RE:

The Diana inquest – the people’s verdict?

Well we now know who didn’t do it. It wasn’t the Royals. Not that they and their associates don’t have past form when it comes to helping family members into the next world. George V was given a fatal injection on his deathbed in order that news of his demise would appear first in the morning edition of The Times and not in some ‘lesser publication’ later in the day.(1) And it wasn’t MI6. This assumes that, as former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove would have us believe, Secret Intelligence Service service personnel follow the rules. A less trusting Michael Mansfield QC, for Mr Al Fayed, suggested ‘there are things countenanced within the service that do not exactly match the structures and controls in place. Rogue elements could act without the knowledge of their superiors’.(2)

It might have been a staged accident but the jury wasn’t allowed to consider this as an option. Lord Justice Scott Baker admitted that he was ‘strongly tempted to leave this verdict so that the jury could pronounce upon the matter’. Temptation was duly overcome and he managed to convince himself that this ‘would be unlawful.’(3) So it had to be Henri Paul and the paparazzi after all: one dead man and a group of individuals unlikely ever to be brought to trial.

Note that it is no longer an accident but an unlawful killing. Even so ‘French prosecutors [have] ruled out “any possibility” of bringing the photographers back before a judge and jury…simply because of the opinion of a foreign jury’.(4)

Given the restricted choice, the jury would have been hard pressed to return verdicts other than those that they did.

To give them a gentle nudge in the right direction, the Duke of Edinburgh played the sympathy card with a brief stay in hospital during the period of the jurors’ deliberations.(5)

Whilst not accusing Lord Justice Scott Baker of bias, his instructions to the jury do appear to follow a tradition of exculpating the establishment at all costs. In the Jeremy Thorpe trial, Mr Justice Cantley described alleged potential murder victim Norman Scott as follows: ‘He is a fraud. He is a sponger. He is a whiner. He is a parasite. But, of course, he could still be telling the truth. It is a question of belief.’(6)

We should also remember the inquest into the victims of the Hillsborough Disaster, where the coroner ruled that there would be no consideration of events after 3:15 pm on the day of the disaster. ‘Effectively [he] excluded any discussion of the adequacy of the rescue operation and the appropriateness of medical attention given to the dying.(7) Accidental death verdicts were duly recorded and police officers were spared the ignominy of having to face charges of negligence or manslaughter.(8) More of the same is quite possible during the forthcoming inquest into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes.(9)

Some questions – although addressed – have still to be satisfactorily answered. The validity of Henri Paul’s blood samples remains problematic. Even Scott Baker had to admit that ‘there were real flaws in the chain of custody of samples and the recording of results by the French pathologists and toxicologists. Furthermore, the results of tests for carboxy haemoglobin were difficult for anyone to explain.’(10) That Henri Paul could still walk and talk given the amount of carbon monoxide his body was supposed to contain continues to be one of the enduring mysteries of the night of the crash. Another is why the bodyguards allowed someone allegedly under the influence to drive the Mercedes, or why indeed Henri Paul himself would have got behind the wheel. According to former Al Fayed bodyguard Lee Sansum:

‘…if Trevor was involved in any task, there would be no alcohol, full stop…I can say for sure that there is no way that Trevor would have let that guy drive the car that night if he suspected that he had been drinking. I remember taking Trevor to Dodi’s grave after the crash and him telling me that this was such an important event, but he could not remember anything other than the fact that there was “no way the driver was drunk as I would never let it happen.” ’(11)

The inquest procedure itself has not been particularly helpful. ‘[The system is]…arcane, fundamentally flawed and in need of reform…..Coroners do not have the power to compel witnesses to attend, having to rely on people co-operating with their inquiries.’(12)Co-operation by a number of key players – the French pathologists and most of the paparazzi, for example – was certainly not forthcoming at this inquest.Not that those witnesses who did appear were necessarily thought to be entirely truthful. Paul Burrell’s evidence in particular came in for severe criticism, although Scott Baker seemed curiously relaxed about taking the matter further saying he was ‘not minded’ to refer his evidence to the Metropolitan Police.(13) There has also been the continual vilification of Al Fayed, concentrating on his intemperate outbursts and ignoring some of the more interesting points to come out of the hearings.(14)

The establishment must now be hoping that the jury’s verdict will bring closure. Having definitively trashed Diana’s ‘good name’,(15) it’s certainly business as usual for Royals.(16)

However, one legacy is the mass of material still available on the inquest website. Freed from the strictures imposed by Scott Baker one can peruse and analyse this and – possibly – come to quite different conclusions.(17)

*

The spoils of war

The Center for Public Integrity has published an updated list of companies that continue to benefit from contracts awarded in Iraq and Afghanistan. Halliburton was the largest single contractor in Iraq in 2004 and its former subsidiary, KBR Inc. (a.k.a. Kellogg, Brown and Root), has carried on the tradition by topping the new list with over $16 billion in US government contracts from 2004 to 2006. Not bad, considering the total value of contracts for that period came to $25 billion.(18)

The Human Rights First report Private security contractors at war: ending the culture of impunity argues that the US Department of Justice’s ‘systematic failure to hold private security contractors operating in Iraq and Afghanistan criminally responsible for acts of excessive violence and abuse has created a dangerous “culture of impunity,”’ concluding that ‘this lack of accountability has given rise to a principle of shoot first, ask questions later – or never.’(19)

Baker on Kelly

Norman Baker’s The Strange Death of David Kelly (London: Methuen, 2007) exposes the Hutton Inquiry as a hastily arranged sham that failed to address even the most blatant ambiguities and uncertainties surrounding Kelly’s death. It should come as no surprise, therefore, to learn that a call by Lord Berkeley in the House of Lords to ‘set up an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 to investigate in full the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly’ was dismissed out of hand by government spokesman, Lord Hunt. ‘The Government believe that the inquiry by…Lord Hutton, in this matter was conclusive.’ Interested parties were advised to ‘seek a new inquest under Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988.’(20)

The case for war

The National Security Archive has made public declassified pre-Iraq war documents containing the claims made by of Rafid Ahmed Alwan (aka CURVEBALL) that Iraq possessed stocks of biological weapons, information that helped the US justify its invasion in 2003.(21) Those wanting to compare rhetoric with truth during the run up to the invasion can consult the Iraq: the war card database compiled by the Fund for Independence in Journalism and published by the Center for Public Integrity.(22) Comprising all public statements on Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction and its alleged links to Al Qaeda made by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others, the database allows these to be tracked against their private assessments and the actual ‘ground truth’ as now known.

Also made available, courtesy of ABC News, is a copy of a Pentagon report which – ‘based on the analysis of some 600,000 official Iraqi documents seized by US forces after the invasion and thousands of hours of interrogations of former officials in Saddam’s government now in US custody’ – provided the first official acknowledgement from the US military that there was no evidence that Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda.(23)

No riffraff

Organised by the Royal United Services Institute, Whitehall Dialogues(24)are invitation-only events discussing specific defence and security issues of current importance to industry, the military, academia and government. As none of us are ever likely to get an invite – ‘the meetings bring together industry, diplomatic members, academics, some City firms, and Government Departments’ – here’s a sample of recent topics:

Peter Riddell (Chief Political Commentator of The Times) on ‘Media and war: shaping public opinion’. ‘This meeting will incorporate discussion on the impact of 24-hour news, satellites and the internet shaping public opinion and influencing expectations; the instant reporting of casualties and impact on opinion at home, looking at the Falklands conflict, first Gulf war, Bosnia and operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.’

Lord Butler of Brockwell on ‘The Butler Report: implications for public administration’. ‘Lord Butler will examine the reasons why the UK intelligence community seem to have reached wrong conclusions about Iraq’s possession of WMD and the lessons that can be learned for the future.’ Not that we’ll ever learn the lessons as the event was ‘off the record’ and closed to the media.

Sir Ian Blair on ‘Policing the metropolis: current challenges’. Challenges include ‘…communication and accountability in an increasingly diverse world city…’. This event was also ‘off the record’ and closed to the media.

Election fevers

The US Election Technology Council has admitted what many already feared:

‘..no voting technology is invulnerable, and…it is critical for election administrators…to build robust procedures for safeguarding the use of electronic voting systems. Misconceptions concerning the operation of electronic voting systems, if left unanswered, can have a corrosive effect on voter confidence if they are not taken seriously and addressed with clear, factual information.’(25)

Prospective voters coming across The Buying of the President 2008 website <http://www.buyingofthepresident.org> are also likely to have their confidence corroded. A companion to the book of the same name, the website explores the roles that money and special interests play in presidential politics.(26)

Uncle Sam steps in

A recent Congressional Research Service Report, Richard F. Grimmett’s Instances of use of United States armed forces abroad, 1798-2007 (Washington: Congressional Research Service, 2008)

‘….reviews hundreds of instances in which the United States has utilized military forces abroad in situations of military conflict or potential conflict to protect US citizens or promote US interests. The list does not include covert actions or numerous instances in which US forces have been stationed abroad since World War II in occupation forces or for participation in mutual security organizations, base agreements, or routine military assistance or training operations. Because of differing judgments over the actions to be included, other lists may include more or fewer instances.’(27)

9/11

The North American Aerospace Defense Command and the United States Northern Command have released a copy of their audio files, telephone conversations and situation room discussions, all recorded during the 9/11 attacks.(28)

Is all this information too late? According to one study, ‘conspiracy thinking is now a normal part of mainstream political conflict in the United States’ especially amongst members of less powerful groups who are ‘more likely to believe at least one of the [9/11] conspiracies, as are those with low levels of media involvement and consumers of less legitimate media (blogs and grocery store tabloids [sic]).’(29)

And from the far end of the spectrum, The Spectator has a disturbing account of David Shayler promoting his 9/11 Truth campaign in a Methodist church hall to an audience of about a dozen. The basic thrust of his theory is that the Twin Towers were brought down by ‘Mossad secret agents working with a cabal of US arms manufacturers, the FBI, the CIA and blessing of the US government’. Fair enough, some might say. However, Shayler then claims that the planes involved in the attacks were ‘missiles wrapped in holograms’. At this point the author puts forward a theory of his own. Could Shayler be an MI5 plant ‘designed eventually to discredit the so-called 9/11 Truth Movement with increasingly extravagant absurdities?’(30)Or could he in fact be a higher being?(31)

DANGO

DANGO, the database of archives of UK non-government organisations, NGOs, since 1945, is a free online database, enabling researchers to identify NGOs and access information about the content, location and accessibility of archival holdings relating to them. Also available are details of individual NGO’s history, previous names, and related organisations.(32)

The end of ideology

Using Al Qaeda as a case study, recent research suggests that ‘…terrorism’s view of the media, far from being composed of rigorous ideological or political principles, is shaped by their calculations of estimated opportunities. Its perception of the mass media…[depends] on its perception of estimated media impact.’(33)

Wikileaks

Wikileaks <http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks> is developing an uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis. Its primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East. So far it has received over 1.2 million documents from dissident communities and anonymous sources.

Don’t panic

Clive Walker asks if the UK’s critical national infrastructure (CNI)(34) can survive threats such as global warning, pandemic disease and international terrorism. Who is ultimately responsible for this seems to be vague, possibly deliberately, reflecting ‘a wish to limit the commitment of central government and to place it upon localities.’ Walker also points out that ‘though there are many laws, guides, and networks in place, they are neither evenly nor consistently applied across the CNI sectors.’ Fragmentation still exists, even after the creation of the Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure in 2007.(35)

CIA history

The Intelligence Community, 1950–1955, published by the US Department of State as a sequel to The Emergence of the Intelligence Establishment, 1945–1950 (1996),(36) documents the growth of the CIA under Walter Bedell Smith and Allen Dulles.(37) The Company’s more recent history is covered (more succinctly) by Richard D. White Jr.’s survey of the career of George Tenet, ‘George Tenet and the last great days of the CIA’: ‘a public servant caught between the warring factions of the White House decision-making process, his own agency’s intelligence priorities, and, ultimately, his own conscience.’(38)

The image thing

Linda Kaye provides a thorough account of the government’s post-Suez realisation of ‘the value of national projection’ arguing that ‘the demand generated by the global expansion of television and the fear that the United States might satisfy it’ made television the obvious medium of choice to achieve this. A process fraught with difficulty, however, as ‘the struggle of the [Overseas Information Service] to convey a cohesive image of Britain on the small screen mirrored its own endeavour to overcome inherent dysfunctional aspects within the organisation.’(39)

Terry Hanstock hails from Sheffield and lives near Nottingham. He has worked in a variety of libraries for many years and now helps look after the information requirements of students and academics at a large ‘new’ university.

Notes

1. See: Francis Watson, ‘The death of George V’, History Today, 36(12), December 1986, pp. 21-30; J. H. R. Ramsay, ‘A king, a doctor, and a convenient death’. British Medical Journal, 308(6941), 28 May 1994, p.1445 <http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/308/6941/1445>.
2. Or, as another observer put it, ‘MI6 may know who’s pulling the trigger and indeed may have encouraged it in the first place – but its fingerprints are rarely, if ever, found.’ Philip Johnson, ‘Licensed to kill? Yes, but…’, The Daily Telegraph, 23 February 2008. See also Stephen Dorril, ‘The truth about MI6…’, The Express, 22 February 2008. Dearlove’s evidence at the inquest can be found here: <http://www.scottbaker-inquests.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/200208am.htm> and <http://www.scottbaker-inquests.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/200208pm.htm>.) Lee Sansum, a former Al Fayed bodyguard, also casts doubt on Dearlove’s claims: ‘[MI6] had surveillance on the Fayed house, and then in St Tropez where Diana and Dodi went on holiday….It means they were on the ground when she crashed. MI6 know what happened that night in Paris because they were there.’ Mark Stevenson, ‘MI6 lied about spying on Diana…’, Sunday Express, 6 April 2008. See also Sansum’s evidence at the inquest: <http://www.scottbaker-inquests.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/090108pm.htm>.
3. Ruling on verdicts at para. 23 <http://www.scottbaker-inquests.gov.uk/docs/ruling_on_verdicts_270308.pdf>.)
4. Peter Allen, ‘Paparazzi who will never face justice’, Daily Mail, 8 April 2008. The French had previously declined to put the photographers on trial for manslaughter in 2002 and a subsequent court case also cleared them of breaching privacy laws. Jon Henley, ‘Paparazzi at Diana crash site acquitted’, The Guardian, 29 November 2003; Richard Palmer, ‘New fury as death crash pursuers are all cleared…’, The Express, 29 November 2003.
5. Jack Malvern, ‘Duke in hospital with chest ailment’, The Times, 5 April 2008; Matt Williams, ‘Duke leaves hospital with a smile and a wave’, The Daily Telegraph, 7 April 2008.
6. See Lewis Chester, Magnus Linklater and David May, Jeremy Thorpe: a secret life (London: Fontana, 1979) and Auberon Waugh, The Last Word: an eye-witness account of the trial of Jeremy Thorpe (London: Michael Joseph, 1980). See also Peter Cook’s parody of Cantley’s summing up, Entirely a matter for you, at <www.phespirit.info/pictures/heroes/p008_info.htm>.
7. Phil Scraton, ‘Policing with contempt: the degrading of truth and denial of justice in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster’, Journal of Law and Society, 26(3), September 1999, pp. 273-297, at p. 290. See also: Hilary Arnot, ‘Justice: Hillsborough’s final victim?’, Legal Action, April 1992, pp. 7-8; Phil Scraton, Hillsborough: the truth (Rev. ed. Edinburgh: Mainstream, 2000).
8. Malcolm Pithers, ‘Hillsborough inquest ends with tears and scuffles’, The Independent, 29 March 1991; Martin Wainwright, ‘Anger greets Hillsborough verdict’, The Guardian, 29 March 1991; Ronald Faux, ‘Relatives weep as jury says deaths were accidental’, The Times, 29 March 1991.
9. Sean O’Neill, ‘De Menezes case police seek inquest anonymity’, The Times, 24 April 2008; Justin Davenport, ‘42 Menezes police ask for names to be kept secret’, The Evening Standard, 25 April 2008.
10. See Ruling on verdicts (see note 3) at para. 43. See also his summing up on 1 April 2008 <http://www.scottbaker-inquests.gov.uk/hearing_transcripts/010408pm.htm>.
11. Lee Sansum’s evidence (see note 2) at para 125. Also puzzling is why Trevor Rees-Jones was the only occupant of the car to wear a seat belt as ‘witnesses testified that the Princess was normally punctilious about buckling up.’ See Alan Hamilton, ‘Diana, Princess of Wales conspiracies can be left to time lords but some questions remain’, The Times, 8 April 2008.
12. Victoria Pigott, ‘Coroner inquest reforms need to go further’, The Lawyer, 22(15), 14 April 2008, p. 8. For an example of the difficulties involved in getting hold of potentially useful information see Teresa Neil, ‘Channel 4 ordered to disclose sources to inquests into the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Fayed’, Entertainment Law Review, 19(3), 2008, pp. 65-67.
13. Gordon Rayner, ‘Coroner will not call for charges against “liar” Burrell’, The Daily Telegraph, 9 April 2008; Andy McSmith, ‘Burrell will not face charges despite admission of deceit’, The Independent, 9 April 2008. Obviously this is unrelated to rumours that the former butler ‘knows several things that would bring great embarrassment to very important people if he were to speak out.’ Dominick Dunne, ‘Two ladies, two yachts, and a billionaire’, Vanity Fair, May 2008, <www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/05/dunne200805?currentPage=1>.)
14. One of the few commentators to look objectively at Al Fayed’s claims was Mary Dejevsky: ‘That he may not have presented his case in the most convincing way for an audience more attuned to understatement….does not mean that his belief in a conspiracy is discredited. There are old questions that remain unanswered….And there are new questions that have been raised by this inquest: not least why witnesses at the scene who volunteered their accounts were not properly interviewed at the time….It is a classic case of allowing the messenger to obscure the message. I wonder in whose interests that might be?’ ‘Why does Mohamed al Fayed get such stick?’, The Independent, 21 February 2008.
15. ‘By giving an outlet for every possible view of Diana…[the inquest] served to chip away at her iconic image. Every last facet of her affairs were raked over, while only the more kindly words of Prince Philip’s letters to here were released….How the Royal Family hate her and how determined they are that their version of her as a neurotic, self-indulgent and wilful “girl” becomes the received version of her.’ Adrian Hamilton, ‘The real purpose of the Diana inquest’, The Independent Open House blog, 8 April 2008. <http://blogs.independent.co.uk/openhouse/2008/04/diana-inquest.html#more>. See also Geoffrey Levy and Richard Kay, ‘Diana’s most intimate secrets have been cruelly exposed…her dignity torn to shreds’, Daily Mail, 8 April 2008.
16. Within a couple of weeks of the verdict Prince William was displaying the Family’s customary boneheaded arrogance, joyriding around the country in a Chinook helicopter. Aislinn Simpson, ‘William flies into a storm for landing at Kate’s…’, The Daily Telegraph, 21 April 2008; Andy McSmith, ‘MoD admits it was naive to allow Prince William’s joyrides in helicopters’, The Independent, 24 April 2008.
17. The official website contains not only transcripts of each day’s hearings but also all documents seen by the jury in open court. These include photographs, plans, drawings and CCTV camera footage. Coroner’s Inquests into the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al Fayed <http://www.scottbaker-inquests.gov.uk/index.htm>)
18. More details in Windfalls of war II <www.publicintegrity.org/wowII/>. The original survey can be found here: <www.publicintegrity.org/WOW/>
19. <www.humanrightsfirst.info/pdf/08115-usls-psc-final.pdf>
20. <www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldhansrd/text/80108-0002.htm#08010865000006>. Those doubting the official line may take comfort in the fact that, somewhat ironically, Baker’s book was runner- up to Alastair Campbell’s The Blair Years in Channel 4 News’ Political Book of the Year Awards.For more recent views on the death of Dr. Kelly see Paul Brandon et al, ‘The death of David Kelly and the “sexed up” WMD report: was BBC Andrew Gilligan’s original source a senior member of Her Majesty’s Government?’ at <http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8146>.
21. ‘The record on CURVEBALL: declassified documents and key participants show the importance of phony intelligence in the origins of the Iraq War’ <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB234/index.htm>.
22. <www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/Search/Default.aspx>
23. Kevin M. Woods and James Lacey, Saddam and terrorism: emerging insights from captured Iraqi documents. Volume I: Redacted (Alexandria, Virginia: Institute for Defense Analyses, 2007) <http://abcnews.com/images/pdf/Pentagon_Report_V1.pdf>.
24. <http://www.rusi.org/whitehalldialogues>
25. Safeguarding the vote: applying best practices to mitigate perceived threats for voting systems, (Houston: Election Technology Council, 2008). <http://www.electiontech.org/documents/SafeguardingtheVotepracticesETCfinal.pdf>
26. Also available are full text versions of earlier books in the series: <http://www.buyingofthepresident.org/index.php/archives>
27. <http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32170.pdf>
28. The files are posted here: <http://www.governmentattic.org/docs/NORAD-USNORTHCOM_9-11_Tapes.pdf>
29. Carl Stempel, Thomas Hargrove, and Guido H. Stempel III, ‘Media use, social structure, and belief in 9/11 conspiracy theories’. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(2), Summer 2007, pp. 353-372. See also Peter Knight, ‘Outrageous conspiracy theories: popular and official Responses to 9/11 in Germany and the United States’, New German Critique, (103), Winter 2008, pp. 165-193. This is a special issue devoted to ‘Dark powers: conspiracies and conspiracy theory in history and literature’.
30. Jeremy Clarke, ‘Secrets and lies’, The Spectator, (9361), 26 January 2008, p. 49.
31. David Shayler ‘has called a news conference this afternoon at which he will claim that he has been chosen by a high power to save the planet …[He] says: “I am the last incarnation of the Holy Ghost (aka the Holy Spirit) or the Yeshua or Jesus Spirit (aka the Christ consciousness).”’ Anon., ‘Shayler: I am the Messiah’, Bucks Free Press, 6 September 2007. See also Annie Machon, ‘How the bullying state has crushed my poor David. As David Shayler proclaims himself “God”, a damning indictment of his treatment from his former partner’, Mail on Sunday, 12 August 2007; Jane Fryer, ‘The MI5 Messiah…’, Daily Mail, 16 August 2007. See also: <http://daveshayler.com/>.
32. <http://www.dango.bham.ac.uk/qsearch.asp>
33. Manuel R. Torres Soriano, ‘Terrorism and the mass media after Al Qaeda: a change of course?’, Athena Intelligence Journal, 3(1), 2008, pp. 78-97. <http://athenaintelligence.org/Al_Qaeda_and_the_Mass_Media-_Athena.pdf>.
34. Defined as critical elements ‘the loss or compromise of which would have a major detrimental impact on the availability or integrity of essential services, leading to severe economic or social consequences or to loss of life.’ Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI) glossary: <http://www.cpni.gov.uk/glossary.aspx#C>.
35. Clive Walker, ‘Governance of the critical national infrastructure’, Public Law, Summer 2008, pp. 323-352.
36. <http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/intel/index.html>
37. All 867 pages are available here: <http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/96785.pdf>
38. Public Administration Review; 68(3), May 2008, pp. 420-427.
39. Linda Kaye, ‘Reconciling policy and propaganda: the British Overseas Television Service, 1954-1964’, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, 27(2), June 2007, pp. 215-236