Diana, Official Report: The Crash Was an Accident.

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 07:46 AM
link   
After 3 years of investigations, Lord Stevens and his hand picked team have concluded that there is no evidence to support conspiracy theories regarding the crash.
Most notably, The claim that Diana was pregnant and engaged are rebuffed.

 



news.bbc.co.uk
This is a defining moment. The core team of 10 British detectives, led by Lord Stevens, were set their task back in 2004 by the then royal coroner, Michael Burgess.

His instructions were simple. He wanted to know whether Princess Diana's death was, as he put it, anything more than "the result of a sad, but relatively straightforward road traffic accident in Paris."


There have been many conspiracy theories about the couple's deaths


Like the French police officers before them, the Metropolitan Police have come to the same conclusion: the princess and Dodi Al Fayed died because their chauffeur Henri Paul was drunk, and driving too fast.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


People inclined to believe official findings will accept it, and hope that the rumour mill will grind to a halt. Those who inherently distrust officialdom will dismiss it as a whitewash. It makes you wonder, was it worth it?




posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Well it didn't work for the Kelly inquest, but that didn't deal with many of the substantial issues raised.

And of course Di was much more photogenic.

So no, it won't. And, frankly, I don't care much about Di, never cared for her when she was around, could NOT get into all that hysteria around the time of her funeral (thank heaven I was out of the country), and don't subscribe to the hagiography that's surrounded her since. So I've never really looked into the circumstances surrounding her death... there are, for me, more interesting ways to spend the day.

However, do I think MI5/6 offed her? Oh yeah.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Dear rich23:

There is/was a conspiracy. Personally I wasn’t a great fan of Diana either. I thought she was a little “ditzy” and spoiled. But she and Dodi both didn’t deserve to die. And Diana was “sucked” into the establishment at a very young age. So she really couldn’t help it if she was somewhat “misguided’.

Anyways, have you ever rode in a car with a defective accelerator? No? Well I have. Being a junk car enthusiast I have driven all kinds of “heaps”. And riding in a car with a “sticking” accelerator lever — the one under hood on the carburetor or fuel injectors not the foot pedal itself — is rather scary. See what happens, is once you mash the gas pedal, the throttle goes wide open and STAYS wide open. Well in Diana and Dodi’s Mercedes something similar happened. Except in their case the accelerator hinge was radio-remote controlled. Diana’s driver — Henri Paul — was at some point only able to steer the car. Brakes weren’t working of course. It was akin to a cruise-control gone crazy. So naturally, at 120 plus mph on narrow European Roads in a narrow European tunnel a crash was the inevitable outcome.

Here’s a link that partially backs up what I’ve just said: www.skolnicksreport.com...

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods


Ex

posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   
A bell keeps ringing in the back of my head on this whole thing.
It seems to me that if she was pregnant
( I know they say she wasn't,
but how hard is it to switch
a speciman of a pregnant woman for one that isn't)
The offspring of her and Dodi would have been in line
to the throne, somewhere.
Dodi being Muslim and The Church of England would
have been at odds with this.
Seems there was some very large powers at work to make
this just NOT happen!

Am I wrong in my assumption??
( LOL.I know the assumption joke)



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ex
The offspring of her and Dodi would have been in line
to the throne, somewhere.


Diana was a member of the aristocracy by birth but not, directly, the royal family. Any child of hers by Dodi Fayed would have been no more in line to the throne than you or I. This element of any conspiracy theory is complete nonsense.



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ex

The offspring of her and Dodi would have been in line
to the throne, somewhere.


that is incorrect : the lne of sucession must follow the male line

diana [ before she married charles ] had no legitimate claim to the throne , though IIRC her brother does [ 250th in line , or some absurdity ]

even when married , she would only have been queen as a consort - and so any children that were not charles offspring wuld have no roya claim .



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Anyways, have you ever rode in a car with a defective accelerator?


More relevantly, have you ever ridden in a car with a defective (drunk) driver - much more scary.


in their case the accelerator hinge was radio-remote controlled. Diana’s driver — Henri Paul — was at some point only able to steer the car. Brakes weren’t working of course. It was akin to a cruise-control gone crazy. So naturally, at 120 plus mph on narrow European Roads in a narrow European tunnel a crash was the inevitable outcome.


Please, there is not a scrap of evidence to support any of these statements whatsoever.


Here’s a link that partially backs up what I’ve just said: www.skolnicksreport.com...


...the first words of which are "We cannot authenticate this document", however, it was retrieved from a man who was trying to relieve Mohammed Fayed of £10 million for documents which said what he wanted to hear.

You may wish to draw your own conclusions...



[edit on 14-12-2006 by timeless test]



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test...the first words of which are "We cannot authenticate this document", however, it was retrieved from a man who was trying to relieve Mohammed Fayed of £10 million for documents which said what he wanted to hear.

You may wish to draw your own conclusions...


Dear timeless test:

What? Were you expecting a bunch of choirboys/girls to be active in those circles which have access to sensitive documents? No, wait, I forgot it’s the nice people that tend to gravitate toward undercover agencies. Sorry, my bad. You’re right secret service organizations are run by “softies”. The Albert Schweitzer’s of the world would never do such a rotten thing, try to blackmail someone for lots of money. Please forgive my silly oversight.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods

Originally posted by timeless test...the first words of which are "We cannot authenticate this document", however, it was retrieved from a man who was trying to relieve Mohammed Fayed of £10 million for documents which said what he wanted to hear.

You may wish to draw your own conclusions...


Dear timeless test:

What? Were you expecting a bunch of choirboys/girls to be active in those circles which have access to sensitive documents? No, wait, I forgot it’s the nice people that tend to gravitate toward undercover agencies. Sorry, my bad. You’re right secret service organizations are run by “softies”. The Albert Schweitzer’s of the world would never do such a rotten thing, try to blackmail someone for lots of money. Please forgive my silly oversight.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods


Sorry Wizard it's probably me as I have a long couple of days but I'm not sure I understand a word of that.

For clarity, the point I was trying to make was that the very first words of the link you have quoted as a source stated that the document could not be authenticated. It was apparently part of a bunch of papers offered to Fayed for £10 million saying exactly what he wanted to hear.

The document as quoted in the link also contains a number of illogical and outright inaccuarte statements. It would be very easy to believe that it was a very naieve forgery used as part of an attempted scam.


kix

posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I dont care if it was a conspiration to kill her, but one thing is sure everyone has blamed the driver, they have said that he had high levels of Alcohol in the blood, but on the hotel videos he appears completelly sober, then they said he had unusual levels of CO2 in the blood (and that gives you dizzines and headaches) but on the videos he is making jokes, and completelly normal....

So who knows, maybe Oliver Stone can shed some light on this one too...LOL



posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ex
The offspring of her and Dodi would have been in line to the throne,


No, the child wouldn't have been.

I have no idea if Diana was killed on purpose or if it was an accident. Perhaps it was an accident that was a 'happy chance' for the royals who wanted her gone. The accident killed her before they could get to her? Who knows.

All I know is that she wouldn't have been in Paris running around at top speed with a playboy, if Charles had just kept his pants zipped and had honored the vows he made to her and to God in the church on their wedding day.

It's his fault she's dead. Either by accident or by plan .. it's his fault.



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 05:26 AM
link   
The driver was not drunk how could he have been. He was the official driver for her and it was his job therefore he would NOT have been drinking. Not only is it unprofessional but it would be unprofessional in front of the paparazzi's DUH!

They have to invent an excuse for why a professional driver lost control of the car.



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 05:40 AM
link   
MALCR :

I disagree , supposedly " professional " people make the most unbelievable errors of judgment every single day

from the files of " what were they thinking " ? :

the recent debarcle regarding the alchaolism of Charles kennedy [ a UK pilitician ] who was leader of the liberal democrat party here in Brittain ,

i actually met him several years ago , [ when he either was not drinking or was concealing it very well ] and he struck me as very proffessional .

so to claim that supposed professionalism would prevent a french driver from being a drunkard is absurd .

a more valid question would be why did two body guards not spot and or react to the threat of a drunk driver ?


[edit on 15-12-2006 by ignorant_ape]



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 06:05 AM
link   
The questions I have always had about Diana's "accident" remain unanswered.

If Henri Paul was drunk, why did Diana's bodyguard, Trevor Rees Jones, allow him to drive the car that night? Rees Jones was a highly trained and skilled professional.

Why was Rees Jones the only person in the car wearing a seatbelt? I believe (please correct me if I am wrong) that bodyguard's never wear seatbelts as they would restrict their movements in case of an emergency.

Why did I hear of Diana's death on local radio while driving home from work at 12 midnight BST - hours before her death? And yes, it clearly stated that she was dead, not injured.

Rees Jones went to ground and kept stumm after the crash. A book was published in his name, but other than that nothing has been heard of him.
Why was there no investigation into his actions that night when if the official story is true, he clearly behaved negligently?



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Love that Duke of E quote about "son of a bedouin camel-trader..."

Made oi larf... and very DOE.

Came across this today...


Tomlinson claims that MI6 may have been responsible for the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. He has claimed that Britain's Secret Intelligence Service was monitoring Princess Diana before her death, that her driver, Henri Paul, on the night she died was an MI6 informant, and that her death mirrored plans he saw in 1992 for the assassination of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.

Tomlinson was arrested by French Authorities in July 2006 ... It was mistakenly reported by some quarters that this arrest was linked to the inquiries into the death of Princess Diana.

During an interview in "Hardtalk", televised around the globe on BBC World, Tomlinson raises a pertinent question to the interviewer, Tim Sebastian. He asks why, considering the historical importance of the death of the Princess of Wales, he is constantly hassled by the secret services for simply pointing out the bizarre similarity of the active plan MI6 had poised to assassinate Milosevic in 1992, and all the details of the crash which resulted in the Princess's death in 1997.



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 07:08 AM
link   
I've just printed the entire report off, all 832 pages of it and intend to read the lot of it. Just something to bear in mind. In the first section of the report which is the Introduction, on page 12 is states :




The claims at the beginning of each chapter are direct lifts from source documents or have been made in interviews to camera. The wording may have been abridged to assist the reader in understanding the key points.


I just thought this was a funny thing to declare;



abridge
verb [T]
to make a book, play or piece of writing shorter by removing details and unimportant information


Anyway, will continue to read the report. Some light bed time reading for the next six months I guess.



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Mayacara

the exact questions i wanted to raise...
Although a lot of money and time has been spent on this investigation, some points still remain (and always will be ) unanswered.

Here are a couple of points that i would like to know if anyone has the answeres to please let us know , or if im wrong ,again let me know.

The white fiat punto...i know this has been gone over time and time again but why have that not found the owner/driver of this vehicle.

CCTV.
Paris along with London is probably one of the cities with the most CCTV in Europe, well what happened to "any footage" from that night, all we have seen so far is the footage from inside /outside the ritz.

Trevor R-Jones.
As Mayacara has pointed out, he went straight "underground" after his recovery, he was the only person who survived, the only one apparently wearing a seatbelt.
Surely if he thought during the so-called chase by the paparazzi that henri paul was driving "ereatic" or that he needed to get upto to the supposed speeds in order to getaway from the press he would have "ordered" the other occupants inside the car to put on their belts?For their own saftey
After all he was their guardian???
At the end od the day, he was being PAID to protect them, they WOULD have listened to his Proffesional advice!!!!.

I too was coming back along the emabankment (london) and heard the news and as Mayacara has stated the intitial news reports, i heard the Di was sitting with her head in her hands at the side of the road, all other occupants in the car were deceased?
I know that intial reports can ofetn be confusing and wrong but this was totaly wrong?

Later that morning watching the news, i see an interview with two Americans who were in Paris on Holiday, One black large male and a Very slim white female (they didnt look like a couple per say) and they stated the foolwing:
"we see something and then heard a bang (talking about the crash) but we were too scared and didnt stop?"
So what did they see that made them too scared (their words not mine) to stop?
Why if this was the case did the Paris police not attempt to charge them with "leaving the scene of a crime" as they did with the Paparazzi.
I have only ever seen this interview ONCE on sky and it was NEVER repeated again since that time?

I mean come on ...you see an accident...do you feel too scared to stop and try to help...NOPE!
Like ive said this was their words "too scared to stop"

A French Doctor
i dont know who he was)
At the scene states.." i was helping this lady , she had blood coming from her ears, running down towards her mouth, because of the angle she was laying"
I did not know who she was???????????????????????????
WHAT!!!! This lady he was attending to in his words did NOT have massive facial injuries , she was in Paris and had been hounded by photographers, the worlds cameras, were in Paris, Dodi was wellknown in Paris and there he is attending to her and he hasnt recognised her??????/??
She was one of the Most photographed women in the world.

The Nearest Hospital:
Apparently there was a nearer hospital..that DID have a specialist trauma unit!

I think this is something that will never be known but the debates will go back and fourth





posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by rich23

Came across this today...

So... Henri Paul was a MI6 informant? He seems to have been a broker between Mogilevich's gang and Arab arms dealers as well. And on the night of the car crash, Mogilevich allegedly found out that Henri Paul was being recruited by Mossad. And the Mogilevich gang has a record of staging car accidents. I wonder what is true and this case and what is not...


www.abovetopsecret.com...



But of course it was just an accident. Nothing to see here...


[edit on 2006/12/15 by Hellmutt]



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 07:22 PM
link   
hey guys/gals...

I really want to get my hands on a couple of books regarding the 'conspiracies' surrounding the death of Di.

I already own "Who Killed Diana?" by Peter Hounam & Derek McAdam

thanks for all your help.



posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 08:44 PM
link   
What a slap in the face.

So some retired police/government official has publically said there was nothing suspicous.

If there was something suspicous..

AS IF THIS MAN IS GOING TO SAY THAT TO THE PUBLIC

i mean jesus... how stupid do they think we are?

Its like they expect people to take everything he says as gospel.

If she was knockd off, they certainly arent going to allow someone to publically say it... they'd more than likely put someone on the stand, and MAKE HIM SAY it was all an accident.,





 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join