blame it on the KGB if it ever came up. But they should have done it while she was still The Princess of Wales and before people have heard about Camilla... Just imagine! And the queen allowing all of this (or does someone believe Prince Philip would do such a stunt without anyone informing his beloved wife?)....

 

[MARG]

Personally I think that she was actually abducted by aliens and a clone left in her place. Makes as much sense, if not more, than most conspiracy theories!

 

[Warren]

Yes, why wait till after the divorce?

Well, yes, surely it would have been easier to get MI5 or MI6 to do the deed and save having to pay out that 20 million or whatever it was in the divorce settlement.
It seems a bit pointless bumping her off after the event when the damage had already been done.

 

[MARG]

Well, yes, surely it would have been easier to get MI5 or MI6 to do the deed and save having to pay out that 20 million or whatever it was in the divorce settlement.
It seems a bit pointless bumping her off after the event when the damage had already been done.

You're looking for common sense or, heaven forend, logic here?

 

[Duchess]

That fact that if it were a murder (which I, like you and others, don't believe it was BeatrixFan), then those who orchestrated and executed the plot, would unquestionably be brought to trial (with sufficient evidence provided to support the outcome) and no doubt, convicted on three counts of first degree murder.

if it wasn't an accident (i think it was and agree that if she'd worn her seatbelt she'd be alive) the sadly, the people ultimately responsible for this would never be brought to trial. someone very low in the whole scheme of things would take the fall for this.

 

[Skydragon]

Well next week we should all have had a chance to read the 'key points' in the preliminary report and then those that firmly believe that she was killed, by whoever, can start shouting 'cover up!

The reason al Fayed keeps shouting 'murder', is because he can't accept that his driver, in his car, caused the deaths of his son and Diana, that the protection he offered them both, that night was totally useless, IMO.

 

[sirhon11234]

It is getting annoying that every time Al Fayed is on t.v. he always shouts out that Diana was pregenant and was going to marry Dodi. enough is enough.