20 years later we lose Princess Diana on August 31,1997

[sandy]

Yes the ambulance did pass two hospitals because they were not designated as place that could provide care for them aka "trauma centers" in 1997.  They took Diana to the hospital that had the team that was trained and skilled in working with severely injured people such as victims of severe car accidents. Had they been routed to the place that didn't have the team that was capable of handling and left the patients there, then yes you would have had a case for malpractice.

A team could always have traveled to another hospital.  Diana was doomed because she did not get to the hospital on time while bleeding to death. Sometimes "procedures" set up do not work.
Double post auto-merged: August 21, 2017, 11:21:43 PM

It is strange that Charles just stomped off without getting an outside party to counsel both of them. Maybe he felt above what "mere mortals" did to try to save a marriage.  The Queen decided they should divorce, she was the one who made the first move, not Charles.

The settlement did not get handed back to Charles, it went to her sons William and Harry  in the will.  The sons did not give the money to their father, they kept it.

Charles did not get the money back. His sons money was not willed to him. He was not her widower. The money was not willed to them by Charles but by their mother. Charles did not get the money back so he could not will it back to them. It was DIana's property after Charles settled the money on her.

Nobody's death makes things less complicated.  If the Windsors thought that way, they are as cold blooded as reptiles.

[royalanthropologist]

Not all the people who remained married @sandy are madly in love and do not have mistresses/lovers. There are countless examples of women who have remained married to princes even today regardless of mistresses (e.g. Queen Sophia and Queen Syliva). Those women just made a decision that their marriage was more important than fighting over the mistress.   Like I have often said, people marry for many reasons and stay married for many reasons. Just because some people cannot live with one another does not mean that they are a standard of what a marriage is.

People may complain until the cows come home but there is not a thing that was going to make Charles fall in love with Diana. She tried it all and it all failed, miserably sometimes like that lingerie incident showed. If Diana had been compliant, discrete and took lovers on the side without all the press interviews, she would probably be the princess of wales today. The issues started when she reacted and acted up in the home, making it impossible for them to live together.

There is always a price to pay for each decision we take and the price for Diana's reprisals was that Charles left the home for good. Her reasons for reacting are understandable but so are his. He just could not live with someone when they were fighting constantly. Nobody can tolerate that. I tell warring couples in my sessions: "If you decide to fight the problems by making each other miserable, do not be surprised when the divorce papers land on the doorstep". In this relationship Diana wanted to remain married more than Charles, so it was her that was hurt most in the end when he left.

When he left, she took it up a notch with her books, interviews and recordings. That is when the queen decided to put an end to the farce and Charles was absolutely in agreement with her. He wrote to Diana telling he he wanted a divorce and actually petitioned for it. The suggestion that Charles was coerced into divorce has absolutely no factual basis. He later told friends that he was looking forward to the day "he would be free". She on the other hand called it "the saddest day of my life".

I also find your notion of Charles not inheriting an estate from his sons quite strange. Charles is considerably wealthier than Diana was. The divorce settlement in its entirety is no more than what he spends on himself every year.  Why would he want to inherit from his sons when logic suggests that he would die before them???

Diana's death opened up many paths and resolved many potential problems that could have occurred when she was alive. That is why the conspiracy theorist questioned her death...nothing to do with the royal family or their coldness as you call it.

[Duch_Luver_4ever]

Yes the article runs through the timeline leading up to the accident and then goes into some specific detail regarding the injuries and condition of the car's occupants. However I did gain a better understanding of how difficult it was for the rescuers to free and then treat the injured. Having read the article and the timeline I am convinced that the the rescuers did follow protocol and made the best decisions for their patients that they could given the gravity and severity  of the situation.

@Duch_Luver_4ever -After reading Charles' comments, I do believe that he was speaking in the moment after receiving the news of the accident.For all his many faults, I do believe that Charles would have provided for the best possible rehabilitation care for Diana if she had survived the accident. And with her injuries her rehab time could have been extensive.   I don't believe that he was referring to any sort of marital reconciliation with his ex-wife when he made those remarks.

I hear what youre saying @TLLK and I probably didnt express myself correctly, while it was not likely to be a marital reconciliation, but it was an extremely out of character thing to say, given his temperament and past actions, and it implied a level or care and devotion that would be required thats galling to hear, considering their past.

It would be like if you neglected and abused a dog for years and everyone knows all you ever wanted was to be rid of the dog, but it gets loose one day and hit by a car, and they you say to someone how you hoped the dog would come back to you, that you just wanted to nurse it back to health....what would someone think or say to that kind of person????

While im sure for the boys mostly and maybe for himself hed want to be seen to be as helpful as possible, she had the resources to have top notch care, there might have been a few connections that Charles might have access to that she didnt, but she would be able to provide for 99.9 percent of her rehab, had she survived.

It may have been careless choice of words in the moment (hes done that before) but it implies a level of tender caring and compassion that seems pretty galling IMO, as it appears that finally in death, when its too late, hes seen her, at least a little bit, like many of us have, someone that makes you want to drop everything to care for her.... but its a hot button issue with me, so im willing to admit the heart may be overruling the head here.

As for the medical care, there was an interesting news item in google news about one of the first witnesses had a lot of unkind thing to say about the medical care, especially the time to respond and the delay getting her out of the car, etc.

As you guys know im pretty comfortable with the esoteric, but I also hold the doc/book Story of a Princess in very high regard, so if they are rethinking the issue, its something ill look at for sure, but im not sold one way or the other yet.

Very good info on your posts TLLK  :goodpost:

[Curryong]

Let's not forget that Charles made the remark about feeling Diana would always come back to him and need his care to Mark Bolland, a man who has Machiavelli as a middle name.

There were no other witnesses to this supposedly compassionate remark and it was made to a man who dedicated himself night and day to rehabilitating Charles and Camilla's reputation, and one who spent years in Charles's service.

For myself, if this statement of intent had been made to a couple of people whose word could be trusted, I'd accept it. From Bolland? No.

[TLLK]

A team could always have traveled to another hospital.  Diana was doomed because she did not get to the hospital on time while bleeding to death. Sometimes "procedures" set up do not work.

@sandy-Hospitals do not work in this manner. Not all physicians, nurses and technicians are able to work in other hospitals in which they are not employed.  Diana was transported to the closest hospital that specialized in treating trauma victims meaning that they also had the necessary equipment to best treat patients who were  gravely injured.

She died because she had injuries that were too devastating for them to save her. :(

[amabel]

It seems so, if she was having heart attacks in the ambulance, which could have killed her. 

[sandy]

@sandy-Hospitals do not work in this manner. Not all physicians, nurses and technicians are able to work in other hospitals in which they are not employed.  Diana was transported to the closest hospital that specialized in treating trauma victims meaning that they also had the necessary equipment to best treat patients who were  gravely injured.

She died because she had injuries that were too devastating for them to save her. :(

She did not get the help she needed. I still found it disgraceful at the amount of time she got to the hospital no matter what they "could" and "could not do." Caring for someone should not be that strict that they "could not" of course they could.

ANd letting her sit in that car before any attempts were made to get her out was just sloppy treatment.

There was a window of opportunity to save her and they messed up. Big time. Dr. Barnard the renowned heart specialist said she could have been saved if there were not that delay.
Double post auto-merged: August 22, 2017, 09:59:51 AM

Not all the people who remained married @sandy are madly in love and do not have mistresses/lovers. There are countless examples of women who have remained married to princes even today regardless of mistresses (e.g. Queen Sophia and Queen Syliva). Those women just made a decision that their marriage was more important than fighting over the mistress.   Like I have often said, people marry for many reasons and stay married for many reasons. Just because some people cannot live with one another does not mean that they are a standard of what a marriage is.

People may complain until the cows come home but there is not a thing that was going to make Charles fall in love with Diana. She tried it all and it all failed, miserably sometimes like that lingerie incident showed. If Diana had been compliant, discrete and took lovers on the side without all the press interviews, she would probably be the princess of wales today. The issues started when she reacted and acted up in the home, making it impossible for them to live together.

There is always a price to pay for each decision we take and the price for Diana's reprisals was that Charles left the home for good. Her reasons for reacting are understandable but so are his. He just could not live with someone when they were fighting constantly. Nobody can tolerate that. I tell warring couples in my sessions: "If you decide to fight the problems by making each other miserable, do not be surprised when the divorce papers land on the doorstep". In this relationship Diana wanted to remain married more than Charles, so it was her that was hurt most in the end when he left.

When he left, she took it up a notch with her books, interviews and recordings. That is when the queen decided to put an end to the farce and Charles was absolutely in agreement with her. He wrote to Diana telling he he wanted a divorce and actually petitioned for it. The suggestion that Charles was coerced into divorce has absolutely no factual basis. He later told friends that he was looking forward to the day "he would be free". She on the other hand called it "the saddest day of my life".

I also find your notion of Charles not inheriting an estate from his sons quite strange. Charles is considerably wealthier than Diana was. The divorce settlement in its entirety is no more than what he spends on himself every year.  Why would he want to inherit from his sons when logic suggests that he would die before them???

Diana's death opened up many paths and resolved many potential problems that could have occurred when she was alive. That is why the conspiracy theorist questioned her death...nothing to do with the royal family or their coldness as you call it.

There should not have been a mistress around. Period. IT was the late 20th century not the 1600s. There would have been no fights over mistresses if Charles had not set up a "competition" between the wife and mistress.

Charles should not have married Diana if he did not love her. He was  wishy washy about an important life decision. ANd just thought of HIS needs not considering hers.

The Queen wrote a letter to both of them suggesting divorce. This is a matter of public record. Charles did not initiate it.

The lingerie incident may not be true. From how Diana described that night she was very hurt and not in the mood for love.

CHarles never spelled out the terms of marriage. Had he done this before he proposed Diana could have left the scene.

Charles tried and failed. Diana went into the marriage in good faith. 

Why would Diana want to stay in a dead end situation. Suppose she had met someone she wanted to marry. She couldn't. Charles was also increasingly contemptuous of her even in public. Who needs that? Charles is not worth the trouble.

Charles had to borrow money from his mother to help pay Diana. SO the money was not all Charles' in the first place. The money became Diana's when she received it from Charles and her sons' when they collected their inheritance. IT's immaterial what Charles has, the money belongs to their sons now.
Double post auto-merged: August 22, 2017, 10:13:11 AM

Story about Diana's treatment:

Diana's life could have been saved says doctor | UK | News | Express.co.uk
Double post auto-merged: August 22, 2017, 10:20:08 AM

What Charles "said" to his friends may be hearsay. Divorce is supposed to be a sad event and he had some blame for it to put it mildly. If he said that, Shame on him.  It certainly proves my point that the royals are cold if Charles actually said that.

Check the thread out.  I was refuting your comment that the "family" got Diana's money "back." And I said the boys got it back not the royal family family. That was what I said. I did not comment on Charles own income or anything else. . DIana had the money and left it to her children who are not the whole family. If Charles was as wealthy as you say, how come he had to borrow from his mother to pay the settlement?

[royalanthropologist]

Really @sandy? You believe the POW really had to borrow money to pay a divorce settlement of $30 million? That was a ruse to ensure that Diana could never touch the Duchy of Cornwall. They focused solely on the money that he declared as his personal asset, 101 rule when dealing with a messy divorce. Put it all in a corporation and cry poverty...happens all the time. Certainly Charles found the money to buy Camilla a home and install security in it when he wanted. This was just a way of ensuring that Diana got as little as possible in the settlement and could not touch the Duchy.

It seems that everything that shows Diana in a less than flattering situation is written off as "hearsay" and everything that shows her in a good light or Charles in a bad light must be factual. You are aware that everything Diana said about Charles is "hearsay", aren't you?

Charles said he was happy to be a free man because the marriage had become a nightmare for him. They were not getting a long and hurting each other. He was relieved it was all over. That is why he said that. I doubt he was devastated or sad about the divorce. His view of that marriage was very different from Diana's.

[amabel]

That's nonsense.  Diana could not "touch the Duchy" because it is a crown asset.

[sandy]

Really @sandy? You believe the POW really had to borrow money to pay a divorce settlement of $30 million? That was a ruse to ensure that Diana could never touch the Duchy of Cornwall. They focused solely on the money that he declared as his personal asset, 101 rule when dealing with a messy divorce. Put it all in a corporation and cry poverty...happens all the time. Certainly Charles found the money to buy Camilla a home and install security in it when he wanted. This was just a way of ensuring that Diana got as little as possible in the settlement and could not touch the Duchy.

It seems that everything that shows Diana in a less than flattering situation is written off as "hearsay" and everything that shows her in a good light or Charles in a bad light must be factual. You are aware that everything Diana said about Charles is "hearsay", aren't you?

Charles said he was happy to be a free man because the marriage had become a nightmare for him. They were not getting a long and hurting each other. He was relieved it was all over. That is why he said that. I doubt he was devastated or sad about the divorce. His view of that marriage was very different from Diana's.

Charles did have to borrow some of the money. That is a fact. The Duchy was not in question nor even remotely on the table during the divorce settlement.

Diana 'took Charles to cleaners' in divorce, says his banker - Telegraph

There are things that Charles and DIana said directly. There are things they did not. Charles never told a biographer or anyone publicly he was "happy" that he got the divorce. I think the royals should be credited with some discretion. I doubt Charles would have said that. In all honesty it is not anything he should be proud of if he indeed said it.

IT is a moot point because Charles and Diana were in effect leading separate lives since the end of 1992.

It was a nightmare for Diana too. She was quoted as saying re: the marriage "my life is torture."

[Duch_Luver_4ever]

What amabel says leads into why he had to borrow from the Queen, while it was a crown asset and thus Diana couldnt get half of it (imagine what thats worth today) im guessing theres also laws on how much of it Charles can liquidate for personal reasons, the press tried to make the borrowing sound like Charles was broke, it was just that the lump sum was a temporary blow to his monthly cash flow.

Like most upper families they have the bulk of assets either tied up in trust, or otherwise kept as far from the divorce lawyers as possible. Also the duchys profitability has grown considerably since the separation/divorce, which Diana wouldnt have got to partake in as far as Charles annual income.

Its why I say she got shafted in the divorce, compared to if they were ordinary people.

Also heres the link i was talking about re the witness to the accident:

Lawyer who saw Diana's death crash breaks 20-year silence to claim "other forces" were behind accident - Mirror Online

[sandy]

It could have been worse, she could have been made to sign a pre nup.

In any case, I think the terms of the marriage should have been spelled out before the proposal.

[amabel]

She didn't "get shafted" in the divorce.. (and As I'm sure Sandy knows quite well pre-nups were not avaialabe in the UK at the time she was married.. )
She got a good settlement considering that she was leaving the RF, and that she had done things that the RF consider pretty terrible, I think she was quite lucky.  Fergie didn't do half as well

[sandy]

It was only a hypothetical statement.

I think Diana had things done to her that were pretty terrible. The main thing Charles marrying her when he knew he preferred someone else. He should have cut ties with her if he could not truly commit to her.

[TLLK]

It seems so, if she was having heart attacks in the ambulance, which could have killed her. 

Yes @amabelaccording to this article-https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/apr/07/monarchy.diana Diana went into cardiac arrest three times. The first time was after she was removed from the ambulance and suffered a steep drop in her blood pressure and the ambulance's physician realized she was suffering from internal bleeding. Diana was then stabilized and the driver was ordered to drive slowly as any jostling or bump could trigger another bleed. Just yards away from the hospital entrance, she went into cardiac arrest a second time and the team had to work to stabilize her. The last event occurred on the operating table.

When the hospital's top cardiac surgeon opened Diana up he found the following:

At the Pitie-Salpetriere hospital, she was operated on by Professor Alain Pavie, the president of the French college of cardiovascular surgeons. He discovered huge internal injuries, including a tear the width of a man's fist in her superior pulmonary vein where it entered the heart.

Pavie said he had never seen a patient survive such an injury. Diana was pronounced dead inside two hours.

Professor Thomas Treasure, the president of the European Association for Thoracic Surgery, queried some details of the treatment, but conceded to the inquest there was a "very low likelihood" that she could have lived.

How could there have been a better outcome for the driver and passengers?

Had the car not been travelling at 65mph in a 31mph area, had it glanced against the pillar instead of hitting it head-on, or had it bounced off the side wall instead, the shock of the crash would have been less shattering and the occupants of the car might have survived.

Had any of them been wearing seatbelts, they might have stood a better chance.

Also thank you for sharing this information:

She didn't "get shafted" in the divorce.. (and As I'm sure Sandy knows quite well pre-nups were not avaialabe in the UK at the time she was married..

However I would imagine that they are standard operating procedure now for anyone marrying into any royal family.

[sandy]

I am glad one change that was made that of the fiancée of a senior royal not having to live in a royal residence up until the wedding day. Kate got to stay with her family and was not moved into a residence for months. She I think appreciated having her family around. She also spent time with her family when her babies were young and she had some help from her mother.

[TLLK]

^^^I believe that the BRF allowed Sarah and Sophie to both live with their fiances after their engagements and Sophie had more access to her family than any of the brides/grooms that came before her.  I believe that the BRF dropped the "illusion" of the young woman living apart from their fiance when it was shared that Diana had been living at BP for most of the time and not with the QM.

[amabel]

I am glad one change that was made that of the fiancée of a senior royal not having to live in a royal residence up until the wedding day. Kate got to stay with her family and was not moved into a residence for months. She I think appreciated having her family around. She also spent time with her family when her babies were young and she had some help from her mother.

taht's rather amusing because I can remember a lot of people attacking Kate for being so close to her mother and for "having help with her mum" with the babies...#

[sandy]

^^^I believe that the BRF allowed Sarah and Sophie to both live with their fiances after their engagements and Sophie had more access to her family than any of the brides/grooms that came before her.  I believe that the BRF dropped the "illusion" of the young woman living apart from their fiance when it was shared that Diana had been living at BP for most of the time and not with the QM.

Sarah had just broken up with Paddy McNally (she was living with him) when she started dating Andrew. She was more or less on her own and working. She had really wanted to settle down with McNally but he did not want to remarry. Sophie spent more time with her family.

Diana felt very isolated at BP and Charles was away on a major tour during the engagement.  She stayed with her mother and stepfather in Australia  before her engagement was announced and later her mother went to London to assist her with wedding plans.

[Curryong]

I've been thinking about Diana every day and feeling sad of course that she was taken so suddenly and so young.

This is a little article from Sky News about the new doco in which William and Harry talk about their mother's death, the French paps, and  how their father and grandmother tried to protect them at Balmoral.

Harry: Paparazzi chased Princess Diana then photographed her dying

[sara8150]

Harry and William Open Up About the Moment They Learned of Diana's Death — as They Defend Their Father
Prince Harry Defends Prince Charles's Response to Diana's Death
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 04:34:07 AM

Prince William Blasts the Photographers Who Hounded His Mom: They Were 'A Pack of Dogs'
Prince William Blasts Photographers Who Followed Diana
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 04:37:30 AM

Princes William and Harry have given their 'final word' on mum Princess Diana
Princes William and Harry give 'final word' on Princess Diana
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 04:41:11 AM

Moment our father told us our mother was dead: Prince William and Harry reveal their reaction to being given the news in remarkably candid TV documentary about the turmoil of the days after Diana's death
Prince William and Harry reveal reaction to Diana's death | Daily Mail Online
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 04:52:59 AM

'I used my fringe as a safety blanket': Prince William reveals he 'hid from thousands of mourners behind his hair' as he walked behind the coffin at Diana's funeral
Prince William 'hid behind hair' at Diana's funeral | Daily Mail Online
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 04:59:36 AM

'It was an act of desperation': Prince William reveals he 'understands' why his mother chose Panorama interview to discuss her marriage problems
Prince William 'understands' why Diana went on Panorama | Daily Mail Online
that what Diana told interviews and she says "Charles been see Camilla mostly and Diana wouldn't approved and she told interviews says three marriages"
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:01:24 AM

Diana's sister says Princess was 'religious about seatbelts' and she is 'haunted' by unanswered questions over her sibling's death in car crash
Diana's sister says she was 'religious about seatbelts' | Daily Mail Online

Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:09:19 AM

Prince Harry 'very glad' to walk behind Diana's coffin
Prince Harry 'very glad' to walk behind Diana's coffin - BBC News
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:13:29 AM

'You didn't even know her': Prince William on his confusion over public grief for Diana
'You didn't even know her': Prince William on his confusion over public grief for Diana

Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:16:09 AM

Harry slams dying Diana pictures
Harry slams dying Diana pictures
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:17:10 AM

Prince William: Queen shielded us from public grief after Diana's death
Prince William: Queen shielded us from public grief after Diana's death | UK news | The Guardian
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:20:36 AM

Princes Harry and William talk about impact of losing mother ? video | UK news | The Guardian
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:22:52 AM

Tony Blair praises the Queen for her reaction following Diana's death
Diana's funeral: Tony Blair praises Royal Family's reaction | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:24:57 AM

Charles 'was there for us' when Diana died, Prince Harry says
Charles 'was there for us' when Diana died, Prince Harry says - ITV News

[sandy]

Did they make these documentaries all at once? I thought the HBO special was the main one.

[sara8150]

Did they make these documentaries all at once? I thought the HBO special was the main one.

NBC will aired 7 days of Princess Diana on September 1 I can't wait for that after her 20th death anniversary of her death August 31

[TLLK]

Did they make these documentaries all at once? I thought the HBO special was the main one.

https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/st...49026322366465

Richard Palmer‏Verified account @RoyalReporter 5h5 hours ago
More
For those asking, I'm told all three sets of William and Harry interviews - ITV, BBC, and Newsweek - were done around the same time in March

[sara8150]

Theroyalfamily.wcgc on Twitter: "#DukeandDuchessofCambridge and #PrinceHarry will visit the White Garden to pay tribute to #Diana , at Kensington
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 04:18:05 PM

Majesty/Joe Little on Twitter: "The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry are to visit the White Garden at Kensington Palace on 30 August:
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 04:19:06 PM

Gert's Royals on Twitter: "New engagment: August 30th William, Kate & Harry will visit the White Garden at Kensington Palace which was inspired by
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:02:35 PM

'Why didn't she wear a seatbelt?' Diana's sister haunted by unanswered question over death
Princess Diana death: Sarah McCorquodale raises questions over crash | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2017, 05:04:23 PM

William and Harry to mark their mother's death and then hope to move on
William and Harry to mark their mother's death and then hope to move on - ITV News
Double post auto-merged: August 24, 2017, 04:04:37 AM

Royals and Spencers at war over the prayers, the route extended by two miles and gardeners tidying the M1: Minute by minute, how preparations were made for Diana's funeral
How preparations were made for Diana's funeral  | Daily Mail Online