Gone but not forgotten: a further update on Di
Terry Hanstock
This update follows on from my earlier articles in Lobster 38 and Lobster 39
Never was the old adage ‘She’s dead but she won’t lie down’ more apt than when applied to the late Diana, Princess of Wales. Although she died almost nine years ago, she continues to haunt us. There have been books,([1]) television documentaries, ([2]) a ballet, ([3]) a talking doll ([4]) and a film is forthcoming.([5]) A climax of sorts was reached on 10 November 2005 (almost ten years to the day since Diana’s Panorama interview with Martin Bashir) ([6]) On that day This Morning (ITV1) had crime novelist Patricia Cornwell revealing the results of her own inquiry into Diana’s death;([7]) while in the evening the final episode of series four of Spooks (BBC1) included a convincing explanation of how MI5 could have engineered the crash. ([8])
The coroner
On 18 December 2003, Michael Burgess, H.M. Coroner for Surrey, confirmed that inquests on Diana and Dodi would open on 6 January 2004: Diana’s inquest was to be held at the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre in the morning, with Burgess acting as the Coroner of The Queen’s Household; Dodi’s would be held that afternoon at Reigate with Burgess acting as H.M. Coroner for Surrey. ([9]) Burgess also said that although he would not be receiving evidence from witnesses, he would be making a statement. This he duly did, dryly summarising the circumstances of the crash and pointing out that the inquest had been unavoidably delayed because of continuing French enquiries and related legal appeals in the French courts. Towards the end of his statement, and much to the surprise of the 200 assembled reporters, Burgess calmly announced that he had asked the Metropolitan Police Commissioner to make inquiries and interview witnesses on his behalf. ([10]) The Prince of Wales was said to be ‘devastated’ with the mood at Clarence House and Highgrove described as ‘one of bewilderment and disbelief ……We just never saw this coming,’ one friend of the Prince said.([11]) As that day’s issue of The Mirror had revealed Diana’s fears of falling victim to a car accident arranged by him, perhaps the Prince shouldn’t have been too surprised. ([12])
Operation Paget
The then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir John Stevens duly set up Operation Paget. ([13]) Its aims were to be objective and to obtain all available information. It would not be an examination of the French investigation, although much of the documentation resulting from the French inquiry would be made available. (Fluent French speakers formed an important part of Operation Paget’s team.) It would produce computer models and plans of the crash scene and a Metropolitan Police traffic officer, an expert in collision investigation, was to be included in the team. Once Operation Paget had finished its inquiry, the Metropolitan Police Service would report to HM Coroner. If there was evidence of any criminal act, the Crown Prosecution Service would be informed. If no evidence to support a criminal act was found, the Coroner would decide on what course of action to take. ([14])
The first public outing for Operation Paget came in April when Stevens and Michael Burgess traced the route of Diana’s final journey and examined the Alma Tunnel. At this stage it was being reported that there was ‘a growing belief within the Yard that the French reached the correct conclusion about the deaths that they were caused by a straightforward crash that resulted from a powerful car being driven too fast by an intoxicated driver whatever the loose ends and differences in investigative techniques that conspiracy theorists try to exploit.’ ([15]) As the inquiry progressed, however, there seems to have been a change of mind, with Stevens himself admitting that the investigation was ‘more complex than any of us thought’ and that ‘some of the issues that have been raised by Mr Al Fayed have been right to be raised’. ([16])
Media coverage
Since Operation Paget began its investigations there has been a significant increase in the number of Diana stories. Some appear to be (off the record?) statements from Operation Paget, while others have resulted from Al Fayed’s continuing legal battles with the French authorities to get documents released and individuals questioned.([17]) It should be noted that much of Operation Paget’s findings have been ignored by the media, the only newspaper to reporting them with any degree of thoroughness being The Express.([18]) In the interests of balance, therefore, wherever possible I’ve tried to provide references from other sources. (It should also be noted that as far as I’m aware none of the claims made by The Express have been contradicted or denied by Lord Stevens or his team.)
Why was Diana’s body embalmed?
According to the former Royal Coroner, Dr John Burton, ‘It is normal to embalm bodies when they are going to be flown to another country. It would not interfere in any way with a pathologist’s ability to carry out a post-mortem.'([19]) Others disagreed. Forensic experts from Glasgow University and Lausanne University criticised the decision by French doctors to embalm the top half of Diana’s body:
‘This is, in our experience, highly unusual. We understand that no explanation for the embalming prior to post-mortem has been given, despite being asked for. We individually would be concerned if embalming took place prior to any post-mortem that we might be asked to conduct.’
They also pointed out that the embalming fluids would make it difficult if not impossible to tell if Diana was pregnant or not.([20])
The embalming was not only medically suspect, it was also contrary to French law, which prohibits the process if a post mortem is to be performed and also requires the permission of a judge and the next of kin.([21]) Although it is known that a leading French pathologist, Professor Dominique Lecomte, carried out the embalming, it is uncertain whose instructions she was following. The French claim that British officials ordered the embalming.
‘The decision to embalm the Princess and fly her back to Britain within hours of the tragedy was taken in London. The order was passed on to the French authorities by the British Ambassador Sir Michael Jay, presumably acting on the instructions of a higher authority. If that order had not been issued you can be sure a full autopsy would have been conducted here.'([22])
Jay has been reported as having ‘no recollection of any such request being made’ and continues to claim that the decision was made by the French.([23])
Who’s the daddy?
Most of the ‘Was Diana pregnant or not’ stories assume that she was (or wasn’t) carrying Dodi’s child. Indeed, according to Al Fayed, her supposed pregnancy was one of the reasons she was killed. However, Simone Simmons, her ‘energy healer’, has claimed that Diana’s real affections were directed towards Hasnat Khan, a Pakistani heart surgeon ‘her dream was to become Mrs Hasnat Khan and live in suburbia as his wife’. A child was also part of her plan and she was convinced that ‘her “brown baby” would help improve relations between Muslims and Christians.’ Diana was apparently so besotted with Khan that she considered getting herself pregnant with his child in an attempt to force him to marry her.([24]) It was not to be, however, and he abruptly ended the affair.([25])
Henri Paul
Henri Paul’s finances continue to cause speculation. It now appears that he received £75,000 in the weeks preceding the crash and he had built up a total of £100,000 spread over thirteen different accounts. He was also carrying the equivalent of £2000 in French francs on the night of the crash.([26]) Although much of the money is said to have come from British banks it remains unclear who was paying him and for what purpose.([27])
Claims that Henri Paul met with a high ranking member of the DCRG (Direction Central des Renseignments Generaux, the French equivalent of Special Branch and the FBI) on the night of the crash are being investigated by Operation Paget. Paul, who allegedly worked part time for the DCRG, ([28]) was said to have had an ‘animated conversation’ with this individual less than an hour before the crash.([29])
Speculation also continues over Henri Paul’s blood samples: were the samples actually taken from his body or not? Following a lengthy legal battle by Paul’s parents and Al Fayed, a judicial inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the drawing and analysis of the blood samples was finally authorised by a Paris court in June 2004.([30]) Operation Paget is also investigating how the forensic tests were carried out, and expert witnesses are reported as having told the inquiry that the levels of carbon monoxide allegedly found in Henri Paul’s blood ‘are more consistent with someone who had committed suicide by inhaling exhaust fumes’.([31])
The Mercedes
Cabinet Office papers released under the Freedom of Information Act have revealed conflicting accounts as to why Diana and Dodi changed cars at the last minute. A document signed by Sir Michael Jay, the British Ambassador, and dated 31 August 1997, the day of the crash, said ‘Because, apparently, their getaway car failed to start, they got into another nearby car driven by a Ritz driver.’ However, less than a month later, in a paper dated 23 September 1997, the story had changed and the switch to another car was now ‘a last minute change of plan aimed at diverting the waiting paparazzi’. ([32]) This has lead to speculation that the Mercedes driven by Henri Paul may have been tampered with beforehand it had been stolen several months before.([33]) However, when the car was examined by Operation Paget’s forensic team it was declared it to be in ‘good working order’.([34])
The Security Services
Unsurprisingly MI5 and MI6 have denied any involvement in the crash. Equally unsurprisingly their denial has not halted speculation. Members of an MI6 death squad [sic] were allegedly in Paris on the night of the crash and allegedly were ‘tasked with ensuring the Princess’s death was swiftly passed off to the world as a tragic accident.'([35]) According to some sources they may also have been in the vicinity of the Ritz that evening. Two unidentified men appear on the hotel’s CCTV footage drinking at the main lobby bar and ‘carefully observing events, until shortly before midnight when the Princess was about to leave the hotel’. Hotel staff said ‘Their conversation was constant but very terse….'([36] ) Yet another unidentified man was observed ‘whipping the crowd [outside the Ritz] into a frenzy as Diana and Dodi Fayed left’. He has not been traced. ([37])
It is well known that the Security Service put Diana under fairly constant surveillance as part of their remit to ‘protect the Royal Family from scandal that might bring it and Britain into disrepute’.([38])According to former MI5 officer David Shayler, MI6 wanted to curtail Diana’s liaison with the Al Fayed family.
‘I think that MI6 paid to have Diana and Dodi involved [my emphasis] in an accident using a “surrogate”. Because Diana was either getting married to Dodi or she was pregnant, the authorities planned the crash to ensure she was taken away from the Al Fayed family or that she lost her unborn child. The only reason I don’t believe that the authorities didn’t actually aim to assassinate her was that they did not want to make her a martyr at the expense of the royal family.’ ([39])
Flashing lights
If the crash wasn’t a simple accident, how was it engineered? The laser gun theory has resurfaced, with new witnesses claiming to have seen ‘an enormous radar-like flash of light’ caused by a device fired by the pillion passenger on a motorbike which had followed the Mercedes into the Alma Tunnel.([40] )On the other hand, another witness says the crash was an accident and insisted that there were ‘no photographers or other vehicles around the car and no flash of light’.([41]) One way to resolve these conflicting views would be to double check to see if any CCTV footage still exists. It has always been claimed that traffic cameras in the area were out of action on that night, but it now appears a motorist was caught speeding on camera in the Alma Tunnel ‘minutes before’ the crash.([42] )
What next?
Expect more headlines if and when Nicholas Davies’ new book Cover-up is published later this year.([43]) In it he will claim that MI5 were concerned that Diana was about to publicly support the Palestinian cause. So concerned in fact that (with assistance from the French DST (La Direction de la Surveillance du Territoire), they staged ‘a sophisticated operation’ ([44] ) to ensure that Diana’s car would crash.([45]) Also expected this year is Lord Stevens’ report the definitive official version of what happened in Paris in August 1997, but hopefully not official in the sense of the Warren Commission’s Report. While we await its appearance Al Fayed and The Express will doubtless continue to produce further revelations. ([46])
Notes
[1] These include David Cohen’s refreshingly objective, Diana: death of a goddess (London: Century, 2004) (briefly reviewed in Lobster 48); Martyn Gregory’s The Diana conspiracy exposed: the definitive account of the last days and death of Diana, Princess of Wales (Milford, CT: Olmstead Press, 2000) and an updated edition of his Diana: the last days (London: Virgin Books, 2004); and Paul Burrell’s A royal duty (London: Michael Joseph, 2003), which includes the letter written by Diana expressing her fears that she might meet her end in a rigged car accident.
[2] These include a revised version of ‘Diana – the night she died’ (Channel 5, 2 November 2003); ‘The death of Diana'(one of BBC2’s Days That Shook The World programmes, 20 January 2004); and ‘The Diana conspiracy'(Channel 4, 5 February 2004).
[3] Stephen Brook, ‘Coming soon: Diana the ballet set to Elgar and The Cure’, The Guardian, 19 February 2005; Russell Jenkins, ‘Diana dance fans boo and hiss Prince and Camilla’, The Times, 9 March 2005.
[4] Anon, ‘Diana doll speaks of her sadness’, Daily Telegraph, 31 January 2006.
[5] Plans are apparently afoot to film Jon King and John Beveridge’s book, Princess Diana: the hidden evidence (New York: SPI Books, 2002). Richard Palmer, ‘Film tells of Diana “murder”‘, The Express, 11 February 2006. For an idea of what to expect see the review in Lobster 43.
[6] An unofficial transcript of the interview can be found here: <http://members.tripod.com/~zeltan/interview95.htm >
[7] Whatever the results were, the press failed to report them. Cornwell had already put forward her views on ABC’s Primetime (‘Scene of the crime’, 30 October 2003; ‘Scene of the crime: a second look at Princess Diana’s death’, 29 January 2004) and concluded that Diana was the victim of a ‘perfect crime’. Ayshea Buksh, ‘Top writer’s verdict on crash that killed Di.’, Daily Star, 1 November 2003.
[8] Written by some time radical playwright Howard Brenton, the episode later revealed that MI5 had set up a committee to plan for ‘worst case scenarios, and [it] inadvertently predicted Princess Diana’s death perfectly. It was nothing more sinister than that.’ (www.bbc.co.uk/ drama/spooks/series4_ep10.shtml>) Interestingly, in the first series of Spooks Brenton showed (off-screen) the illicit but dramatically satisfactory killing of a villain as he drove through a tunnel. (Car enters tunnel followed by motorbike. Sounds of crash. Motorbike emerges from the other end of the tunnel. Plaintive sound of jammed car horn.) (www.bbc.co.uk/drama/spooks/series1 _ep2.shtml>)
[9] ‘Coroner’s inquests into the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Al Fayed’ statement from Michael Burgess issued 18 December 2003. Mohamed Al Fayed had earlier queried the appropriateness of a Royal inquest. ‘Diana had been stripped of her royal titles after her divorce. Having cast her aside so emphatically in life, it is a bit rich of the Royal Family to reclaim her in death for the purposes of holding their own inquest.’ (Letter to The Times, 19 September 2003). He was corrected by Michael Powers QC, a former general practitioner and expert on coroners’ law. ‘Irrespective of status, when the body of any person lies within the curtilage of one of the Queen’s palaces…… [the Coroner of the Queen’s Household] has exclusive jurisdiction to hold the inquest. In Diana’s case, his jurisdiction arises not because she was a member of the Royal Family but because her body was laid in the Chapel Royal at St James’s Palace.’ (Letter to The Times, 26 September 2003). A Royal inquest also requires a jury made up of members of the Royal household, a state of affairs that Al Fayed’s lawyer, Michael Mansfield QC, has argued could run contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights. Mansfield also pointed out that ‘it is difficult to think of deaths in recent times about which there has been greater public distress and concern…..a jury is essential if the considerable public anxiety about these deaths is to be assuaged. By virtue of section 29 (4) (of the Coroners Act) jurors in the Diana inquest will have to consist of officers of the Queen’s household. It appears that they would be nominated by whichever officer of the household was directed by the coroner to summon them. This would clearly make a mockery of the whole process.’ David Leppard, ‘Fayed challenge on Diana inquest jury’, The Sunday Times, 12 March 2006
[10] ‘I am aware that there is speculation that these deaths were not as a result of a sad, but relatively straightforward traffic accident in Paris. I have asked the Metropolitan Police Commissioner to make inquiries. The police in England will be asked to see and interview on my behalf, those who are identified as possible witnesses.’ Burgess’s full statement can be viewed on the H.M. Coroner for Surrey’s website <www.surreycoroner. info/inquests.html>
Al Fayed had previously asked for a public inquiry into the crash to be held in Scotland but this had been rejected by the Lord Advocate. (Fayed v. Lord Advocate (2004 S.C. 568); John Robertson, ‘Scottish court rejects Fayed’s plea for action on Dodi’s death’, The Scotsman, 13 March 2004; Gordon McIlwraith, ‘MI6 claim is thrown out’, Daily Record, 13 March 2004; Anon., ‘Inquiry jurisdiction national’, The Times, 23 March 2004.
[11] Alan Hamilton, ‘Jaws drop as the coroner delivers his bombshell’, The Times, 7 January 2004; Ian Cobain, ‘Royal fury at Diana inquiry’, The Times, 7 January 2004; Karen Mcveigh, ‘Diana: the twists and turns continue’, The Scotsman, 7 January 2004; Robert Verkaik and Kim Sengupta, ‘The accidental death of a Princess or murder most foul?…’, The Independent, 7 January 2004; Tania Branigan, ‘Met chief to lead Diana death inquiry’, The Guardian, 7 January 2004.
[12] These fears were expressed in a note written by her in October 1996: ‘This particular phase of my life is the most dangerous my husband is planning “an accident” in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for him to marry.’ Jane Kerr, ‘Royal sensation. Diana names Charles. My husband is planning an accident in my car so he can marry again’, The Mirror, 6 January 2004.
[13] Stevens has now retired and been ennobled as Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington, but still heads the inquiry on a consultancy basis.
[14] I’ve been unable to find an official statement or press release announcing the terms of reference for Operation Paget. The only record in the public domain appears to be a summary of the range of documents to be made available under the Freedom of Information Act ‘Operation Paget: document for inclusion in the Metropolitan Police Freedom of Information Act 2000 Publication Scheme’. <http://www.met.police.uk/ foi/ pdfs/other_information/corporate/operation_paget_met_diana_ inquiry.pdf >
[15] John Steele, ‘Police chief traces Diana’s final journey’, Daily Telegraph, 27 April 2004. Stevens reiterated this view a few months later Rajeev Syal, ‘My investigation should end all the conspiracy theories about Diana’s death’, Sunday Telegraph, 1 August 2004.
[16] He expressed his views on GMTV’s Sunday Programme, 29 January 2006. Andrew Pierce, ‘Diana death inquiry fails to answer doubts over how she died’, The Times, 28 January 2006. However, a few weeks later it was being claimed that Stevens would be releasing an interim report saying that there was no evidence to suggest that Diana was unlawfully killed. ‘The full report will go to the royal coroner in the next few months and will form part of the inquest due to be heard in the autumn.’ Stephen Wright, ‘Official: Diana’s death was simply an accident’, Daily Mail, 6 March 2006.
[17] Last November the European Court of Human Rights ruled in Al Fayed’s favour (Al Fayed v France (38501/02)) and instructed French authorities to release key documents.
[18] Richard Desmond proprietor of The Express is a ‘loyal friend and supporter’ of Al Fayed. Max Clifford, ‘Maximum impact’, Press Gazette, 3 March 2006, p.5
[19] Dodi’s body, however, was not embalmed. Rebecca English, ‘I’m sure Diana was pregnant, says policeman’, Daily Mail, 22 December 2003; Sue Reid, ‘So is this the proof she was pregnant?’, Daily Mail, 27 December 2003
[20] Alex Hitchen and Rachel Bletchly, ‘Diana: we find secret medical report’, The People, 11 January 2004.
[21] Mark Reynolds, ‘Diana: the pregnancy conspiracy’, The Express, 26 September 2005. Robert Thompson, who was present at the mortuary in London where Diana’s post mortem was eventually performed, has implied that the embalming was carried out ‘in a very clumsy fashion. Although this was not a complete embalming it may have been enough to ensure that the blood samples taken at the post-mortem would have been rendered useless for pregnancy tests.’ Sue Reid, see note 19.
[22] Keith Perry and Jack Gee, ‘Amazing demand by French as they accuse British government of organising cover-up; exhume Diana’, Sunday Express, 2 November 2003. Two American pathologists have offered to do just that. Professors Jerry Conlogue and Ron Beckett of Quinnipiac University, specialists in the study of mummies and experts in autopsies on embalmed bodies, have been approached by the Coroner and say that their expertise is available if required. Jack Gee, ‘Could they really dig up Diana’s body?’, Sunday Express, 21 August 2005.
[23] Keith Perry and Jack Gee, ‘New tests may solve riddle of her death’, Daily Star, 2 November 2003; Sue Reid, ‘A question that won’t go away’, Daily Mail, 4 February 2006.
[24] Neil Wallis and Rachael Bletchly, ‘Di’s nights of love in bedsit’, The People, 29 November 1998; Colin Freeman, ‘Surgeon family furious over revelations of affair’, The Evening Standard, 6 November 2002; Robert Jobson, ‘Diana longed for baby girl called Allegra by her surgeon lover’, The Evening Standard, 7 January 2004; Jane Kerr, ‘Royal sensation: Diana coroner tells all: her “plot” for baby with lover Hasnat’, The Mirror, 8 January 8, 2004.
[25] After a visitation according to some reports. ‘Two gentlemen in suits knocked at my door the other day and they told me it wasn’t healthy for me to continue seeing Her Royal Highness. I am not normally scared of such things but I don’t think they were joking.’ Anon., ‘Hasnat warned by “men in suits”‘, Mail on Sunday, 11 January 2004
[26] According to bodyguard Kez Wingfield, ‘We all carried at least £1,000 for bungs. Henri Paul was no spy. His job meant contact with police. But he was a glorified doorman. More Inspector Clouseau than 007. He might have choked you to death on his cigar smoke, that’s all.’ Clive Goodman, ‘Al Fayed’s to blame’, The News of the World, 28 August 2005.
[27] Peter Allen, ‘£75,000 paid to Diana’s death driver’, The Express, 13 June 2005.
[28] It has been said that he was an ‘occasional informer’ for the DCRG and that he also ‘kept an eye on suspicious foreigners for the authorities’. Lara Marlowe, ‘Princess Diana’s driver takes many secrets to grave’, The Irish Times, 20 September 1997; David Leppard, ‘Diana driver was secret informer’, The Sunday Times, 26 February 2006.
[29] Richard Palmer and Peter Allen, ‘Diana probe: bid to force secret agent to reveal all’, The Express, 15 August 2005; Peter Allen, ‘Spies in constant touch with driver’, The Express, 28 November 2005.
[30] Its unclear if the judicial inquiry is underway but recent reports say that French police are to interview Dr Gilbert Pepin, one of the toxicologists involved, and are demanding that he hands over ‘all outstanding information relating to the tragedy’. Anon., ‘French officials start new probe into Princess Diana’s driver’, Agence France Presse, 12 August 2004; Richard Palmer and Jack Gee, ‘Judge sacked in row over Diana: victory for dead chauffeur’s family in blood test riddle’, The Express, 26 January 2005; Peter Allen, ‘Diana death doctor made to tell truth’, The Express, 18 April 2006.
[31] David Leppard, ‘Doubts cast over blood samples in Diana inquiry’, The Sunday Times, 29 January 2006; Billy Paterson, ‘Diana death tests were bogus’, Sunday Mail, 26 February 2006.
[32] John-Paul Ford Rojas, ‘Diana death crash: “intended car wouldn’t start”‘, Press Association, 16 March 2005; Danielle Demetriou, ‘Car swap fuels mystery surrounding Diana’s death’, The Independent, 16 March 2005; Steven Morris, ‘Diana may have transferred to fatal Mercedes after hire car broke down’, The Guardian, 16 March 16 2005; Richard Palmer, ‘Diana car switched before death crash’, The Express, 16 March 2005.
[33] ‘Although the car was ruled roadworthy again after repairs costing £12,000, one of the chauffeurs who worked for Etoile [the company that hired out the Mercedes] claimed that in the month before the crash the vehicle did not hold the road well and had suffered persistent problems with its antilock braking system.’ Peter Allen and Richard Palmer, ‘Diana police probe on car’, The Express, 31 May 2005.
[34] Stephen Wright, ‘Diana crash car moved back to Britain for tests’, Daily Mail, 28 July 2005; Robert Jobson, ‘Diana crash an accident’, The Evening Standard, 25 August 2005.
[35] One of the operatives referred to as Agent Y still works for MI6. His recent activities appear to include overseeing the kidnapping and interrogation of a number of Pakistanis in Greece following the London bombings. Glen Owen, ‘MI6 man in Greek kidnap probe “played major role in Diana cover-up”: spy chief’s links with Princess exposed as secret documents lay bare deal to aid CIA “rendition programme”‘, Mail on Sunday, 1 January 2006; Mark Reynolds and Peter Allen, ‘The death squad had to tidy up all of the loose ends’, The Express, 9 January 2006.
[36] Sue Reid, ‘Diana: the MI6 mystery’, Daily Mail, 4 December 2004.
[37] Mark Reynolds and Peter Allen, ‘Diana: how spy started car death chase’, The Express, 23 February 2006.
[38] Phillip Knightley, ‘Yes, there ARE mysterious powers at work out there…’, Daily Mail, 22 October 2003.
[39] Annie Machon, Spies, lies and whistleblowers: MI5, MI6 and the Shayler affair, (Lewes: Book Guild, 2005), pp.213-214.
[40] David Pilditch, ‘Diana death: spies flashed laser beam at crash driver’, The Express, 6 February 2006.
[41] Emma Britton, Graham Brough and Tom Parry, ‘I saw Diana death crash and it was an accident’, The Mirror, 15 January 2004.
[42] Peter Allen, ‘Diana’s death: yet another lie exposed’, The Express, 6 March 2006.
[43] Author of Ten-thirty-three: the inside story of Britain’s secret killing machine in Northern Ireland (Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing, 2000) and Dead men talking: collusion, cover-up and murder in Northern Ireland’s dirty war (Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing, 2004), plus a slew of books on the Royals.
[44] Details of the operation have been published where else? in The Sunday Express: Nicholas Davies, ‘The killing of a Princess’, Sunday Express, 23 October 2005.
[45] Brendon Abbot, ‘Diana: was she murdered over Palestine link?’, Sunday Express, 23 October 2005.
[46] There are signs that the non-tabloid sectors of the media are taking a more objective view. See for example Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, ‘Conspiracy theories are not all wrong’, The Independent, 27 February 2006.