Diana inquest ~ All stories here please!

Started by Wombat, December 31, 2006, 03:22:47 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 ... 21
User actions

sandy

#26
January 08, 2007, 09:37:18 PM
Quote from: fawbert on January 07, 2007, 08:07:19 AM
Diana was a member of the Royal Family, but without the prefix HRH.

Diana was not a member of the royal family at the time of her death. Charles divorced her the year before and was not her "widower" by any stretch of the imagination. If she had been a member of the family, she would have been buried in a royal grave, her HRH would not have been removed, and she would have been remembered in prayers the morning after she died. She was also required to curtsy to all senior royals when her HRH was taken from her. 

Wombat

#27
January 08, 2007, 11:37:32 PM
Quote from: fawbert on January 08, 2007, 10:21:22 AM
She surrendered the HRH tag and became "Diana, Princess of Wales, on her divorce from the P of W in Aug 1996.
As I said..details...had she lived long enough to see Wills to the throne he would have reinstated her title.....no debate there..it was his wish :windsor1:

AHoch82

#28
January 09, 2007, 01:37:34 AM
Harryite #0040

sandy

#29
January 09, 2007, 01:44:53 AM
William would have had to have waited until Daddy died to reinstate her title. So had she lived, she would supposedly be required to curtsy to HRH Camilla- until Wills became King -not that she'd do it.

Jenee

#30
January 09, 2007, 03:34:43 AM Last Edit: January 09, 2007, 03:44:22 AM by Jenee
The Sun: Public may decide Diana verdict

QuoteA JURY made up of members of the public is expected to decide if Princess Diana was murdered or died in an accident.



Telegraph: William: inquest must be fair

QuotePrince William and Prince Harry called yesterday for an "open, fair and transparent inquest" into the death of their mother as they were told it was highly unlikely they would be expected to give evidence



Here is a short video clip about it-- I hope this works!
"It does not do to dwell on dreams, and forget to live" -Dumbledore

Jupiter

#31
January 09, 2007, 11:34:28 AM
when willy says inquest must be fair, what he means is the inquest must conclude diana's death was nothing more than an accident

Lila the Flirt

#32
January 09, 2007, 12:43:02 PM
 :brainwashed: They're bound to have the same results.

People's accounts of the tragedy would be very inaccurate by now, almost 10 years to her death. There's just no point.


Flirt's the name, flirtin's my game :lila:

fawbert

#33
January 09, 2007, 04:48:36 PM
Do a majority of the British public believe in conspiracy theories? If so, then they'll decide that Diana's death was no accident, overturning Lord Stevens's report. Then where will that leave us ? :hmm:
Fawbert

Wombat

#34
January 10, 2007, 07:51:54 AM
Back where we've been the past 10 years :french:

Lila the Flirt

#35
January 10, 2007, 10:05:47 AM
It's a waste of time and money IMO.  :mellow:


Flirt's the name, flirtin's my game :lila:

smiler

#36
January 13, 2007, 06:05:33 PM
 i still think it is sad  diana was killed but there is a lot of unanswered questions  and people will not except anything else but the truth a coverup there truly is smiler

heather

#37
January 14, 2007, 05:13:36 AM
  We have all have our own opinions, but having the facts would help.

heather

#40
January 15, 2007, 07:52:52 PM
   Can't say I am at all surprised....first the royal household employees were fine to sit on the jury,
             and then when it became apparent that the public were not impressed with this sort of bias,
it was changed to members of the public,
            and then when it became apparent to the powers that be, that a public jury just might have some valid questions to ask,
             then it suddenly becomes a no jury inquest.

                        British Justice.....my eye!
                                                 

dizzylizzy13

#41
January 16, 2007, 04:21:12 AM
Exactly.
Why would members of the Royal Household have been OK (are they all trained professional coroners?) but a public jury is not?

My prediction: they'll delay this until the summer wedding that one of the boys will have. Maybe 2008, 2009? I'm taking bets at Window 3.

guysguy

#42
January 16, 2007, 06:32:17 AM
i just wish they could end this all so that we could move on.

blue eyes

#43
January 16, 2007, 06:46:19 AM
 :o i never thoughht i would say this but   
i agree with guysguy aka harry  :teehee:

dizzylizzy13

#49
February 20, 2007, 04:18:03 AM
I think he's a little nutty but I do believe they should allow a jury. It's the law in Britain, isn't it? I don't understand why they said it was OK to have a jury when it would have been comprised of the Royal Household and now it's not ... if they have nothing to hide, they should allow it IMO.

But for goodness sakes, why bring Midds into this?
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 ... 21
User actions