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?
Go on then, explain how to make sure someone dies in a car crash despite the very many variables..........thought so, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE so get over it you sad deluded people!
Occam the Razor, Blackpool, UK
The first autopsy report stated that the Princess was several weeks pregnant. It was rapidly removed and replaced with another report in which there was no mention whatsoever of her being pregnant. Now, the age of a fetus cannot be determined by a pregnancy test, the only way to do so is through ultrasound imaging which will show the size of the fetus, or, in the case of an autopsy, through opening the uterus and measuring the fetus.
Vierotchka Narishkin, Geneva, Switzerland
I was almost a victim of an "accident". My vechicle was tampered with as to cause an accidental death. If my ex can try to collect death benifits on me,than Prince Charles should have had no problem. I belieive that Princess Dianna was murdered! I survived, thanks to GOD.
BOBBIE DAY, FRESNO, USA/CA
Jobrag
America's 1st Lady swapped that role to be Mrs Onassis and was therefore guaranteed the sort of privacy only men of immense means can supply.
cathy, NSW, Australia
Who Cares - please give the Diana thing a rest we are sick of it !
Tree Ugger, Woodbridge , Suffolk
Lets all turn a blind eye, its obviously the best way to find the truth.
What if Mohamed Al Fayed is correct, is he not entitled to find out the truth, If it was your son, and you doubted the way he died, would YOU say "I cant be bothered to find out if its true".
I am ashamed of some of the British public that are willing to just forget.
Good luck Mr Fayed, if you are wrong, than so be it, but if you are proven right, God save the KING!! (and i dont mean Charles)
Joseph Jobson, Chatham, Kent
Personally I can't help but find solace in the closing remarks from Stanley Kubrick's the film Barry Lyndon:
'...good or bad, handsome or ugly, rich or poor, they
are all equal now'
Perhaps it's about time the family's did as well.
Elisha Moor
Elisha Moor, London, England
If the inquest jury's verdict is accidental death, I hope (and I'm no monarchist) that despite the royal family's reluctance to do so, Prince Philip will sue for libel and/or slander. Even to me (a republican), it is beyond all acceptability that a person (however rich) should throw around accusations of murder against another person (however eminent) and get away with it.
JF, Canterbury, UK
Without wishing to sound prejudiced in any way, it does seem as though Fayed is trying to fit facts round a bizarre theory entirely of his own.
As such, I don't think this man is interested in "truth" at all - at least, not as conventionally understood. Throughout the last few years he's repeatedly hinted at "evidence" known only to him; and "facts" about to be brought to light. But where are they? Show us your "truth" Mr Fayed and we'll compare it with what's already been concluded. Come clean about what you say you "know" and let the public see how it stands up.
If this man can do none of those things, then the bill for this whole exercise should go to him for wasting time and money. And if he persists in his unproven and perhaps unprovable allegations or imputations, then I think he should be faced with Court.
This character sought British Citizenship and entry to the Royal Family. It may be shown that he merits neither.
Sebastian, Dartmouth, UK
I have worked in Crisis Pregnancy Centers for many years and it is well known that many women and girls who are on the PILL do get pregnant. Since 1981 ALL Birth Control Pills have been LOW DOSE... some more than others....so the possibility of breakthrough ovulation is high...and so is pregnancy.
What amazes me is that Diana said that Charles had threatened to kill her and make it look like a car accident. In this age of high technology it would be easy to do.... so why is the fact that she had already exposed this not being taken into account.
T.J, Jax, US
In years to come Al Fayed's conspiracy theories will be held up alongside Intelligent Design and Climate Change Denial as shining examples of attempts to make the evidence show the opposite of what is really true. At least in this case the conspiracy theory may be laid to rest once and for all, and some might say that was worth the money. As for Al Fayed, he should do what ordinary people do when a tragedy like this happens, and grieve for a son taken from him by terrible misfortune.
Richard Milne, Edinburgh,
Although Diana was known for her charity work etc....she was a bad parent...as was Charles. Divorced couples should never talk bad about the other infront of their children, and they both did it on national TV, that was very selfish of both of them.
They both cared very much about their public images and both wanted sympathy from the masses. A divorced Diana was not important to the monarchy, she couldnt destroy it...just embarress it, as the Duke of Windsor and Mrs Simpson did. There is no conspiracy, just a grieving father who wont let go.
Joel Martignetti, Cranston, Rhode Island, USA
What a terrible trajedy......that this total waste of time and money is allowed to go on?
I feel for the 2 Princes, having their dead mothers name dragged through the mud again and again.
Let the poor woman rest in peace...her reputation can only be worsened by this charade!
MIKE , gloucester, uk
Just a few weeks after Prince Harry's heartfelt speech to the world to let his mother rest in peace, suddenly her face appears once more, splashed across the papers and on television again, with her personal life being dragged up yet again. For heaven's sake, it was a terrible thing to happen, but it was ten years ago and I think it's time that her memory was honoured and her sons allowed to get on with their lives without fearing that new 'revelations' are going to emerge and pull them down again. Everyone was quick to think of her boys when she died - think of them again and give her long-suffering family some closure.
Eleanor Potten, York,
These questions are big issues.
It feels from here that they are rushing through these important issues.
Is there not a bit of a difference between traces of contraceptive in the blood and "on the pill"? How long does this drug stay in the body?
cathy, NSW, Australia
How much of taxpayers money has been spent on this endless regurgitating of cockeyed conspiracy theories? Present Mr Al-fayed with the bill and if he doesn't pay, send the baliffs to Harrods.
Dan, Hampton, UK
One lesson should emerge from this sad affair which, hopefully, will save lives in the future - Wear a seatbelt when travelling in the rear of the car.
Pippa, London, UK
Occam's Razor; it slices, it dices. The only message from this whole affair is, wear a seat belt.
Russ, Reading, UK
I feel the world doesn't want to let go of Diana, that's why they are doing eveything they can to "keep her alive" with all this commotion around her final day on earth.
Diana was one astonishing figure of world history and I'm sure no one will ever forget her, but it's time to let it go. Even getting at the truth of her death will not bring her back.
She's gone, we should all remember but not cling.
Rutendo Choto, Pretoria, South Africa
I sadly fear that unless Fayed gets the version of events totally corresponding with his opinion, Diana's reputation will be sullied by public knowledge of her personal and private life.
Regardless of the findings of the Stevens Inquiry; this inquest is forced by the derisory comments of Al Fayed to pour millions from the public purse into a complete humiliation of Diana. Who will suffer? Without a doubt Diana's family and those who felt enough about this woman to mourn her loss. And we the public have to endure the excruciting headlines daily for the next six months.
Why on earth is Mike Mansfield getting embroiled in this mess?
Carolyn Rhodes, Belfast, NI
It is sad to hear intimate details of Diana.
She was a beautiful person inside and out unfortunately she wasn’t appreciated by her husband or else none of this would have happened.
She was used and thrown out like a bit of dirt once she had borne the airs so desperately needed by the Royal family.
Charles bears as much responsibility as does any one involved in her untimely demise.
Sad to see this come to all this but if only everyone spoke the truth from the beginning we would not have to hear the intimate details of a beautiful person.
Sad very Sad.
James Dean, London, UK
I thought maybe the inquiry would concentrate on the accident not a character assassination of someone who had done so much good to vulnerable people!!
Sandra, Croydon,
Why do some people attach a conspiracy to every event that happens, can they just not accept that accidents happen every single day, and that this is just one of them !
Then we have others who are equally devoid of rational thought, who go along with it for fear of being left out.
Neil, Liverpool, UK
No Comments on this!!Lol!
sam, london, england
I thought this inquiry was supposed to be into her death, not her personal life. That she may have been on the pill has no bearing whatsoever on her death. The fatcs are there, the Princess and the others died in a tragic car accident, nothing can change this, so please end terrible assasination of character, accept the facts, let them rest in peace.
Carole Foster, Maidstone,
The Royal Family have been murdering their opposers for centuries, what makes this affair any different?
Graham Palfrey, Littlehampton,
no amount of chewing over the details will change the fact that the princess is dead, she should be left in peace now
suzy, lincoln, england
Why on earth would she have wanted to marry Dodi? I would bet a moderately large amount ,that deep in the divorce settlement there was a clause that if Diana re-married she would loose the title Princess of Wales, I know she wasn’t the brightest card in the pack but does anyone really think that she would swap PoW for Mrs. Fayed.
Jobrag, Waterloo, UK
Let this poor woman rest in peace,I think enough has been said concerning her death.
We will never know what realy happened.
David Nigel Braham, Milan, Italy
1. No, I don't believe Diana was pregnant. Nor do I believe she was about to marry Dodi. They had only known each a short time - a few weeks.
2& 3. I don't know about Henri Paul's blood samples. Nor do I believe it would have made any difference. He was driving way too fast...probably on Dodi's orders.
4. Again I don't know the French laws pertaining to this - but I see no reason for it not to have been done.
5. This is quite likely - but needs further investigation.
6. I would say so. Paul Burrell says they do, and he is a man of honour.
Mary , Melbourne, Australia