The Murder of Princess Diana
- JB Ehrlich: Special Report (mirror)
[The] death of Princess Diana may have its nexus more to the ambulance ride and the treatment during that ride than to the accident itself. With billions of people throughout the planet interested in her death and the cause thereof, it is a deep mystery of why the focus of investigators and media circumvent this critical area of inquiry, which paradoxically seemed to be a mystery to the French Interior Minister and the Police Chief of Paris as well. Our mystery ties in as to why a VIP may have been traveling without a police escort in an ambulance taking, without acceptable explanation, one hour to get to a hospital. The answers have been to transport the injured Diana safely and to "avoid bumps." In that case, it seems every other ambulance throughout the world operates on a different basis, in recognizing a need to get an injured person quickly to a hospital; here, where a team of doctors, awaiting Diana's arrival, may have saved her. To our minds, and the minds of any reasonable man or woman, the one hour trip is inexcusable and carries compelling questions which demand detailed answers.
- And (also mirrored on this site) Page 2 of this report.
- The Diana Forum — Why did it take an hour to get Diana to the hospital? Why did the ambulance stop for ten minutes when just 600 yards away from it?
- Joe Vialls: Prince Charles Implicated in Murder of Princess Diana (Mirrored on this site.)
Logic dictates Princess Di was deliberately frightened into writing the incriminating letter before her death, but science suggests that she did not write the letter at all.
- Diana — was it an accident or was she killed?
- The 'MI6 factor' in the murder of Princess Diana
- US Spy Tapes Reveal Diana Was Pregnant
- Princess Diana's Death: Did MI6 Kill Her?
- Princess Diana Was The Target
- Diana's Grave Secret: Police To Probe Charles' Murder Plot
It was clear that with opinion polls showing over 90% of Britons think Diana was murdered, something would have to be done to mount at least a semblance of justice. And a semblance is what we have here.
The appointment of an already knighted senior police officer, Sir John Stevens to the investigation, indicates that the whole exercise is a sham. Furthermore, Sir John has assigned Commander David Armond to lead the inquiry. Commander Armond is a member of the Met's anti-terrorist branch which is a very political position ...
All this is reminiscent of the case of the murdered weapons inspector David Kelly. The British establishment simply engaging in the usual sham of investigating itself.
- Document says Diana's car was replacement
The car in the crash that killed Princess Diana in Paris was a last-minute replacement either meant as a media diversion or because the vehicle she was supposed to take failed to start, according to British government documents released Tuesday [2005-03-15].
- Xymphora on Henri Paul's mysterious payments:
Henri Paul, the chauffeur who died in the Paris car crash that also killed Princess Di, received £75,000 in the weeks before the crash, over three times his annual salary, mostly from British banks. Former MI6 officer Richard Tomlinson has sworn an affidavit in which he declared that he believed that Henri Paul was engaged as an informant for MI6 reporting on happenings in the Ritz Hotel.
- THE MURDER OF PRINCESS DIANA
So here's a possible scenario (plausible but unproven): Diana was pregnant by Dodi. The US/British power elite either knew this (perhaps her doctor's office was bugged) or were afraid it might be true. The prospect of someone of Arab descent (and perhaps a Muslim too) being in line to the British throne was intolerable to the British establishment, and the Americans were concerned about what they saw as Diana's populist political activities (campaigning for an abolition of land mines and so on, with maybe the international arms trade targeted next) so the decision was made to eliminate her. The Mercedes in which she was supposed to leave the Ritz Hotel with Dodi failed to start (as intended by the plotters) and a replacement was produced. The brakes on the replacement car had been sabotaged. Henri Paul, their driver, sped off, followed by paparazzi, one of whom was in contact by phone with the driver of a white Fiat. The Fiat entered the Pont d'Alma Tunnel as Diana's car approached it. Somewhere in the tunnel, with the white Fiat just in front of the Mercedes, a powerful flashgun, aimed at Paul's windscreen, was set off. This blinded Paul, and he hit the brakes, which did not work properly, ensuring that the car would crash. But the crash did not kill Diana. Much to the chagrin of the plotters, she was still alive. An ambulance (and a French doctor provided by the plotters) was brought up and took her away after a delay of forty minutes, taking her slowly to the Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, 4 miles away. During this trip the doctor performed an abortion (so that evidence of pregnancy would not be found in an autopsy), and something was done to ensure that Diana's life could not be saved upon arrival at the hospital. The potential problem was thus removed.
The British coroner's inquest into the death of Princess Diana lasted six months and came to an end in April 2008. As the jury retired to consider its verdict ...
The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, said there was nothing to support allegations that Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh and husband of Queen Elizabeth II, "ordered Diana's execution," nor that Britain's secret intelligence service, MI6, or any other government agency played any part in the 1997 car crash that killed her and her lover, Mr. Fayed's son Dodi.
"There is no evidence that the Duke of Edinburgh ordered Diana's execution, and there is no evidence that the secret intelligence service or any other government agency organized it," he said. The five possible verdicts he outlined available to the 11-member jury included unlawful killing through "the gross negligence" of the driver, Henri Paul, and "grossly negligent driving" by the paparazzi pursuing the couple. [The three other verdicts permitted were: gross negligence by both driver and paparazzi, accident, and insufficient evidence.] But, he added, "It is not open to you to find that Diana and Dodi were unlawfully killed in a staged accident."
— Coroner Rejects Conspiracy Theories in Diana's Death, New York Times, 2008-04-01
It is true that no evidence was presented (beyond unsubstantiated speculation) that Diana's death was due to actions of Prince Philip or any British or French government agency (of course not). Lack of such evidence, however, does not imply that her death can be attributed solely to "gross negligence" on the part of Henri Paul and the paparazzi (which was the verdict that the jurors returned). The coroner should have permitted a sixth possible verdict — unlawful killing by persons unknown — but to risk this would have run counter to the British Establishment's fervent desire to suppress persistent suspicions that Diana was murdered.
Evidence was not presented that Prince Philip or MI6 ordered the killing, but evidence was presented, by the coroner himself, that cast doubt on the official French assertion that the car crash was due to Henri Paul's being drunk.
The Princess Diana inquest jury was ordered yesterday to consider whether French scientists faked controversial test results showing driver Henri Paul was drunk.
Lord Justice Scott Baker, the coroner, pointed to doubts over the reliability of the results used to blame Mr Paul for the crash that killed Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed.
And he warned: "Did the wrong samples just happen to get into the bottles for which alcohol was tested or was there some other mix-up, accidental or deliberate? That is something you will have to decide."
The coroner had to halt his summing up yesterday after the French sent him an email about blood samples from the body of Mr Paul, acting security manager at the Ritz Hotel in Paris. ... A French investigation into the couple's deaths blamed Mr Paul, arguing that he was driving too fast while high on a cocktail of drink and prescription drugs when he crashed their Mercedes in the Alma underpass in Paris on August 31 1997.
The authorities reached their conclusion after tests on blood and other samples from his body appeared to show that he was three times over the French drink-drive limit.
But Dodi's father, Mohamed Al Fayed, has always believed that the samples were faked or switched, pointing to question marks over the labelling of vials of blood, missing samples and doubts over DNA tests.
The coroner ... pointed to evidence that Mr Paul had definitely drunk two 5cl shots of Ricard "the equivalent of four single whiskies" in the Ritz Hotel in the two hours before he left on the fateful journey that also killed him..
But that would have still left him under the limit. It was possible, he said, Mr Paul had drunk more in the three hours he was off duty earlier in the evening.
The test results suggested he must have drunk the equivalent of up to six more Ricards. But the coroner said CCTV footage and most witnesses had suggested he showed no sign of being worse for wear.
It was regrettable, he said, that the French scientists, Prof Dominique Lecomte and Dr Gilbert Pepin, who tested the samples, had refused to testify to the inquest and answer severe criticism of the shoddy way they labelled and recorded their results.
He highlighted the inexplicably high levels of carbon monoxide in Mr Paul's blood. "If the carbon monoxide readings must be wrong, what about the alcohol readings?" he asked. ... The jury ... were also told other questions remained a mystery.
They include: How Henri Paul came to have such a large amount of money in his bank account, where he was in the three hours off duty, and who drove the white Fiat Uno that tests showed caught the Mercedes a glancing blow before it crashed into a concrete pillar.
— Are Diana Driver's Blood Samples Fake, Coroner Asks Jury, Daily Mail, 2008-04-02
The high level of carbon monoxide in the blood sample is consistent with the following conjecture: This blood sample was taken from someone who had committed suicide, first preparing themselves by consuming a large amount of alcohol, then gassing themselves. The doctors were ordered to submit a blood sample with a high alcohol content, overlooking (perhaps) that the only one which happened to be at hand also had a high carbon monoxide content.
Another "mystery" is why Diana was not rushed to hospital, where her life might have been saved. The crash occurred at about 12:25 am and Diana was freed from the wreck at 1:00 am. She was put in an ambulance but the French doctor, Jean-Marc Martino, treated her there for forty minutes before it set off for the Pitie-Salpetriere hospital, where Diana died. The inquest was read a statement by the ambulance driver, Michel Massebeuf, that, rather than travelling quickly (the ambulance had a police motorcycle escort) he was ordered to drive slowly. And before reaching the hospital the ambulance stopped.
The court heard how the ambulance had to come to a complete stop a short distance from the hospital when Diana's blood pressure dropped, prompting fears her heart would stop.
Massebeuf said: "In front of the Jardin des Plantes, the doctor asked me to stop. We stopped for about five minutes in order for him to be able to provide treatment that required a complete absence of movement. We continued our journey without having to stop again."
— Ambulance driver defends slow Diana journey, The Guardian (UK), 2007-11-14
If Diana's blood pressure dropped (and her heart was still beating) would not this have been a reason to go the short distance to the hospital as quickly as possible? Or did the French doctor realize, as the ambulance neared the hospital, that they would arrive there before he had finished what he was supposed to do? And what was this "treatment that required a complete absence of movement"? Removal of evidence that Diana was pregnant, perhaps?
But what if she was not pregnant (had, perhaps, had a miscarriage)? Then if the task of the doctor in the ambulance was to remove evidence of pregnancy then he has a problem, because he can't find any. That might explain why he ordered the complete stop just before reaching the hospital, so he could make sure he was not overlooking anything (there'd be hell to pay if the post-mortem discovered evidence of pregnancy). The French doctor, Jean-Marc Martino, should be questioned (under oath) as to exactly what he did during that 5-minute stop just before reaching the hospital, and why it "required a complete absence of movement". As of May 2011 this has not been done.
Princess Diana documentary to screen at CannesWhat is it that the British Establishment does not want the British people to know? That they suppressed evidence indicating that Diana was targeted for assassination (perhaps to eliminate the possibility of a Muslim being in line for the British throne)? And that when she did not die in the car wreck in the Paris tunnel she was allowed to die before her deliberately slow-moving ambulance was permitted to reach the not-so-distant hospital where her life might have been saved?Keith Allen will debut his controversial film, 'the inquest of the inquest' of Princess Diana, at the festival [on 13 May, 2011] as [his film] Unlawful Killing will not be shown in UK cinemas.
A copy of the Serendipity website is available on CD-ROM. Details here.
Serendipity Home Page