See the footage
from the inquest
Read
the transcripts
Holding the conspiracy theory of the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales, and
Dodi Fayed up to the light yesterday, Lord Justice Scott Baker found it, if
not shot full of holes, at least a patchwork quilt of darkest grey.
Lawyers representing Mohamed Al Fayed have their needles ready to stitch up
the gaps and colour in the squares, but by the end of a lengthy opening
address to the jury yesterday, the coroner had enumerated a number of key
areas where hard evidence was distinctly lacking.
There was, for example, no proof that the Princess was pregnant at the time of
her death in a car crash – there was evidence to show that she was taking
the contraceptive pill – nor any that she and Dodi were about to become
engaged. There was no evidence that the British secret intelligence services
were involved in a murder plot, and alleged letters from the Duke of
Edinburgh to the Princess have disappeared.
Three eminent French doctors attended a postmortem examination on Henri Paul,
the driver of the Mercedes, and took photographs of blood samples being
taken from the corpse; there is as little firm proof of the samples being
switched as there is of Paul being in the pay of MI6. And any number of
white Fiat Unos could have been involved in the fatal accident in the Alma
tunnel.
And yet the coroner had his caveats and even some fresh disclosures. He has
been making inquiries of his own to add to the French inquiry into the
deaths and the exhaustive 800-page report published last year by Lord
Stevens, the former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, neither of which
discovered any skulduggery.
Mr Al Fayed has maintained unwaveringly that the couple were killed by British
secret agents, acting on the orders of the Duke of Edinburgh, because the
mother of a future king was pregnant by his Muslim son and was about to
marry him.
Contrary to such claims, the coroner said he had found evidence that the
Princess had been taking the contraceptive pill at the time of her death.
The jury, he said, would hear more intimate details of the Princess’s
personal life in the coming weeks.
“No indication was given on pregnancy by Diana to her doctor, family, friends
or associates,” the coroner said. “No pregnancy test was carried out when
the doctors were trying to save Diana. There was no reason to and, if
anything, there were far more important things to do.”
The pathologist who carried out a full postmortem examination after the
Princess’s body had been returned to Britain saw no signs of pregnancy. But
the coroner concluded: “It is likely that pregnancy is a matter that cannot
be proved one way or the other in scientific terms in this case.”
Pregnancy, or lack of it, was relevant in two ways: it is being claimed by the
Al Fayed camp that it was motive for murder, and the embalming of the
Princess’s body by the French authorities was a way of concealing it.
Mr Al Fayed claims that he received news of her pregnancy in a telephone call
in the afternoon before the fatal crash and that calls were being monitored
by MI6.
Lord Justice Scott Baker disclosed that he had been making some inquiries of
his own of MI6, with what he conceded might be limited success.
His team had been given access to the agency’s files, in which no reference to
the Princess could be found; but he acknowledged that secret intelligence
services let you see only what they want you to see. However, he was able to
discover that MI6 officers were operating in France during the summer of
August 1997; it would be surprising, he said, if they did not maintain a
regular presence at an important British diplomatic mission. Their role
consisted of liaison work with the French authorities over counter-terrorism
and organised international crime. “In other words, it is claimed, they had
other and bigger fish to fry.”
Mr Al Fayed has claimed that Sir Michael Jay, the British Ambassador at the
time, was at the forefront of the alleged conspiracy.
“To the best of his knowledge, no officer acting for security services or SIS
[the Secret Intelligence Service] was involved in a conspiracy to cause the
death of Diana and Dodi, neither were they involved in any cover-up,” the
coroner said.
“The UK Government has maintained from the outset that it was entirely unaware
of the presence of Diana in Paris on August 30 and 31, 1997 and it had no
information with regard to her movements or the circumstances of the crash.”
The US National Security Agency had similarly denied tracking her, the coroner
said.
Another unresolved question concerned alleged letters to the Princess from the
Duke of Edinburgh. Lady Sarah McCorquodale, her sister, in the presence of
Paul Burrell, her butler, had opened a chest in the Princess’s Kensington
Palace apartments to find a folder of correspondence. She had also looked in
her desk where she kept private letters, but nothing from the Duke was
found.
“It is probable that such letters do exist,” the coroner said, adding his hope
that Mr Burrell would agree to give evidence to the inquests.
An important question for the jury is the state of intoxication of Henri Paul.
Lord Stevens, who published his report last year, is expected to give
evidence and explain the discrepancy between his telling Paul’s parents that
their son was not drunk and his official report saying that he was. “I
anticipate Lord Stevens will give evidence that he was trying to reassure
the Pauls that their son had not been ‘as drunk as a pig’ as had been
alleged in some newspapers,” the coroner said.
The jury would also have to contend with questions over the contents and
reliability of blood samples taken from Paul’s body. “You may conclude that
there are some unsatisfactory features about aspects of the sampling and
recording procedures; some of the results are puzzling.”
Blood samples indicated that Paul had been about three times over the French
drink-driving limit, yet CCTV footage showed Paul bending over to tie his
shoelaces quite steadily. One sample indicated an unusually high level of
carbon monoxide, enough to make a person unwell.
“One possibility to consider will be whether or not the sample could have been
contaminated in some way. Another possibility to consider is whether the
high levels mean that that particular sample could not have come from Henri
Paul.”
Having the Princess’s body embalmed ten hours after her death is another grey
area. Was it illegal? Was it ordered by MI6 to conceal the pregnancy? What
took place was not the kind of embalming associated with the pharaohs, but
rather an injection of fluid into the blood vessels to slow decomposition.
Efforts to keep the body cool on a hot day were failing.
In France, the inquest heard, author-isation to embalm a body is needed from
both the local mayor and relatives of the deceased. Permission from the
official side came from the police because the crash happened in the early
hours of the morning.
In the absence of relatives, personal permission was given by Michael
Gib-bins, the Princess’s personal secretary, and Colin Tebbutt, her security
consultant, after learning that the Prince of Wales would not arrive in
Paris until 5pm to collect the body of his former wife. “These men may paint
a picture of finding themselves unexpectedly in a difficult situation; a
decision should have been made by relatives, but who was there to call?” the
coroner said.
He noted that three members of Mr Al Fayed’s security team, including Trevor
Rees, the only survivor in the Mercedes, had resigned their jobs within
months of the crash. After recovering from extensive injuries, Mr Rees went
back to work for Mr Al Fayed for a brief period. “He saw so much more of Mr
Al Fayed than he had ever seen of him before and there were meetings between
just the two of them. He felt Mr Al Fayed was obsessed with the idea that
Diana and Dodi had been murdered, and was increasing trying to pressure him
into agreeing with that,” the coroner said.
In one telling passage the coroner referred to Mr Al Fayed’s insistence that
the couple were about to marry. He pointed out the unreliability of the
jeweller from whom Dodi allegedly bought a ring, and who had changed his
story more than once. He also recalled a press conference given by Michael
Cole, then Mr Al Fayed’s press officer, in the days immediately after the
crash and before Mr Al Fayed’s crusade was fully wound up.
“If the planet lasts a thousand years, that ring will forever remain a
mystery,” Mr Cole had told journalists. His employer soon took a different
view.
As he wound up his 150-page statement, which had taken him almost a day and a
half to deliver, the coroner urged the jury to forget any prejudices they
might have had about the Princess, the Royal Family or Mr Al Fayed.
The hearing continues.
Questions of the day
1 Was Diana pregnant and planning to marry Dodi?
2 Were the pathology samples taken from Henri Paul either contaminated
or switched?
3 Was Henri Paul drunk?
4 Was the embalming of Diana’s body legal?
5 Were the security services involved?
6 Do letters to Diana from the Duke of Edinburgh exist?
