The anniversary of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales has just passed. Far from beig solved the mysteries surrounding her death deepen.
Diana - The Questions
At this time of year there is inevitably a flurry of speculation about the bizarre circumstances surrounding the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. Did her death occur simply because of a tragic accident, was there negligence on the part of British security people or the Al Fayed family or was there a conspiracy to remove this woman who had become a threat to many vested interests. No new facts have come to light and speculation is pointless but the continuing jamboree of bad taste surrounding the dead Princess could be ended if only the authorities were prepared to answer some rather inconvenient questions. After all, conspiracy theories feed on unanswered questions and people who have nothing to hide need not fear the truth. So let's start asking :-
The mysteries of the Ambulance
; records show that the no ambulance was dispatched to the scene of the accident by the Parisian ambulance authority and yet an emergency vehicle arrived almost immediately after the crash. Had the vehicle been dispatched through normal channels there is no ambulance depot or assembly point close enough to the scene to allow for its arrival so quickly. There is also the question of where the ambulance went after delivering Diana to the hospital. One would expect that in the case of a suspicious death the crew would be detained for interview by the police but that does not appear to have been the case. And why, after collecting Diana from the scene of the accident did the vehicle stop at the roadside for several minutes before carrying on to a hospital. It has been suggested that the Princess was so badly injured it was not safe to drive with her on board. If the situation was so critical that brings us to the next mystery, the case of The Disappearing Hospitals.
The Hospital at which Diana was eventually treated was neither the closest to the scene of the accident nor the best equipped to deal with seriously injured A & E cases. There were five (yes, FIVE) hospitals closer and the emergency crew, who if they were trained paramedics working for the French Health Authority in Paris could not have been unaware of the existence of these. Even if the crew by some mischance did not know of the hospitals, ambulances are instructed via a central command and control system. Furthermore, the crew would have had to drive past two of the hospitals to deliver their passenger to the place where she died. Was the driver as drunk as the chauffeur driving Diana and Dodi Al Fayed was alleged to be or was he just blind, because I know it is rather hard to miss the signs for a hospital on French roads.
The closest hospital to the scene is actually one of the most modern in France and has what is acknowledged to be one of the most advanced emergency departments in the world. Surely if the Princess could have been saved that is the place that could have saved her.
The Drunken Chauffeur
. Henri Paul, the driver has been made the scapegoat in many peoples' eyes, particularly by those writers and journalists who make a living from debunking conspiracy theories. Such writers are frauds of course because their rebuttals of any accusations merely rest on pointing out the lack of evidence to support a challenge to the official version of events. We should always remember that if the establishment wish to cover up something they have the means at their disposal to destroy evidence and disappear witnesses.
Henri Paul has been described as a "recovering alcoholic" yet people who knew him insist he never had a drink problem and medical records that have not been conveniently lost or destroyed make no mention of a drink problem.
The official inquest suggested Mr Paul had in his bloodstream enough alcohol to render even the most hardened drinker visibly drunk and incapable of walking steadily.
Can the authorities seriously ask us to believe that Dodi Al Fayed and Princess Diana, two intelligent and rational individuals would get into a car about to be driven by a drunken man?
Records from the post mortem show that on top of the alcohol Mr Paul's blood samples also contained an unusually high amount of carbon monoxide. Leaving aside the alcohol, the carbon monoxide would have been sufficient to lay low a big and extremely fit man. And yet this man, paralytic with drink and disoriented by carbon monoxide managed to leave his quarters, drive the car to the rear of the hotel and convince not only Dodi and Diana but also The Bodyguard a highly trained member of the British security forces that he was fit to take the wheel.
Bodyguards are responsible for protecting their charges from all risks, including over - enthusiastic fans, mad axemen, paparazzi and drunken chauffeurs. No trained bodyguard would have allowed the person being escorted to get into a car if there was the slightest suspicion that the driver was drunk or in any way likely to pose a risk. Defenders of the official version have said the Mr Paul was not Diana and Dodi's regular driver and was not known to either them or the bodyguard. All the more reason then that the guard would have checked him very carefully.
The official report records that Diana would not have died had she been wearing a seatbelt. As stated above the task of a bodyguard is to protect their charge from ALL risks. Is it possible that on the night a Parisian Ambulance Driver forgot where all the cities main hospitals were and a recovering alcoholic fell off the wagon while suffering from carbon monoxide poisoning, the bodyguard responsible for protecting the accidents most prominent victim suffered some kind of breakdown and forgot all his training. We do know the man suffered total memory loss but that was as a result, we are told, of head injuries sustained when The Car hit the barrier.
Mercedes Benz have a reputation for building structurally safe and reliable cars and naturally as one of the world's leading companies they were concerned that one of their products had been involved in a fatal accident involving such high - profile people. Driver error or mechanical failure are the only reasons put forward for the accident in official reports. One might think, that being the case, that a thorough examination of the wreck might throw some light on what actually happened, in fact in any other case a forensic examination of the car by automotive accident specialists would be part of the investigation process. There is no indication in documents that any such examination by independent experts took place and requests from Mercedes Benz to be allowed access to the wreck so that their engineers could examine it have been ignored.
Here is a reputable company wishing to act in a responsible way and yet they are treated shoddily. Is this simply due to the ineptitude of the authorities in Britain and France or must we again wonder if something is being covered up. Eyewitness reports would certainly suggest that is the case especially as witnesses have been systematically discredited on the flimsiest of evidence.
More than one person testifies to seeing a very bright flash and hearing a bang at the time of the accident. CCTV cameras cover the underpass where the crash happened. It would be very hard to disguise a bright flash on CCTV recordings. Apparently there was no coverage in that part of the underpass at the time of the accident making it very difficult to prove there was a flash which may have temporarily blinded the driver. It also makes it impossible to prove the existence of the small white car observed speeding away from the scene. Again the official version insists there is no proof the car ever existed. Unofficially, one of the later discredited witnesses had a registration number for the car. It is now impossible to prove that the car was anywhere near the accident scene at the time but rather strange that it turned up as a burned out wreck in a field hundreds of miles away a few weeks later. Even stranger is the fact that the alleged owner of the car committed suicide shortly after the accident.
Perhaps the most strange of all the strange circumstances surrounding Diana's death is the almost indecent haste with which the body was embalmed and prepared for burial. So great was the rush that no post mortem was carried out. Now in Britain and America, Canada, Germany, Sweden….. and France in the case of deaths in a road accident a post mortem examination is routine. The embalming process would destroy much of the forensic evidence that might have helped establish the true cause of death. It would also have destroyed signs of pregnancy; remember, witnesses who cannot be discredited have sworn Diana had promised that on her return from the vacation that was to end her life she would "make an announcement that would shock the world."
These are the questions that must be answered before the unfortunate Princess can truly be left to rest in peace. All that remains here is to ask who might benefit from these questions being left unanswered.
The British Monarchy certainly do not emerge from the treatment of the mother of a future King with any credit. Charles was openly conducting an affair with the then married Camilla Parker - Bowles before he became engaged to Diana. That affair continued throughout his marriage to the mother of his children. The Mother of Prince Charles' children - could she have been allowed to marry a Muslim, thus giving the Al Fayed family access to and influence over the Princes? Could the Monarchy have withstood another scandal after the embarrassments of the previous decade? Was Diana simply too popular, after all her ex - husband was at that time the most hated and ridiculed man in Britain. Diana was the people's Princess, nobody ever referred to her as anything but Princess Di. even though she was no longer officially a member of the royal family. Her natural warmth and sense of fun, the way she put people at ease, her gift of empathy and her visible and very human flaws made the other Royals seem aloof and snobbish, an anachronism.
But the Royal Family were not the only people Diana had upset. Though famous for her campaigning against the use of landmines she was in fact an effective and energetic campaigner against the arms trade with the third world. Not just dealers in landmines, but also those who trade in Kalshnikovs, Rocket Propelled Grenades, SAMs, chemical weapons, mortars, shells, bullets and anything with which one human being can damage another were feeling their profits squeezed by the attention she was drawing to their obscene trade. These people exist in a shadowy world that sometimes seems to be outside the law; in most major industrial countries there are people at the heart of government who stand to lose a great deal if this trade is exposed.
And finally of course, the drug manufacturers. Not just AIDS but hepatitis, malaria and numerous other diseases that are epidemic in the third world are spreading simply because governments of poor countries and aid agencies cannot afford the prices the patent holders demand for their products. Again a lot of people stood to lose a great deal because of the work Diana was set upon doing.
These then are the unanswered questions and the reasons we must keep asking them. It is an unfortunate trend in world affairs that the public are more than ever prepared to accept the slanted view of events presented by their governments. This situation is not healthy for democracy; the rich and powerful must be accountable and must be held to account whenever something happens that leaves a rotten stench lingering in the air.
The events around Diana's death have been stinking for seven years now, if there is nothing rotten in the story that stink would have dispersed long ago.
Copyright © 2004, Ian R. Thorpe