Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Diana's death blamed on driver and paparazzi

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 07 April 2008
HENRI PAUL and the paparazzi share the blame for the manslaughter of Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed, the jury at their inquest concluded today.
The panel returned joint verdicts of unlawful killing through grossly negligent driving – or gross negligence manslaughter – ten and a half years after the Paris crash in which Diana, Mr Fayed and Mr Paul died.

After sitting through evidence from
278 witnesses from across the world, the jury of six women and five men took four days to reach the majority decisions.

The three were killed when Mr Paul crashed a hired Mercedes into a pillar in the Alma underpass in Paris (pictured below) in the early hours of August 31 1997.


The jury heard compelling evidence that he had been drinking that night and was driving at twice the speed limit for the road when he crashed.

But 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.

The combined manslaughter verdict represents an emphatic rejection of conspiracy theories promoted by Mr Paul's employer Mohamed al Fayed.

Mr al Fayed has long believed that the Duke of Edinburgh and MI6 murdered the couple through a staged crash but even his own legal team abandoned that position.

Coroner Lord Justice Scott Baker ruled out the possibility of concluding that the couple were murdered because of insufficient evidence.

But he did leave the jurors the option of an open verdict, something which might have been taken as an indication they believed there was some merit the conspiracy claims.


The verdicts raise questions over the conclusions of earlier proceedings in France in which paparazzi were cleared of any wrongdoing.

Other than motorcyclist Stephane Darmon, all of the paparazzi and their drivers who were present that night refused to give evidence to the High Court inquest.

As they remained in France, the coroner had no power to compel them to testify even by video link and the French government actively refused to force them.

In the end, the coroner had a series of statements which were taken from the paparazzi during the earlier French investigation read to the jury.

But he issued a warning that their evidence had not been tested in court.

The jury saw receipts from the Ritz Hotel showing that Mr Paul ordered two double shots of Ricard spirit shortly before taking to the wheel.

There was also first-hand evidence that he was seen in a nearby bar earlier that night and medical evidence that he was on Prozac and had a drink problem unknown to friends and family.

The jury was not swayed by question marks over blood samples showing that Mr Paul was three times the French drink-drive limit when he crashed.

The jury also specified that Mr Paul's drink-driving and the fact that neither Mr Fayed nor Diana were wearing seatbelts contributed to their deaths.

There was laughter in court as the coroner rose to leave before turning around to tell the jury that they would be excused jury service for the rest of their lives.

He thanked them for their "considerable devotion" to duty over the past six months and said it was "almost astonishing" that they had been present on every day without having any absences.

The inquest has been sitting for 93 days.



The full article contains 572 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 07 April 2008 4:53 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Princess of Wales
 
1

ednbru,

07/04/2008 17:10:44
Aye you can fool all of the people, all of the time, or can you ???
2

Jock MacSprog,

07/04/2008 17:18:38
another excellent use of taxpayers funds.
Shall we commission a 12 year study to establish if the Pope is Catholic ?
3

Calum McLeod 1,

07/04/2008 17:30:11
Sad fact remains that so many so-called VIPs don't wear a seatbelt for whatever reason and, if Diana had, she would most probably still be here. Can't say the same for Dodie but she would almost certainly have survived. Clunk, click - every trip!
4

Steve Evans,

Malta 07/04/2008 17:38:19
This case will never die!
5

Paul Voltiare,

07/04/2008 18:13:27
Why wasn't the Duke called to give evidence ?
6

John Knox furr First Meenister,

High St, Embra 07/04/2008 19:02:04
#5 Exactly. Good question. And why wasn't I? I have information about it which could prove that the Duke done it guv but nobody wanted to know.
7

THE BPRENTICE,

07/04/2008 22:00:50
2 Jock MacSprog - spot on!

Mohamed al Fayed should have been asked why he didn't employ decent 'advanced' drivers to ensure the safety of his loved ones? They knew the inherent risk of paps hassling - he should have paid for proper cover.

But he has to live with that!
8

THE BPRENTICE,

08/04/2008 10:05:55
Watched something on sky news about this and I realised Mohamed al Fayed DID employ decent 'advanced' drivers to ensure the safety of his loved ones - it was an over the limit Henri Paul that waved the experts away - AND Diana didn't have her seatbelt on.

Mohamed al Fayed has had his day in court, more than your average person would have received...now he needs to accept what's happened and move on with his life.
9

gorgeousgorgieboy,

Edinburgh 08/04/2008 11:55:07
If Diane is up there somewhere looking down on all this....

she'll be loving it.

She was nowt but a publicity seeking paim in the erse, and the world is better off without her. I'm glad that this total waste of money is over.
10

Iain Bhern,

08/04/2008 12:10:09
I can't say I care about the verdict. I became sick and tired of the constant need for the media to drone on about this woman years ago. Didn't even bother to read the article, just came straight down to see other people's opnions.
11

Proud to have Scots blood,

New York 08/04/2008 19:06:06
Mr. Fayed will NEVER believe the truth. He wants to believe his son was expecting a child with Diana & she
was going to marry Dodi. He wants to believe they were
killed to prevent a marriage. They were dating, that's all. The driver of their car was impaired & the reporters hounded them. It is they that Mr. Fayed should be angry with, not Diana's in-laws. Mr. Fayed
is'nt going to give it up either, he will continue to
be a gadfly.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.