Credit Munch

Get 20% off your bill at Pizza Express

Navigation - link to other main sections from here

Skip Navigation

From The Times

October 3, 2007

Inquest jury told: ‘Diana decision is yours and yours alone’

image shows the aftermath of the crash which lead to the deaths of Diana & Dodi Al Fayed

Alan Hamilton

Read the full transcripts of the Diana inquest

Six women and five men found themselves in a jury box yesterday at the start of an inquest that will take a six-month bite out of their lives. Before them in a crowded courtroom sat the principal players in a drama that has seized most of the world for a decade.

It was for Lord Justice Scott Baker, coroner at the inquests of Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed, to steady their nerves and to inject a sense of purpose that must not be swayed by the millions of words and pictures published over the past ten years, nor by the knowledge that the eyes of the world will be upon them.

Now, at last, the final act is under way and 11 ordinary souls drawn at random from the West London electoral register will have the final say on whether the deaths were the result of a conspiracy to murder or a simple, sad case of drink-driving.

The hearing will touch the highest in the land, and there is an attempt to summon the very highest to give evidence in one of her own courts.

There was drama from the start, with the court being shown a photograph of the Princess in a leopard-print swimsuit and pictures of the crash scene, and with Mohamed Al Fayed, Dodi’s father and the chairman of Harrods, provocatively complaining that the coroner was already showing bias.

It had happened a long time ago, Lord Justice Scott Baker, the third coroner to take on the case, told his new jury in a tone of sympathetic apology; memories had faded or distorted and witnesses vanished or died. But the whole rigmarole must be gone through again to satisfy English law, and they must cast from their minds anything that they had heard, read or seen about the infamous crash.

The jury would be in the public eye, “but you must not let that deter youfrom your job. There is no reason why the facts should overawe you.”Whatever theories had been propounded over the past decade, the decision on how Diana and Dodi died was “yours and yours alone”. He cautioned them against private research on the internet. They must reach a verdict purely on the evidence in court.

From a panel of 25 brought into court, the final jury was selected by ballot. The coroner told them: “Most, if not all, of you will remember where you were when you heard about the death of the Princess of Wales.”

He reminded them that they were not in a criminal court; no one present had been charged with a crime. Their task was to discover how the couple died, not to apportion blame.

Lord Justice Scott Baker, with the agreement of the legal teams — 25 lawyers and their clerks — vowed that the hearing would be completed within six months.

At one side of the court sat Mr Al Fayed and his aides. As far away as possible sat Lady Sarah McCorquodale, the Princess’s sister, and Major Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, private secretary to Prince William and Prince Harry. Centre stage was taken by Michael Mansfield, QC, representing Mr Al Fayed, and Ian Burnett, QC, counsel for the inquest.

Finally, the coroner read a 150-page statement outlining what he said were the undisputed facts and highlighting areas where contention might arise.

It took little more than an hour for contention to surface. During the lunchtime adjournment Michael Cole, the bouffant-haired spokesman for Mr Al Fayed, said that his master was surprised at the tone and the contents of the statement.

“His lawyers had been led to believe that it would be a brief outline of the uncontested facts of the case. At an early stage, highly contentious and disputed material was introduced by the coroner when this should be presented to the jury in due course.”

Claiming that the statement “could present an appearance of bias, whether or not this was intended”, the Al Fayed legal team objected to the coroner’s description of the speed of the Mercedes in the tunnel, the number of vehicles in the tunnel and comments that Henri Paul, the chauffeur who also died in the crash, is said to have made to photographers at the Ritz.

In his statement the coroner said: “Mr Al Fayed maintains that the crash was not an accident but murder in the furtherance of a conspiracy by the Establishment, in particular His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, who used the security services to carry it out.” He said Mr Al Fayed had spoken of murder within minutes of the crash and that it had remained his primary allegation ever since.

He showed the jury a photograph of Diana in a leopard-print swimsuit during her Mediterranean holiday as a guest of the Al Fayeds, pointing out it had been taken before Dodi joined the party. He seemed to suggest that she was not pregnant but a 36-year-old woman struggling to resume her youthful figure. “I am unaware of any suggestion that she and Dodi were close before the holiday.”

Then he showed the jury another image, taken by a paparazzo through the windscreen of the Mercedes and showing Diana and Dodi, which is sometimes claimed to have been taken in the Alma tunnel. He said that the picture was taken outside the Ritz Hotel in Paris before they set off.

Rene Delorm, Dodi Fayed’s butler, will give evidence that he saw Mr Fayed stroking the Princess’s tummy as he bent before her on one knee, the coroner said. She whispered, ‘Yes’, Mr Delorm will say, although he could not be sure what she was consenting to. But witnesses close to the Princess will attest that she had no intention of marrying Mr Fayed, the coroner said.

The inquest also heard of an allegation, set down in a letter to her then butler, Paul Burrell, that the Prince of Wales was planning to kill or to injure Diana so that he could marry Tiggy Legge-Bourke, former nanny to his children. Diana shared her concerns with Lord Mishcon, one of her lawyers, during a meeting at Kensington Palace in October 1995.

The jury was told that in a note of the meeting Lord Mischon wrote: “Her Royal Highness (HRH) said she had been informed by reliable sources whom she did not wish to name, that A, the Queen would be abdicating in April and the Prince of Wales would assume the throne.” She feared that efforts would be made to “get rid of her, via some accident in her car such as prepared brake failure”. The note went on: “I could not believe what I was hearing.”

The note also said that Diana had told Lord Mishcon that the ideal situation would be for the Prince of Wales to abdicate for Prince William.

The hearing continues.

— A series of complaints lodged by Mohamed Al Fayed at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in 2002 were thrown out last night by a chamber of seven judges. He claimed that the French police failed in their duty to investigate the deaths. They said that he had failed to show that the French proceedings lacked fairness. The key issues

The key issues

In July Lord Justice Scott Baker released a “list of likely issues” that could arise, including:

— Whether driver error caused the collision, and whether a Fiat Uno was involved

— Whether the actions of the paparazzi contributed to the crash

— Whether the road/tunnel layout was inherently dangerous

— Whose decision it was that the Princess of Wales and Dodi Fayed should leave by Ritz rear entrance

— Why Henri Paul had so much money in his possession

— Whether the Princess of Wales’s life would have been saved if she had reached hospital sooner

— Whether she was pregnant

— Whether the evidence of Richard Tomlinson [the former M16 agent who claimed that Henri Paul was a spy and that there had been M16 officers at the British Embassy in Paris before the crash] is relevant

— Whether correspondence belonging to the Princess of Wales (including some from the Duke of Edinburgh) has vanished

Who’s who

Lord Justice Scott Baker, the coroner The fourth coroner to deal with the case took over in June when the previous judge stepped down after the High Court overturned her decision not to hold the inquest in front of a jury

Michael Mansfield, QC Mohamed Al Fayed’s barrister has been a key figure in some of the most controversial legal cases – he represented the Birmingham Six and Barry George, the man convicted of murdering the TV presenter Jill Dando

Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton The private secretary to Prince William and Prince Harry will be at the inquest, although they are not expected to be called as witnesses

Lady Sarah McCorquodale The Princess’s older sister is representing the Spencer family

Richard Keen, QC Representing the parents of Henri Paul, the chauffeur at the wheel when the Mercedes crashed

Ian Croxford, QC Representing Frank Klein, president of the Ritz Hotel, Paris, and an interested party because Paul was a hotel employee

Ian Burnett, QC Later this week the counsel for the inquest will show jurors a 3-D computerised recreation of events in the tunnel

diana was such a lovely lady had every thing going for her as i really liked her but now diana is at peace now let her rest

michelle cheeseman, merredin, australia

I don't believe anyone intended deliberately to kill Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayad. However, I am not prepared to accept that their death was just an accident, as the authorities - in France as in Britain - would have us believe. The coroner's jury need to show how they died - and that means showing why the Mercedes crashed into the pillar in the tunnel. Speed alone would not have killed them; 65 mph (104 kph) is over the limit for the underpass but not that excessive for a well designed top-of -the range Merc. Unless an external factor caused it to crash. Henri Paul was said to be over the alcohol limit (bear in mind the French limit is much lower than the UK one) ; where did he do his drinking ? So far, I believe, only a couple of drinks have been accounted for. Unless these questions are answered in full, then an open verdict is the only proper conclusion.

David, Ligneyrac, France

I too was wondering about this, but I have found out that the usual number of jurors for a Coroner's Court is between 7 and 11, there are 12 jurors for a Crown or High Court case.

Mandy, Warrington, Cheshire

Can somebody explain why there are 11 jurors and not the usual 12?

John Mander, London,

I do not think we will ever hear all the evident if someone did kill them and stranger thing have happened also I think Mr Fayed would give all his money for Justice I wish I had someone like that on my side

Robert Nisbett, Essex, UK

"I do not know anything much about Al-Fayed save that he is a father who has lost his son.
His son is dead! I repeat.
What else should he do than what he is doing?"

What he should do is get on with life. Accidents happen and sane people accept them. If he did not have the money to throw around but was the parent of an ordinary man who had died in a car accident he would have no option. He is using his money to manipulate the situation.

And what is the relevance of whether Diana was pregnant? No one is alleging she died of that. It could hardly have caused her to be targetted since no one knew, including seemingly her own body, - the autopsy showed no sign of it.

alexandria, Sheffield, UK

I have only one thing to say SEAT BELTS!!!

Mike, Lancaster, UK

It is possible ( though very strange ) that the rear seat belts were not in working order on that night.

M.J, Lancs., England.

I agree with the comments made that this fresh inquest is a farce. Mr Fayed has a longstanding grievance against the UK establishment owing to their refusal to grant him citizenship. Add to that his guilt that he provided the drunken driver who was to cause the crash, and you get some idea as to why he has spent the last ten years being a thorn in the establishment's side.

Dave H, Brighton UK,

arthur, some people are sheep who believe everything the government tells them. on the other hand, some people are cycnical crackpots who see conspiracies everywhere.

fyi, there were wmds in iraq (this according to the un inspectors, not bush and blair), programmes ready to reactivate and an avowed intention to have more wmds. and let's not forget that the biggest propagator of the "myth" of iraqi weapons was saddam himself. and would you claim it's a myth he was persecuting his people?

you response is no more normal than the sheep, I'm afraid.

jem, london, uk

Arthur from Newcastle

Their are two ways to be a "sheep"

One is to believe everything you are told.
The other is to disbelieve everything you are told.

Either way ... you dont actually have to think for yourself.

David, florence, SC

As Arthur of Newcastle rightly says some peope will believe anything that the government feeds tham with.

K Urban, London , UK

Let us put things into perspective. Irrespective of the outcome of this inquest, the conspiracy theory will persist. The fact of the matter is injustice in our judicial system occurs all the time because of corruption or incompetence on the part of the police , judges, lawyers or members of the jury or worse still the suspects just manage to silence all potential witnesses. We just have to live with the fact that sometimes, by chance incidents of miscarriage of justice are discovered while some innocent people are convicted with no chance of clearing their names ever. Of course it is so much harder for the general public to find out what actually has happened if some how the authorities are implicated in malpractices. The Official Secret Act or 'matter of national security' will ensure that those responsible will not be revealed or matters will only come to night after they cannot cause any embarrassment to the people in power.

Wing, Poole, UK

There are certain important facts that are vital to this case.
a. Knowing that Princess Diana was seriously involved with
Dodi Fayed, would and did the Duke of Edin. make the call
to have something done.
b, Clearly,there was a white Fiat that hit their car and may well
have caused the accident,this becomes far more interesting
when one reads that this car was found burnt near woods
outside Paris,and the driver was killed.
c. The car they were supposed to use (a new car)
mysteriously would not work.The car was under tight
security,yet a finger print found was unknown.
Henri Paul hardly appeared drunk...
d. Why was'nt there French protection for her..a first for a Royal
Member.Why didnt the cameras work in the tunnel,why were
French radio frequences off the air.
These, and other facts ,are likely to throw fresh light on what can only be described as an incredibly coincidental that it be
them..of all people.

E.Lewis, Los Angeles, California

It would improve the standing of our country if our media now left this to the coroner and his inquest jury. We know they have said it will take six outrageous months (how lucrative for the lawyers) to talk this all through. In the meantime, we do not need to hear every piece of evidence until after the verdict, thank you.

Who said let her rest in peace now?

Roz Venner, St Neots, England

I doubt that the government was behind the accident, they could've staged a better way buti don't believe either that the driver was drunk, any of the 3 passengers would've noticed & said something. My guess is it was an unfortunate accident, they wanted to escape the paparazzi's & had no seat belts on & undoubtedly the chase did contribute to the crashing. Had they just drove along at a normal speed & allowed the paparazzis to tag along, nothing would've happened. I find fayed's allegation that Prince philip ordered it ridiculous.

S A, Cairo,

The medias should consider diana's family feelings.They shouldn't say these again,though we still remember it

hy, wuhu, china

cleopatra, you don't appear to understand what will happen at the inquest. no doubt, whether wearing a seatbelt would have saved lives will be discussed during the inquest process (and so your comment that it should have been a key issue is based on a faulty assumption that it won't be), but that isn't going to affect the findings of the jury concerning whether it was an accident. inquest verdicts are very vague, by nature. unless something absolutely incredible is thrown up that has not so far come to light, you can guarantee that the verdict will be accidental death.

it's up to the media to highlight the seatbelt issue. and, given the track record over the last ten years of knowing that three of the occupants weren't wearing seatbelts, you'd have to say the chances aren't good. the media will be chasing conspiracty theories and malicious gossip as usual.

jem, london, uk

For me, the most scary part of the inquest, is the sheer number of people who believe everything the government tells them to believe.

I guess thats how the government got away with the iraq war, by telling sheep, I mean people, that there was WMD's there. And like good sheep, I mean, people, they bought it. Hook, line and sinker.

Some people just like to believe whatever lies they are told, and get on with their lives.

Arthur, Newcastle,

I am so in agreement with the above. Can we really sink so low and believe the Royal Family would assasin the mother of the future king in such a way or at all?!
Clearly Al Fayed feels guilty as it happened with his car, his driver and in connection with his hotel furthermore he the uses his guilt to throw dirt at our establishement. If he does not like it why is he still living here?

caroline, London,

PS - and as is evident from the comments on this article, another key issue for the Inquest should have been - whether the deaths of the Princess and Mr Dodi Fayed were caused at least in part from their failure to protect themselves by wearing seatbelts.

Cleopatra, Crouch End,

About time someone mentioned that this woman may still be alive if she had worn her seat belt. Perhaps a better use of Diana's 'memory' would be that speed kills and clunk click every trip.

susan james, Oxford, UK

Al FayedÂ´s son, his hotel, his bar, his car, his driver, his long time campaign against the establishment (Private Eyes passim), his guilt, his continuing to waste our time....enough already!

Ian Smith, Sotogrande, Spain

well said John in Harrogate

NK, London,

Is there no respite from the clammering of the great unwashed? A minority of silly vacuous people cried their eyes out for this woman. A woman who tragically died young, that's all. She achieved very little apart from self publicity with a sucession of men who we can assume she used to goad the Royal Family with because of her perceived slight by Charles. Ten years later this nonsense persists. Please get a life and move on. And send the bill to Harrods!

Marc, London,

and who told Diana and Dody not to buckle up? Mysterious eh?

robert b, vancouver, canada

Is there no end to this torture?

edwina rigby, blackburn, England

Good.

Madelaine L Fayette, Purbeck, England

Please, let us remember Diane's qualities and leave the non provable alone. Enough is enough.

Carmen , San Juan , Puerto Rico

What a lot of poisonous commentators!
I do not know anything much about Al-Fayed save that he is a father who has lost his son.
His son is dead! I repeat.
What else should he do than what he is doing?
Do you think he should just accept the words of politicians? The media? The British secret services?
Come on- what planet are you from?
The De Menezez trial the most well documented case of state murder, ever- tried under 'health and safety' Like someone slipped on a wet floor.
There are over a million innocent people dead in the ME because politicians, secret service and press lied.
We shall soon be a party to another Four million innocents murdered in Iran because of more political/ media lies about "wiped off the map"- "Holocaust denial" "Atomic bomb making" "AlQuedda supporting" All blatant, provanble lies. Then evincing concern for the taxpayer?! How about the cost of the wars?
Green issues? How green is the war machine?
Wake up little people stop trusting & get one!

John Bayldon, Harrogate,

Ignoring Mr Fayed's rantings, how is it that Diana feared she was going to be killed in a car crash before it actually happened? And fearing that, she wasn't wearing her seat belt?
If it's an accident, Mr Fayed should pay the costs, if not then it must be the Crown.
I feel sorry for the Princes, having to go through all of this again!

mike cameron, shenzhen, china

If the establishment did want to kill Diana, why stage a car crash.

If murder, or assasination to give it another term, was the aim a car crash is somewhat chancey is it not?. I am sure that Henri Paul did not commit suicide and therefore would have tried to avoid the accident. But he was drunk, well that was fortunate or was that planned as well.
It should be remebered that the body guard, who was the only one wearing a seat belt survived.

It has also been considered that if Diana and Dodi had been wearing the seat belts, they would also have probably survived.

Much simpler to poison her.

I understand that the relatives are still distraught but surely enough is enough. If the inquest finds an accident occured then anyone who suggests otherwise should be prosecuted, especially Mr Fayed, an dthe Daily Express unles sthey can produce proof.

Let the woman RIP.

Cliford Bury, New Territories, Hong Kong

Diana Internet Court... every case scenario explored...??

BENEDICT DAVEY, BOURNEMOUTH, DORSET

Is there any way the coroner can award costs at this inquest?
I don't see why the taxpayer should fund any more of El Fayed's paranoia.

Mike Bibby, St Albans, England -not EU

Perhaps Mr Al Fayed should be charged the Â£10m this inquest is reputed to cost if the jury find that cause of death was an accident. And if not, the taxpayer should naturally pick the tab and Mr Al Fayed be given British citizenship

Cleopatra, Crouch End,

I hope that Mr Fayed is going to foot the bill for this inquest, as it will return the same verdict that has already been reached, & that is one of a dreadfull accident caused by his drunken driver.
Also, please, please, please can someone have the guts to stand up & say that if Dodi & Diana had been wearing seatbelts they would both be alive!
How Mr Fayed reckons the lack of wearing belts was the work of conspiricy would be interesting to hear.
This whole inquest is a farcical waste of money.
One more thing, when the case is settled as one of an accident, can Mr Fayed be escorted out of this country please unless he gives a full & unconditional apology to all the people he has accused of conspiricy.

Pete , St Albans, England