The death of Diana: an update

In this article I amplify and update my account of the crash that killed Diana, Princess of Wales, Dodi Fayed and Henri Paul which appeared in Lobster 37. Since it was written there have been a number of interesting developments – the publication of Trevor Rees-Jones’ book; James Hewitt’s impromptu recreation of the fatal car journey; Mohamed Al Fayed accusing the Duke of Edinburgh of being the mastermind behind a plot to murder Diana and Dodi; and the possibility of inquests on Diana and Dodi taking place.

A correction

A significant correction to the article needs to be made. When the findings of the French Public Prosecutor were announced in September 1999 most newspapers implied that they were publishing either the full report or that they had seen the full report and were publishing extracts from it. This does not appear to be strictly true as the French authorities have since stated that the report is confidential and could only be seen by employees of the police and the Department of Justice.(1) The Department handling (or rather suppressing) the report is: Section P5, Le Parquet du Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris, 14 Quai des Orfevres, 75059, Paris Louvre, RPFP, France.(2)

Inquests?

Within a few days of the crash the Coroner to the Royal Household announced that ‘..an inquest [into the death of Diana] will take place here some time in the future.’ An inquest into Dodi’s death was also announced by the Surrey Coroner. However, both Coroners stressed that the inquests could only take place after the French authorities had established the cause of the crash and concluded any criminal proceedings.(3) By the following month doubts as to the usefulness of an inquest were being raised. The Coroner to the Royal Household expressed his frustration ‘at having no authority to call witnesses from abroad’, pointing out that ‘if Dodi and Diana had been buried in France there would be no inquest. It is purely the fact that they were brought back to England.’ The Surrey Coroner agreed, saying ‘we believe the inquests will be a waste of time and public money.'(4)

Although the French inquiry made its findings known last September, the inquests have now been adjourned pending the outcome of the appeals against the Report by Mohamed Al Fayed and Henri Paul’s parents in the French courts.

In a related development, Al Fayed lodged an application for a judicial review into the decision of the Coroner to the Royal Household not to allow him legal representation at Diana’s inquest. It was argued that Al Fayed was an interested party ‘in the sense that his son had a relationship with Diana…and in particular in the sense that he is connected with the circumstances leading to the death of his son.’ The Judge agreed with the Coroner and rejected the application.(5)

Charles Wardle MP

One of the more intriguing events occurred in March of this year when Charles Wardle, the Conservative MP for Bexhill and Battle who asked a number of pertinent questions about the crash in the House of Commons in June 1999, joined the board of Harrods and a number of other Al Fayed companies as a non-executive director.(6) He has used his new position to reiterate the questions he asked last year in the House of Commons (questions that still remain unanswered) and to ask for a Parliamentary inquiry into the crash.(7)

The condition of the Mercedes

Much has been made of Henri Paul not being qualified to drive the Mercedes. However, according to the limousine’s regular chauffeur, Olivier Lafaye, ‘…the car should not have been driven by anyone who did not know about its “dangerous quirks”.’ He alleged that “…the Mercedes didn’t hold the road properly’; and that Francois Musa, one of the owners of the hire firm, had warned him, ‘…be very careful with this car. Don’t brake sharply otherwise it slews out at the back end.'(8)

Electronic sabotage

One theory is that the Mercedes was electronically sabotaged by a radio signal that caused its accelerator and brakes to jam. It now appears that such technology does exist in the shape of an electromagnetic bomb. This consists of a flux generator operated by a small explosive charge to produce a magnetic pulse similar to that produced in a nuclear bomb. It is said to be capable of destroying all electronic equipment within a range of 200 to 500 metres.(9)

The Flash

Some witnesses claim to have seen a bright flash in the Tunnel, immediately prior to the crash. (10) The use of flashguns to dazzle and confuse drivers has been highlighted in two recent television documentaries about the Spetsnaz, a group of former Red Army commandos turned mercenaries, and the KGB’s special forces units. One Spetsnaz member claims how he and his colleagues

‘killed a man without firing a shot. He was belting along in a Mercedes…It was dark and he was doing 130 km per hour. We blasted him with an electric light-gun, through the windscreen and, bang, that was the end of him. When the [crashed] car was opened, all those inside were pulp.’

The ‘electric light-gun’ shown in the documentaries appears to have been a very powerful military torch rather than a strobe gun.(11) The Stasi may also have used this technique. Investigations have reopened into the death of Lutz Eigendorf, an East German football player who died in a car crash in 1983 after defecting to West Germany. One theory is that the Stasi ’caused [Eigendorf] to get intoxicated…and later shined a “sudden blinding light” into his eyes while he was driving.'(12)

Diana’s condition after the crash

The American writer Gerald Posner claims to have seen photographs of Diana taken immediately after the crash:

‘Surrounded by tight security in a clandestine location, I was shown low resolution images of pictures taken of a dying Diana still trapped in a crumpled Mercedes ……..Diana, in tight close-ups, looks remarkably uninjured except for a gash over one eye. Her head is rolled back slightly to the left and her eyes are closed – probably to shut out the bright camera flashes popping only inches away.’

Posner also comments on Diana’s medical treatment, pointing out that some American medical experts felt that the delay in getting her to hospital was ‘indefensible’.

‘Diana had no significant external injuries, but she was semi-conscious. She was having difficulty breathing and her blood pressure was low. The only thing you really have to be worried about at that point is the risk of internal injuries,’ says Dr. Michael Baden, who as former chief coroner for New York City has performed autopsies on thousands of accident victims. Diana had a rupture of her left pulmonary vein that was not large enough to cause instant death but was slowly filling her chest cavity with blood. ‘With this type of injury,’ says Baden, ‘time is of the essence…. In the United States the delay in getting her to the hospital could constitute gross malpractice. There’s no excuse for it.’

The question of Diana possibly being pregnant is also raised. Posner ‘…learned that someone from the British Home Secretary’s office interrupted her autopsy with a phone call, ordering the pathologists to omit any mention of pregnancy in their final report.'(13)

Eric Petel, a motorcyclist who claims to have been the first person to arrive at the scene of the crash, says he opened the car door and ‘…saw a beautiful woman. I recognised her as the Princess. She was not moving but her eyelids were flickering. She had blood coming from her ear.'(14) In a more detailed account Petel describes how Diana ‘had slid off the back seat. Her head was resting between the front seats…I went into the car and pulled the woman upright, putting her head back on the rear armrest. Blood was flowing from above her right ear.'(15)

Although Petel has been dismissed by French police as a hoaxer, he was eventually interviewed by the investigating magistrate, Judge Stephan, who admitted that he was ‘inclined to believe his story’.(16)

Petel’s story conflicts with that of Jean-Marc Martino, the emergency services surgeon who was part of the medical team in the resuscitation ambulance.

‘[Diana] was agitated and was crying out and didn’t seem to understand what I was saying to reassure her…She was…moving her left arm and right leg, talking incoherently and in a confused way. Her right arm was bent behind her. She was trapped between the offside front seat and the back seat. With the help of firemen we got her out – with great difficulty.’

The chief fireman said Diana ‘suddenly came to’ when being lifted from the wreckage. Her last words were ‘My God, what’s happened?'(17)

Sebastien Dorzee, one of the first gendarmes to arrive on the scene, said:

‘Diana’s head was between the two front seats and she could see [Dodi]. She moved, she opened her eyes and mumbled in a foreign language…I think she said “My God” when she saw her friend was dead. She was rubbing her stomach at the same time. She must have been in pain…She saw the driver and probably realised what had happened…She became upset. A few seconds later she looked at me. Then she put her head down and closed her eyes.'(18)

It should be noted that Frederick Mailliez, the doctor who attended Diana until the ambulance arrived, was ‘astounded to read the next day that she had died. “The young woman has the best chance of coming out all right,” he had assured a friend.'(19)

More on Henri Paul

The former MI6 officer, Richard Tomlinson, commenting on the size of Henri Paul’s bank account, is convinced that he must have been in the employ of British intelligence. ‘French intelligence would never pay him that sort of an amount of money.'(20) He also claimed that he had seen ‘documents and evidence’ proving that Henri Paul was ‘a paid informant for MI6 in 1992(21)….He was…..the Ritz’s MI6 source….. MI6 never let a source drop…..[They] were in contact with him right until his death.'(22) As to the crash, Tomlinson speculated that Paul would ‘have no idea what was going to happen to him that night…..He would have been a pawn in a larger conspiracy.'(23) Gerald Posner believes that Paul was in regular contact with the Direction Generale de la Securite Exterieure (DGSE), the French equivalent of the CIA, ‘an arrangement not unheard of among security staffers at premier international hotels.’ He also claims that Paul ‘spent the last several hours before the crash with a security officer from the DGSE.'(24)

Some new developments

Trevor Rees-Jones, survivor

(25)
Two and a half years after the crash, Trevor Rees-Jones published his own account of the incident, or to be more accurate, an account of what he admitted to remembering. His book, The Bodyguard’s story: Diana, the crash and the sole survivor,(26) was backed up by a great deal of media coverage, including serialisations and interviews.(27) Unfortunately for Rees-Jones none of the publicity could hide the fact that the book contained a great void at its centre: as the author has no recollection of what happened during the car ride he could offer no evidence of what happened during the fatal journey. Even that persistent anti-conspiracist, Martyn Gregory, in an otherwise favourable review, had to admit that ‘the description of the crash itself is an inaccurate two-and-half page cuttings job’.(28) Given that most people would prefer some fresh insights into what actually happened in the Alma Tunnel, one is forced to ask what the point of the book is.

According to Rees-Jones it isn’t money (29) but a desire to put the record straight.'[Mohammed Al Fayed] has accused us [Rees-Jones and Wingfield] of unprofessionalism that caused the accident. I believe everyone deserves the right to reply. And this is our way of doing it.'(30) However the timing of the book’s publication is significant, in that the prospect of an inquest into Diana’s death is now nearer than it was. The publicity surrounding the book has allowed the media further opportunity to deride not only Al Fayed but also, more importantly, anyone else who might harbour doubts about the official version of the cause of the crash.

A number of issues are raised, if not resolved, by the book.

The seat belt

Rees-Jones now claims that he wasn’t wearing his seat belt and that it was a mistaken observation made by one of his rescuers just after the crash that ended up in the police reports.(31) One would expect a bodyguard not to be wearing a seat belt (they need to have maximum mobility in case of emergencies) and this was a criticism originally levelled at Rees-Jones. Why Diana, Dodi, and Henri Paul were not wearing their own seat-belts remains unexplained.(32)

Henri Paul

Rees-Jones finds himself in a bit of a quandary here. He thinks the accident happened ‘…because the man who was behind the wheel of the car didn’t declare himself unfit to drive…'(33) However, neither he nor Wingfield – despite sitting next to Henri Paul in the Ritz – realised that Henri Paul was under the influence of drugs and alcohol. ‘There was absolutely nothing at all in [Henri Paul’s] behaviour, in his speech. He was behaving exactly the same as he had that morning.'(34) Rees-Jones has also said ‘[Henri Paul] was walking around fine, he was talking very clearly….and he was behaving in a very sober way. There was nothing in the way he was that should have said to me that he had been drinking alcohol.'(35)

Wingfield is in a similar quandary. ‘Well, ultimately, it was a drunk-driving accident, and, however difficult that might be for people to accept, that’s the truth of what happened.’ As to why Henri Paul’s drunken condition wasn’t noticed, he points out that ‘we could have smelled alcohol if he hadn’t been perhaps smoking as many cigars as he did. We’re both non-smokers, and there was a very distinct smell of cigars about Henri Paul. So that perhaps could have been masking. That’s not an excuse. That’s just the way it was.'(36)

Neither Rees-Jones nor Wingfield offer any explanation or comment as to why Henri Paul’s bloodstream had such a large amount of carbon monoxide in it. Martyn Gregory argues that the high level of carbon monoxide was a result of Henri Paul’s tobacco intake shortly before the crash.(37) Gerald Posner, on the other hand, believes that all of the tests carried out on Henri Paul’s body should be regarded with caution:

There is ample evidence of negligent handling, which could have opened the door to contamination. Paul’s body was never identified to the pathologist, nor was a start or finish time recorded. Very few measurements were taken. Documentation showing where body samples were taken from is incomplete. Nor does the report say when the blood samples were drawn………..

Pathologist Dominique Lecomte did not perform histologic exams of the pancreas, liver, and other organs – tests that might have answered questions about whether Paul was a chronic drinker.(38)

Who was to blame?

Dodi Fayed’s behaviour comes in for criticism. ‘…Dodi was a pain in the neck…he didn’t want to tell anybody where he was going ahead of time so it was difficult for a bodyguard to set up security.'(39) But when asked if the crash was inevitable ‘…due to the ad-hoc security arrangements that Dodi Fayed seemed to be running…’, Rees-Jones reply was ‘No, definitely not.'(40) Why does he complain about Dodi’s erratic behaviour in one interview and then admit that it had no bearing on the crash in another? In fact, in one interview he mentions the ‘…very happy atmosphere…’ before the group left the Ritz. ‘We were laughing and joking and we were fine.'(41) (The happy atmosphere isn’t reflected in the video footage of the group as they leave the Ritz.) Rees-Jones and Wingfield have both identified Henri Paul as the primary cause of the crash, but Rees-Jones has also recently attempted to refocus attention on the paparazzi. ‘They are not directly responsible for the accident, but indirectly they created the atmosphere in which the accident happened.'(42)

Fayed and The Royals

Mohamed Al Fayed appears to have had suspicions about the circumstances of the crash well before the accusations about Henri Paul’s unfitness to drive were made. Kez Wingfield met Al Fayed at Le Bourget airport on the morning of the crash and recalls him saying, ‘I hope the bastards and the British government are satisfied now.'(43) Who the ‘bastards’ were is unclear. What was made amply clear last November, however, were his feelings about one particular member of the Royal family. On the third day of the libel action brought against him by Neil Hamilton, Al Fayed effectively accused the Duke of Edinburgh of masterminding a plot to murder Diana and Dodi. When challenged, he responded, ‘I have the right to say what I feel…. Let Prince Philip sue me, then I will go through everything. They killed my son.'(44) As one would expect, evidence to prove his claims has not been forthcoming.(45)

Linking the Royal family to the crash is likely to prove an unrewarding pursuit. Their sorrow at Diana’s death was hardly spontaneous,(46) but that does not offer any proof that they actively sought to have her killed. However, Diana’s lifestyle, behaviour and relationships appear to have been matters of continuing interest to them. There has been speculation that around the time of the crash the ‘Way Ahead Group’ (the House of Windsor’s political strategy committee) was due to receive a report from MI6 on the relationship between Diana and Dodi. The Way Ahead Group was set up in 1993, following the collapse of various royal marriages and the Windsor Castle fire. It meets twice a year – at Balmoral in the summer and Sandringham in the winter – and is headed by the Queen with the Duke of Edinburgh, the Prince of Wales, the Princess Royal, the Duke of York and the Earl of Wessex, with senior members of the Royal Household, including the Queen’s Private Secretary and the Lord Chamberlain, usually attending.(47) Nothing has been made public about the meeting or the report. However, it is on record that the Prime Minister was scheduled to meet with the Royal family on the weekend following the crash.

Up for discussion is the future of Princess Diana and Prince Charles. Mr Blair is determined to hammer out an agreement which will protect the monarchy. A Labour insider said: “This will be the ultimate pow-wow. The issue can not be put off any longer…Diana’s relationship with Dodi Fayed and her role in public life will also be reviewed.”(48)

The Duke of Edinburgh’s views on the relationship were well known. An unnamed friend of the Royals reported:

Prince Philip has let rip several times recently about the Fayeds…He’s been banging on about his contempt for Dodi and how he is undesirable as a future stepfather to William and Harry. Diana has been told in no uncertain terms about the consequences should she continue the relationship with the Fayed boy. Options must include possible exile, although that would be very difficult..(49)

According to one source MI6 had also prepared ‘a special report on the Egyptian-born Fayeds which will be presented to the meeting.'(50)

Hewitt’s Parisian car ride

In a recent interview, James Hewitt described how he recreated Diana’s fatal car journey.(51) He had been lunching with four ‘beautiful’ women in a Paris restaurant and, as one of his companions happened to have with her the same model Mercedes that had been driven by Henri Paul, Hewitt decided to

‘conduct a little test …I reckoned I was about as drunk as Dodi’s driver was that night. I’d had one, maybe two bottles of wine. So I got all the girls into the Merc …..and started bombing around the Peripherique until we got to the underpass where she died…..I get the Merc up to about 100, 120 – about the speed they reckon Henri Paul was going that night and, guess what? I shot straight through the tunnel!…..It’s a completely straight road! I don’t care how drunk you are… There’s no way you’d hit that pillar unless something happened to make you veer off the road. It was definitely a set-up!'(52)

Media coverage was either muted, reporting Hewitt’s account without any comment, or outraged: ‘sick, twisted and deranged’ was a favourite phrase. The fact that Hewitt safely negotiated the tunnel at high speed and drunk went unremarked.(53)

Diana and the intelligence services

Diana was under surveillance by UK and American intelligence, although none of the records have been made public. Mohamed Al Fayed has attempted to get sight of these under the terms of the United States Freedom of Information Act. The Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency (NSA) have confirmed that they hold 39 documents consisting of 1,056 pages of information relating to Diana and Dodi but they refuse to reveal it on the grounds of national security.(54)

In conclusion

In the three years since the crash public interest in the events surrounding it remains unabated. Despite continuing attempts by the establishment and the mainstream media to deny that the crash was anything more than an accident, a degree of public scepticism still remains and the latest attempt to draw a line under the crash – the publication of Trevor Rees-Jones’ book – has done little to allay it.(55) I await further developments with interest.

Notes

1. Posting by Steve Reed to the alt.conspiracy.princess-diana discussion forum, 17 December 1999.
2. Although the official report is unavailable, books on the crash continue to emerge. Two potentially interesting titles have yet to find UK publishers and remain untranslated. Jean-Marie Pontaut and Jerome Dupuis’s Enquete sur la mort de Diana (Paris: Stock, 1998) achieved some notoriety in the UK press for quoting extracts from confidential records of Diana’s medical treatment. However, Hugo Nhart’s Lady Diana, hypothese attentat has received no coverage at all in the English language media. Nhart, though, does have his own Website (in French) at: http://www.chez.com/frenzy/accident.htm Other Websites include: Nando Times’ Diana: death of a princess (http:// www.nando.net/nt/images/diana/); and The Mysteries surrounding the death of Diana (http://dianaconspiracy.home page.com/)
   On a lighter note, at least four novels based on the crash have been published. Of particular interest is Kay Kellam’s A Life to Di for (Bernardo Press, 1999) in which the heroine travels in time to discover what really happened in the Tunnel! There is also Christine Toomey’s In her own words: the after-death journal of Princess Diana (sic) (English Rose Press, 1999); and an opera based on Diana’s life and death is due to be staged in Prague next year. It ends with a fading image of the heroine ‘…waltzing with her Arab lover to the screech of tyres and the paparazzi’s flashbulbs.’ (Richard Owen, ‘Princess’s story an opera’, The Times 26 April 2000)
3. Richard Ford, ‘First inquest on royal to be held’, The Times 2 September 1997; ‘UK to hold inquest for Diana after Paris inquiry’, International Herald Tribune 11 September 1997, p.10.
4. Natalie Martin, ‘Diana inquest Coroner frustrated by limited powers’ Press Association 12 October 1997; Stephen Wright, ‘Coroner: inquest on Diana a waste of time’, Daily Mail 13 October 1997, pp.1, 5. The law relating to deaths abroad is based on the judgement given in the case of Helen Smith, an English nurse who died in mysterious circumstances in Saudi Arabia. See – ‘R v West Yorkshire Coroner, ex p Smith’ [1983] QB 335.
5. It is interesting to note that Al Fayed was represented by Michael Mansfield QC, one of the country’s more liberal and anti-establishment barristers whose previous clients include the Birmingham Six, the Guildford Four, and Stephen Lawrence’s parents. Nigel Rosser, ‘Fayed’s Diana inquest battle’, Evening Standard 24 June 1999, p.1; John Aston and Mike Taylor, ‘Fayed loses Diana inquest court case’ Press Association 9 November 1999; Clare Dyer, ‘Judge denies Al Fayed key role in Princess Diana inquest’ The Guardian 10 November 1999, p.7.
6. See Marie Woolf, ‘MP’s dismay as ex-Tory minister takes Fayed job’, Daily Telegraph 5 April 2000; Nicholas Watt,’Tory MP to quit over Fayed job’, The Guardian 10 April 2000; Robert Shrimsley,’Tory MP in Fayed row is to quit’, Daily Telegraph 10 April 2000; Philip Johnston. ‘How a Tory came to change his mind on Fayed’, Daily Telegraph 10 April 2000
7. Charles Wardle, ‘The Real Mohamed’, The Guardian 4 April 2000. Henry Porter was given space the following day to promote the anti-Fayed line: Henry Porter, ‘Why Wardle is wrong’, The Guardian 5 April 2000. For details of Wardle’s Commons questions see my article in Lobster 38.
8. Mark Dowdney,’Merc “had problem brakes”‘ Daily Mirror 28 July 1998, p.14; Jon Henley, ‘”Erratic brakes” on car in which princess died’, The Guardian 28 July 1998, p.6.
9. Untitled article in the Supplement to Journal of Electronic Defense, January 1997. A San Diego company, SAIC, was also reported to be testing a car immobilisation system which could be used by police to fire mini electro-magnetic bombs at stolen vehicles as they are driven away. (Untitled article in Everyday Practical Electronics, October 1997, p.680) For further background see also Carlo Kopp, ‘The Electromagnetic bomb: a weapon of electrical mass destruction’ at http://www.cs.monash.edu.au/~carlo/
10. There have been no recent reported sightings of Brenda Wells, the English secretary who saw the flash. Following the crash she was advised to go into hiding and not to talk to anybody about what she had witnessed. See Lobster 38.
11. Posting by Liberius to the alt.conspiracy.princess-diana discussion forum – 2 November 1999. The two documentaries were ‘Inside Russia’s SAS’ (broadcast on BBC2 13 and 20 June 1999) and ‘Spetsnaz, a Maverick Commando Unit’ (broadcast on the Franco-German TV channel La Sept Arte, 28 September 1999).
12. George Boehmer, ‘Officials check Stasi links in death’, Associated Press newswire, 22 March 2000.
13. Gerald Posner, ‘Al Fayed’s rage’, Talk, August/September 1999. Extracts from the article can be found on Al Fayed’s Website at: http://www.alfayed.com/dianaanddodi/posner.html In his writing on the JFK assassination case, Posner’s honesty has been called into question. See Martin Cannon’s column in Lobster 28.
14. Nick Pisa, ‘I reached Diana crash first, but French police ignored me…’ Sunday Mirror 8 February 1998, p.6.
15. Ben MacIntyre, ‘Diana witness accuses police of fatal delay…’ The Times 10 February 1998.
16. Ian Sparks, ‘I saw the crash that killed Diana and Dodi’, Daily Record 21 April 1998, p.13For further accounts of Petel’s claims see ‘Surprise French witness claims he was at Diana crash scene, Agence France Presse International 10 February 1998; Peter Shard, ‘I found a woman in the wreckage’ Daily Mail 10 February 1998, p.7; Ian Sparks, ‘Biker: no one was near Merc’, Daily Mirror 21 April 1998, p.7. Petel also said that no other vehicles were involved in the crash. ‘I could see the whole tunnel, right to the exit. As far as I’m concerned, there was no other vehicle in front of the Mercedes.’ However he did concede that ‘it was dark; you couldn’t see much.’ (Ben MacIntyre – op. cit.)
17. Transcript of a live conversation with Christopher Andersen in 1998 on ABC News.com Website at: http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/diana/diana_andersen.html
18. ‘Diana moaned “My God, My God” as photographers snapped away.’ Press Association 25 June 1998
19. Melanie Chandler, ‘The Queen as the mean granny…’ The Vancouver Sun 22 August 1998, p.G8.
    Did something else happen in the car immediately after the crash? Trevor Rees-Jones has admitted to ‘…various recurring dreams of all the things I thought were memories’, one of these being’…a voice calling Dodi from within the vehicle…trying to fight someone off from within the vehicle.’ (Larry King Live interview broadcast 21 March 2000. Transcript posted by Maxie to the alt.conspiracy.princess-diana discussion forum, 22 March 2000.) Interviewed by Jonathan Dimbleby, he described ‘hearing a voice calling out Dodi’s name once…There was someone coming at me and trying to fight someone off sitting in the Mercedes. None of them now I believe to be true memories. Maybe they are, maybe they are not but I wouldn’t put my name against them.’ (Jonathan Dimbleby interview with Trevor Rees-Jones on Tonight with Trevor McDonald broadcast on ITV, 9 March 2000. Transcript posted by Gary Stone to the alt.conspiracy.princess-diana discussion forum – April 2000)
20. New Zealand Press Association interview, ‘Richard Tomlinson talks about his ideas of a conspiracy to kill Princess Diana’, 31 August 1998 (Transcript – with comments posted on Sender, Berl & Sons website – ‘Final farewell analyses’ http://www.senderberl.com/farewell.html)
21. Ibid. Mohamed Al Fayed believes that Henri Paul was ‘…on the MI6 files for three years.’ (Tim Reid, ‘Al Fayed accuses Duke of plotting to murder Diana’, The Times 23 November 1999.)
22. ‘Ex-spy claims Diana’s driver an informer’, Glasgow Herald 19 May 1999, p.3.
23. Tomlinson wrote to Mohammed Al-Fayed about his theories in July 1998. ‘I subsequently learned that the letter never reached him, it was intercepted by British intelligence from after I posted it or before it arrived at his office.’ (New Zealand Press Association interview – op. cit.) One of the senior MI6 officers alleged to have been in Paris on the night of the crash was Richard Dearlove, the then Director of Operations. In 1998 he became Assistant Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service and the following February he succeeded Sir David Spedding as Chief. See Richard Norton-Taylor, ‘Spy chief comes out of shadows’, The Guardian 26 February 1999, p.10.
    Barry Chamish, an Israeli journalist who has investigated the assassination of President Yitzhak Rabin, has been quoted as saying that ‘French Intelligence had a huge role in Rabin’s hit…..Mossad returned the favour with Diana.’ (Posting by Geths to alt.conspiracy.princess-diana discussion forum, April 2000.) I have been unable to find any corroboration for this claim so far. Chamish does have his own website at http://www.webseers.com/rabin, however.
24. Gerald Posner op. cit.
25. Rees-Jones may not have been intended to survive. Jacqueline Beaufort, a nurse in La Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital where he was recovering from his injuries made a statement in which she claimed that ‘on the night of September 9 and 10 [1997] she discovered that Rees-Jones suddenly had breathing difficulties and was slipping into a coma. She warned a doctor immediately who was able to reanimate him….An investigation brought to light that the pain killing morphine dose was tripled; a dose that is only used in case of euthanasia….. The French police believe that [a] person gained access with a false ID card. One of the suspects is an unknown member of the security staff of the Ritz Hotel who brought Trevor Rees-Jones some flowers.’ (Translation of an excerpt from an untitled article published in the Dutch magazine Panorama, October 1997.) Another report said ‘…Rees-Jones’ fingers have regained sufficient agility enough to write. A pad and pen were placed at his bedside. When last seen the top sheet of the pad had been removed, leaving one to believe that it had been used…to write a message…It seems that some-one…will go out of his way to shut up the 29 year old bodyguard.’ (Translation of an article by Gianni Roderi dated 10 September 1997, source unknown.) Both items posted by Gary Stone to the alt.conspiracy.princess-diana discussion forum – 16 March 2000.
26. Trevor Rees-Jones with Moira Johnston, The Bodyguard’s story: Diana, the crash and the sole survivor, (London: Little, Brown, 2000.) One gets the impression that Moira Johnston did the bulk of the writing. An earlier book of hers, Spectral evidence: the Ramona Case – incest, memory and truth on trial (Westview Press), dealt with ‘recovered memory’ of sexual abuse.
27. The book was serialised in the Daily Telegraph. Rees-Jones – sometimes in tandem with Kez Wingfield, the other bodyguard on duty on the night of the crash – was interviewed by Jonathan Dimbleby on Tonight with Trevor McDonald (9 March 2000), on 60 Minutes (12 March 2000), and on Larry King Live (21 March 2000), amongst others.
28. Martyn Gregory, ‘Guard of honour’, the Sunday Times (Culture section) 19 March 2000, p.42. Gregory claims that the book ‘…represents a magnificent revenge for [Rees-Jones and Wingfield]…’, saying that they ‘…deserted the cause of their former employer to prevent al-Fayed buying his version of history.’ In fact, he concludes, ‘history owes Rees-Jones and Wingfield an enormous debt.’
29. According to Mike Wallace, who interviewed Rees-Jones on 60 Minutes, ‘…. he was offered a million bucks by The National Enquirer, turned it down; he was offered similar sums by various tabloids in England and turned it [sic] down.’ (Quoted on ‘The Bodyguard’s tale’ – CBS News Website at:
    http://cbsnews.cbs.com/now/story/0,1597,171265412,00.shmtl) Rees-Jones has admitted that he has ‘…two years of legal bills…’ to be paid. (Larry King Live interview – op. cit.) See also the interview with Rees-Jones, ‘Sole survivor’ – on Amazon.co.uk Website at: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/tg/ feature/-/31323/026-7744921-4514211
30. Larry King Live interview, op. cit.
31. Trevor Rees-Jones and Moira Johnson, op. cit. p.156.
    Rees-Jones’ interview on 60 Minutes contains this exchange:
    Mike Wallace: Did you wear a seatbelt? Rees-Jones: I don’t know. I really don’t remember. I don’t remember anything about the journey itself. (The Bodyguard’s tale – op. cit.)
32. According to Christopher Andersen, author of The Day Diana Died, ‘Diana always wore her seatbelt prior to that fateful day…but when she was with Dodi, she was blinded by love. [He] never wore a seatbelt, and she felt somehow he would protect her.’ (Transcript of a live conversation with Christopher Andersen in 1998 on ABC News.com Website at: http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/diana/diana_andersen.html)
33. Interview with Rees-Jones, ‘Sole survivor’, op. cit.
34. Larry King Live interview – op. cit.
35. Jonathan Dimbleby interview – op. cit. The interview contains the following exchange: Dimbleby: And Henri Paul from how he appeared was completely fit to drive, sober. Rees-Jones: Yes, as far as I can remember he was perfectly sober and perfectly fit to drive. Dimbleby: And if you had any doubt at that point. Rees-Jones: Then the person who brought the car around would have stayed in the driver’s side and Henri Paul would not have got into the vehicle. Dimbleby: You would not have let Henri Paul get into the vehicle. Rees-Jones: Not if I thought he was drunk… Dimbleby: There is no doubt in your mind that this man could drive. Rees-Jones: I can categorically say that as far as I was concerned he was stone cold sober.
36. Larry King Live interview, op. cit.
37. Martyn Gregory, Diana: the last days, (London: Virgin:1999), pp.149-158)
38. Gerald Posner op.cit.
39. The Bodyguard’s tale op. cit.
40. Interview with Rees-Jones,’Sole survivor’, op. cit.
41. Jonathan Dimbleby interview, op. cit.
42. Comments made by Rees-Jones in an interview on France 2 television. (Quoted in ‘Paparazzi’s role in Diana accident’ on BBC News Website at:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/wales/newsid_707000/707445.shmtl)
43. Larry King Live interview, op. cit.
44. Tim Reid, ‘Al Fayed accuses Duke of plotting to murder Diana’, The Times 23 November 1999.
45. Ari Ben-Menashe, a former high ranking Israeli intelligence officer, has accused Al Fayed of being his own worst enemy. ‘From all the enquiries I had made…it was clear that the Royal Family as such has no case to answer. It may well be that privately they would not have wished Diana to marry Dodi. But that is a long way from saying that they wanted the young couple murdered.’ (‘Ben-Menashe “dumps” Al-Fayed’, Intelligence Newsletter no. 114, 27 March 2000, p.1.)
46. See Christopher Andersen, The Day Diana died (London: Blake Publishing, 1999) for an absorbing account of the Royal family’s reaction to Diana’s death.
47. William Russell, ‘Looking for the way ahead’, The Glasgow Herald 20 August 1996, p.7; Peter Archer, ‘New Royal “Summit” on future of monarchy’, Press Association 10 September 1996.One of the topics for discussion at the Group’s latest meeting in March was Sir John Chilcot’s report on Royal security. (Robert Hardman, ‘Princes fight plans to cut £30m royal security bill’, Daily Telegraph 6 March 2000, p.7)
48. Deborah Sherwood, ‘Philip banned from piloting planes as health nose-dives’ Sunday Mirror 31 August 1997, p. 6.
49. Andrew Golden, ‘Queen to strip Harrods of its Royal crest’, Sunday Mirror 31 August 1997, p.6 This article appeared on the day of the crash, a fact which makes particularly ominous its final sentence: ‘But now the Royal Family may decide it is time to settle up.’
50. Andrew Golden op. cit.
51. Martin Deeson, ‘Say what you like about James Hewitt…’, GQ April 2000 pp.94-99.
52. Ibid.
53. For muted coverage see Mark Inglefield, ‘Action replay’, The Times 7 March 2000; Emma Hartley, ‘Hewitt’s bizarre Diana car jaunt’, Evening Standard 7 March 2000 pp.1, 2; ‘How Hewitt re-enacted Diana drive’, The Guardian 8 March 2000 p.14; ‘Hewitt tells of drunken car chase’, Glasgow Herald 8 March 2000, p.4; ‘Hewitt tells of drunken car chase’, The Glasgow Herald 8 March 2000, p.4.For outraged coverage see Jane Kerr, ‘Drunken Hewitt retraced Di drive, The Daily Record 8 March 2000, p.7; Michael Seamark, ‘Outrage as Hewitt boasts: I re-enacted the Diana death drive’, Daily Mail 8 March 2000, p.7; Michael Seamark, ‘Hewitt’s Paris shame’, Daily Mail 8 March 2000, p.27; Charles Rae and Andrea Busfield, ‘Twisted, sick, deranged’, The Sun 8 March 2000; Sheena Hastings, ‘Shameless Hewitt’s action replay’, Yorkshire Post 9 March 2000, p.12.
54. Al Fayed’s Website at: http://www.alfayed.com/openletter/openletter.html. See also Michael Ellis, ‘US intelligence agencies said to have top secret files on Diana’, The Guardian 12 November 1998; Mark Dowdney, ‘CIA spies listened to Diana’s love secrets’, The Mirror 12 November 1998. Martin Bashir, the television reporter who interviewed Diana for Panorama, has also said that ‘…MI5 was carrying out “dirty tricks” on [her].’ (Sally Bedell Smith, Diana: the life of a troubled Princess, London: Aurum Press, 1999, p.281)
55. The Daily Telegraph Home Affairs Editor Philip Johnston has been forced to admit: ‘Since the serialisation [of Rees-Jones’ book] began, this newspaper and others connected with the book have been contacted by people who just cannot come to terms with the banal circumstances of the Princess’s death. One caller yesterday berated The Daily Telegraph for “covering up what everyone knows is the truth.”‘ Philip Johnston, ‘The goodness of the man called The Bodyguard’, Daily Telegraph 9 March 2000, p.30.