'Now let Princess Diana rest in peace'

AN INQUEST jury yesterday ruled that Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed were unlawfully killed by the "gross negligence" of their drunken driver and a pack of paparazzi.

The verdict, at the end of an epic six-month inquest, was a repudiation of suggestions that the couple were murdered as part of a plot involving the Duke of Edinburgh and the secret services. Last night, Princes William and Harry said they "agreed" with the verdicts and thanked the jury for their "thorough" considerations.

Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan Police commissioner who investigated the deaths, called for conspiracy theories to be "laid to rest". He said: "The verdict has been clear. They have said they are absolutely sure there is no conspiracy in relation to this matter. I do hope everybody will take this verdict as being closure to this particular tragic incident and the people who have died will be allowed to rest in peace."

Following a succession of inquiries likely to cost British taxpayers up to £10 million, 11 jurors emphatically rejected the claims of the Harrods tycoon, Mohamed al-Fayed, that the car crash in Paris that claimed the lives of his son and the princess was an elaborate murder plot.

But Mr Fayed shrugged off the jury's findings, still insisting the tragedy had been "murder".

His spokesman raised the possibility of a legal challenge to the verdict, following an inquest described by the coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, as "unique".

While the coroner had earlier ruled out the possibility of the jury concluding that the couple had been murdered, because of insufficient evidence, he did leave them the option of an open verdict, something that might have been taken as an indication that they believed there was some merit to the conspiracy claims.

There were four other possible verdicts: unlawful killing by the paparazzi; unlawful killing by driver Henri Paul; unlawful killing by both; and accidental death. At the end of an inquest that heard evidence from 278 witnesses, the jury at the High Court in London took 23 hours and 45 minutes – spread over four days – to apportion blame.

They said responsibility for Diana and Dodi's "unlawful killing" lay jointly with one of Mr Fayed's employees – the driver Mr Paul, who also died in the crash – and a group of paparazzi photographers who had been following their hired Mercedes at the time of the crash in the Alma Tunnel in the early hours of 31 August, 1997.

Lord Stevens, who led the three-and-a-half-year inquiry, named Operation Paget, which looked into allegations that there had been a conspiracy to murder Diana and Dodi, welcomed the jury's verdicts as "justification" of his own findings.

"We were asked to look at the conspiracy to commit murder and the conspiracy theories," Lord Stevens said. "The jury have just now said that that is completely untrue. They are sure that that is not the case.

"What they have said, of course, is that the deaths were caused by Henri Paul and also by the paparazzi. If you read the report, you will see that's exactly what we said."

Asked about the possibility of prosecuting members of the paparazzi, Lord Stevens said that would be a matter for the French authorities.

The jury heard compelling evidence that Mr Paul had been drinking on the night of the accident and had been driving at twice the speed limit when he crashed. They also concluded that the photographers and their drivers were recklessly "racing" the Mercedes and drove so close to it that Mr Paul had no freedom to move.

However, Diana and her lover might have been saved if they had been wearing seat belts, the jury found.

In a statement issued after the verdicts, Mr Fayed claimed the decision was a vindication of his conspiracy theories and a "blow to the many millions of people around the world who have supported my struggle".

The Harrods owner has long believed that the Duke of Edinburgh and MI6 murdered the couple through a staged crash – something for which Lord Justice Scott Baker said last week there was "not a shred of evidence".

Mr Fayed insisted that the six-month hearing, held largely at his behest, was not a waste of time or money. He claimed the jury had concluded that he was "blameless" for the events of that night.

Yesterday's verdicts raise questions over the conclusions of earlier proceedings in France, in which the paparazzi were cleared of any wrongdoing. With the exception of Stéphane Darmon, a motorcyclist, all the paparazzi and their drivers who were present that night refused to give evidence to the inquest. The coroner had no power to compel them to testify, even by video link, and the French government refused to force them.

One of the main witnesses, the former royal butler Paul Burrell, is facing a possible perjury investigation after being publicly branded a "liar" by the coroner. The Metropolitan Police last night said it had still to decide whether to launch a perjury investigation.

Rosa Monckton, Princess Diana's friend, said the inquest had been "incredibly intrusive".

She said: "I think there's a lot of her life that has come into the public eye that should never have been there. "

Speaking about Mr Fayed, she said: "Overall, I feel very sorry for him. One must never forget that he lost a son. I just hope now that he will find some sort of peace."

But that appeared unlikely last night, with Mr Fayed's spokesman, Michael Cole, announcing his employer was keeping "all options open" on a possible legal challenge.

He insisted the phrase "following vehicles" in the verdict referred not just to the paparazzi but to other mystery vehicles.

Coroner set out choice of five verdicts

THE jury spent 23 hours and 45 minutes – spread over four days – deliberating before returning the verdicts of unlawful killing by a majority of nine to two.

Lord Justice Scott Baker told the jury it could only consider five verdicts.

It could not rule that Diana and Dodi were killed as the result of a plot organised by the Duke of Edinburgh.

The five options were:

• Unlawful killing by grossly negligent driving of the paparazzi in the following vehicles;

• Unlawful killing through the gross negligence of the driver Henri Paul;

• Unlawful killing by the grossly negligent driving of both the following vehicles and Mr Paul;

• A verdict of accidental death – if none of the above verdicts was established;

• An open verdict, which would have given credence to conspiracy theories.

The coroner also allowed the jury to add that a contributing factor to the crash was the design of the tunnel – the fact that the Mercedes struck a pillar rather than a wall made the impact more intense.