Diana's Death - Police Passed New Information

[Eri]

^ Why would they think them being the number one suspects in case anything happened to her would resolve anything? Some ( and I am speaking in general here no names mentioned) can't get over the fact Di wasn't as important as to move Governments to kill her and that she was just a woman who made bad decisions who was with a loser who decided to raise the paps into a Tunnel .

[Limabeany]

All I can say Eri is that there simply were too many holes and coincidences in Diana's death investigation, I don't think we'll ever know what happened but I don't think it was simply a paparazzi accident...

[sandy]

Diana's popularity was on the decline since 1994.  The Bashir interview & her dropping most of her charities caused futher decline in her popularity.

Diana's popularity briefly surge during the war of the wales but was on a steep decline by 1997.

In April 1984 Charles was actually more popular than Diana (50-45). (Poll available on another royal website)  So it is very possible that Charles would have regained his popularity with the way that Diana was behaving.

As far as Diana death being caused by the royal family, totally without merit.  The only person who survived was wearing a seatbelt. 

If Diana had a seatbelt on maybe she would have lived and then we would actually see whether her life became the train wreck it was heading or if she changed her life.  (She was the royal Lindsey Lohan.  Time after time getting away with bad behavior...)

You state this as fact but there were no extensive, detailed census type surveys about how much people liked or disliked Diana.

Are you serious about comparing her to LiLo?! Diana was never arrested, didn't do drugs, and did not serve time. That's a real exaggeration and shows your feelings about Diana.

Charles was very unpopular after his interview in 1994 and his own family complained to him about how he trashed his parents via his Dmbleby authorized biography.

Who took this 1984 poll? Why would there be a poll when the two were still married and were having another baby? The general public did not know the marriage was in trouble.

There were rumors that Diana's seatbelts were defective. I think the long long journey to the hospital did her in. Ronald Reagan had the same injury and got to the hospital FAST after he was shot in 1981 and he lived until he was 93. He wouldn't have made it in the "oxcart" ambulance that Diana was transported in.

Camilla had to literally disappear after Diana died. If Diana were so unpopular why didn't the peasants rejoice? Or do you have another survey that most people really disliked her and faked sending flowers.

If Charles were Mr Popularity he would not have had to hire a spin doctor for himself and Camilla. He could have married Camilla soon after his late ex died if he were so beloved and Diana was "trash."

IMO Charles has not regained popularity. I think some see him as a loser and always will. And I am not sayng as fact the "most people think.." the way you do because there were no definitive surveys.
Double post auto-merged: September 03, 2013, 01:52:04 PM

The only way Diana would have become less popular than Charles is if she had married Qadaffi, Saddam Hussein or Osama.  :hehe:

she was losing popularliy in the early 90s.  Marrying someone like Dodi Fayed would have damaged her even further. Charles would probably have slowly regained his popularity as happened gradually.

There were no definitive surveys about Diana's popularity. All I know is she was popular in the US irregardless of dating Dodi. She was moving on.  There were no indications she was going to rush into Marriage No. 2 with Dodi or anybody. She told Rosa Monckton she needed another marriage "like a bad rash."
Double post auto-merged: September 03, 2013, 01:53:55 PM



I

^ Why would they think them being the number one suspects in case anything happened to her would resolve anything? Some ( and I am speaking in general here no names mentioned) can't get over the fact Di wasn't as important as to move Governments to kill her and that she was just a woman who made bad decisions who was with a loser who decided to raise the paps into a Tunnel .

I think Charles was the loser and Diana made a very bad decision in marrying him. Dodi was pathetic and I don't get why people put him down as a villain. JFK Jr made a mistake flying that plane when his taining in instrument landing was deficient but he was never called a "loser." People make tragic mistakes.
Double post auto-merged: September 03, 2013, 01:59:54 PM

If anything her death at 36 is the worse thing that could happen to Chuck ... he had to live with her "legend" ever since ...all he had to do to be popular after the divorce was let Di be Di but she died ... let's not forget all the bad press and raised eyebrows she had after the divorce she would eventually be just like Sarah ...

In any case Sarah and her ex had an amicable divorce and raised two Princesses who turned out OK. Prince Andrew never had his pals badmouth his ex the way Charles did to Diana.  I think Di would let Charles be Charles and marry his trainwreck of a mistress and still maintain her popularity.

[cinrit]

There were rumors that Diana's seatbelts were defective. I think the long long journey to the hospital did her in. Ronald Reagan had the same injury and got to the hospital FAST after he was shot in 1981 and he lived until he was 93. He wouldn't have made it in the "oxcart" ambulance that Diana was transported in.

Diana's injuries were not the same as Ronald Reagan's assassination attempt injuries.  Ronald Reagan was shot through the lung:

"Reagan suffered a punctured lung and heavy internal bleeding, ..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_assassination_attempt

Diana suffered a torn pulmonary vein, which according to the doctor who testified at the Paget Inquiry: ""The type of injury found is commonly fatal, regardless of the treatment given. It is exceptional for patients with this type of injury to reach hospital alive."

"The Princess was taken to theatre for emergency surgery and the source of the bleeding, a tear to the upper left pulmonary vein - the vessel which carries blood from the lungs to the heart - was found and repaired."
Inquiry reveals graphic details of Princess Diana's injuries » Communities » 24dash.com

But I agree, Sandy ... I would never compare Diana to Lindsey Lohan!

Cindy

[sandy]

I read in a journal it was the same type. Nonetheless, if Reagan had gotten into a Diana-type snail pace ambulance, he would not have made it--he had to get to the operating room Pronto. If she had any sort of chance she was doomed when she got into the slow crawling ambulance. Even if Diana's treatment was "practiced" in France scoop and run via copter would have perhaps given her a great deal more survival chance. Khan and Barnard commented that getting her to the operating room would have given her a lot better odds. If any of my loved ones got into that slow moving ambulance I would be in despair.

[Eri]

Accidents happen ... I don't get why everything has to be a big conspiracy ...

[Trudie]

Yes Eri accidents do happen but in this case there are several conflicts with what witnesses saw at the moment and what the police investigation or inquest never satisfactorily answered. Witnesses said they saw a flashing light in the tunnel just before the crash, the missing Fiat Uno, the security camera's not working that night and why the paps were charged when they were not near the tunnel at the moment of the crash but happened on it minutes later.

Queen Camilla in response to your posts I wonder how you appear to have so much hatred for Diana who was nothing like the train wreck that is Lindsey Lohan. I find that to be such an insult to the family of Diana especially her sons who keep her beloved charities and  compassionate legacy alive. The only compassion Lindsey Lohan has is for Lindsey Lohan who doesn't even know the meaning of the words give back.

[Eri]

^ Weren't the paps charged for like two seconds? They were cleared of everything as soon as the investigation cleared that they had no responsibility whatsoever in the accident ... the rest is just allegations the matter was fully investigated costing the British tax payers  A FORTUNE  <_< ...

[Limabeany]

The matter was investigated to suit someone but it was not, IMO, fully investigated...

[Trudie]

The investigation was extremely sloppy and as far as the inquest was concerned that was nothing more then one very expensive production to trash Diana to entertain the establishment.

[cinrit]

To trash someone is to criticize them harshly and unjustly, or to manufacture untruths about them.  I haven't read the entire inquiry ... how did it trash Diana?

Cindy

[Limabeany]

Many witnesses have said they were not called to testify yet Dr. Khan was called????? He wasn't there. He wasn't in a relationship with Diana at the time, what purpose other than to establish she had relationships/affairs could there have been? Why wasn' Camilla called? She was Charles' lover...  :shrug: Just one example...

[cinrit]

Who were the witnesses who said they weren't called?  And why should Camilla have been called?  Just as Hasnat Khan, she wasn't there.

Cindy

[Limabeany]

She would have had more reason to be called if they had explored the 'Charles might have ordered it' angle, it certainly would have made more sense than calling Khan, he had nothing to do there except to be used... And, his having beeen called shows a clear purpose to the inquest beyond her death, it shows that it was used to try to smear her...

[cinrit]

I don't think the inquiry set out to try to smear her.  What did it say about her that was untrue or unfounded?  She was in a car with a drunk driver, not wearing a seat belt.  That's not a smear.  You don't trash someone by who you do or don't call to testify unless it's something blatant.  So I still don't see how it tried to trash her.  Some people may not have liked the findings, but that doesn't mean that all these people involved in the inquiry set out to ruin her reputation or anything.

Cindy

[Limabeany]

Some people did not like the shoddiness of it. What is the purpose of having people she slept with there and not having the people her husband who is still alive slept with there as well. He wan't the deceased victim, he was the still living and now conveniently free from a nuisance of an ex wife to pursue his lover's respectability. If anyone should have been interviewed it was Charles and Camilla, not Khan.

[cinrit]

I don't understand why Khan was interviewed, either, but none of the three should've been.  My own opinion is that it was a stupid and avoidable accident, nothing more.  My original question was how was Diana trashed, and I still don't understand how she was, so that's okay.

Cindy

[sandy]

Khan even commented on Diana's birth control that she used when they were involved ca. 1996. What on earth does that have to do with anything connected with the accident, just gossip. An attorney should have ordered that stricken from the records.

There are some holes in the story. The bodyguard did not stop Henri Paul from driving--if he were drunk he would have reeked of alcohol. There is a video of him deftly tying his shoe supposedly when he was under the influence of alcohol.

Also it is not known why Diana did not buckle her seatbelt, there are rumors of a defective seatbelt which were never confirmed or denied. And why not have somebody inspect the car first to make sure it is in working order down to the seatbelts. Why did the bodyguard buckle up without telling the passengers to do the same?   Would not that have been his job?

[cinrit]

Actually, Khan's statement about Diana using birth control may have been relevant, since there were rampant rumors that she'd been pregnant when she died.  But if it was known that she was on birth control, that would put those rumors to rest.  And really, there's nothing shameful about being on birth control, so that surely wouldn't be an attempt to trash her.

I don't know how much Henri Paul reacted to alcohol, but he was seen drinking.  Maybe he wasn't seen by the bodyguard, but he's on video, having a couple of drinks.  It was found in his blood, as was an antidepressant.  Not a good mixture.  And it doesn't matter why Diana didn't buckle up, the fact is that she didn't.  I think probably both Henri Paul and the bodyguard were reacting to Dodi's orders, and Dodi may not have been thinking of anything other than getting away from the paparazzi.  In any case, I don't see that any of that "trashes" Diana, which was my question. 

People may not agree with the verdict handed down by the inquiry, but that doesn't mean it's either wrong or right.  And it doesn't mean that it was held just to trash Diana. 

Cindy

[Eri]

Kahn slept with her how is that smearing her?  :orchid: If anything he was called to clear her name on the allegation she was pregnant !!!

[sandy]

But if this were 1996 when she used it what does it have to do with 1997 when she dated Dodi. Also the inquiry was trying to establish how serious she was about Dodi which IMO was ridiculous because the two people who could really answer the question were dead.  Those alive did not for obvious reasons know all the details about the relationship.

And Khan at the inquest reported that he asked Diana if she  had an affair with Mannakee and Diana did not give him an answer (Diana denied this point blank to Settelen). What does that have to do with the inquest except to try to "prove" Diana "cheated first" which has nothing to do with the inquest.   
Double post auto-merged: September 04, 2013, 03:08:47 PM

Kahn slept with her how is that smearing her?  :orchid: If anything he was called to clear her name on the allegation she was pregnant !!!

But Khan was not dating Diana at the time of her death. Dodi was dead and he would be the only one who could establish anything and Diana was dead and gone and could not respond. And how was it "clearing her name" to try to prove she was not pregnant--Diana committed no crime. Diana was single at the time and in this day and age there are pregnancies for single women, it is not as scandalous as the days of Ingrid Bergman being pregnant out of wedlock.  Why was it necessary to give details about Khan and Diana's sex life, just unnecessary tittle tattle IMO.

[cinrit]

If she was on birth control while seeing Kahn, the implication is that there would be a high likelihood that she also was when with Dodi.  Nothing more, and not an indication that there was a plot to trash her.

Why was it relevant whether or not she was pregnant ... I don't know.  But it always seems to come up in these situations, and it always seems to be relevant.  As a matter of fact, when Mary Jo Kopechne drowned in Chappaquiddick, it was rumored that she was pregnant, too, and a big deal was made of it. :shrug:

I'll give you that it made no sense to bring Mannakee into the inquiry, but if Khan offered it up, then he should be blamed, not the inquiry itself.

Cindy

[sandy]

 "a strong likelihood" does not mean it is a fact.

The Mannakee comment was not stricken from the record and I recall he was asked about Mannakee.

[amabel]

I don't understand why Khan was interviewed, either, but none of the three should've been.  My own opinion is that it was a stupid and avoidable accident, nothing more.  My original question was how was Diana trashed, and I still don't understand how she was, so that's okay.

Cindy

I didn't want to see the inquest but As far as I know the reason Khan was called was because M Al Fayed had made all these allegations that Di Had been murdered, because she was with a Muslim boyfriend.. and the point was that she'd been dating a Muslim boyfriend Khan, for quite a while and hadn't been killled because of that. (nor had he).  And Fayed was exaggerating the importance of his son's relationship with Diana, but the Truth was that Di had been involved with Khan up to fairly soon before her holidays and only broke it off finally when she started a romance with Dodi. As her previous lover, Khan could (distasteful as it was) testify about various things in Di's private life that made Fayed's claims look dubious.. for example the hints that Di was pregnant.. and he pointed out that she had been meticulous about taking her pills..  And I cant' see how anyone could see such a thorough investigation as not good enough...

[Limabeany]

So the purpose of the inquest was not to find out the truth but to disprove Dodi's father's claims...  :hmm: