Diana inquest warned of witness 'lies'

THE inquest into the death of Diana, Princess of Wales heard from witnesses who had lied, the coroner said yesterday.

Lord Justice Scott Baker said there was "not a shred of evidence" that the Duke of Edinburgh ordered Diana's death or that it was organised by MI6.

But he said it was regrettable some witnesses had been untruthful, and named Paul Burrell, the former royal butler, as one of those who were "liars by their own admission".

"One of the regrettable features of this case is the number of people who it appears have told lies in the witness box or elsewhere," Lord Baker told the jury as he summarised the evidence.

"Some are liars by their own admission – I refer to James Andanson, Paul Burrell and John Macnamara.

"Others have either admitted telling half-truths, or part of their evidence may have shown in one respect or more that either in court or previously that they were not telling the truth," the coroner said.

Mr Burrell, 49, has refused to return to her inquest to answer allegations that he lied to the jury. After giving evidence in January, Mr Burrell was filmed in New York claiming that, despite being under oath, he had not told the whole truth.

Lord Justice Scott Baker asked him to return and explain himself, but as Mr Burrell now lives mainly in Florida he is outside the jurisdiction of an English court and cannot be compelled to appear.

Mr Andanson, a photographer, wrongly claimed to have taken infamous pictures of the Duchess of York sucking the toes of her financial adviser, John Bryan.

Mr Macnamara, Mohamed al-Fayed's head of security, admitted lying about what the princess's driver had to drink the night she died. In a TV interview, he said Henri Paul had drunk only "a pineapple juice".

But the former Metropolitan Police chief superintendent told the inquest he knew the Frenchman had drunk two shots of Ricard before the crash.

The coroner told the jury: "You must first decide whether the person whose evidence you are considering has lied rather than having made an honest mistake."

Laying out five options for the verdicts expected this week, he ruled that a staged accident orchestrated by the Duke of Edinburgh was not one of them.

Describing Mr Fayed's theories as "worthless" without evidence, he urged the jury not to be swayed by sympathy.

Diana, her lover, Dodi Fayed, and their driver, Henri Paul, were killed when their Mercedes crashed in Paris on 31 August, 1997.

The coroner said that after hearing around 250 witnesses the most the Fayed legal team was putting forward was that the duke had helped create a "climate of hostility" toward the princess.

"That, you may think, is a long way removed from an allegation that Prince Philip ordered the murder of Diana by MI6, with whom he secretly runs the country," he said.

The inquest jury is expected to be sent out to consider its verdict tomorrow.

Claims of execution

"There is no evidence that the Duke of Edinburgh ordered Princess Diana's execution, and there is no evidence that the Secret Intelligence Service or any other government agency organised it," Lord Justice Scott Baker said yesterday.

In one sentence he demolished the case pursued for more than a decade by Mohamed al-Fayed that the Duke of Edinburgh had orchestrated the murders of Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed.

Mr Fayed has maintained that Diana was pregnant and that the Royal Family wanted to prevent them marrying and stop Dodi, a Muslim, becoming the step-father of the future king.

Jurors had heard evidence that the princess feared dying in a car crash, but also had speculated about death in a helicopter or plane crash. There was testimony that she felt intimidated by Prince Philip, her former father-in-law.

Untruths in the witness box

Paul Burrell, Diana's former butler, was branded a "liar" by Lord Baker.

As he began to summarise the evidence, the coroner remarked: "One of the regrettable features of this case is the number of people who it appears have told lies in the witness box or elsewhere."

He said that Mr Burrell, the photographer James Andanson – who owned a white Fiat and claimed to have been in the tunnel – and Mr Fayed's former head of security, John Macnamara were all "liars by their own admission".

Mr Burrell appeared at the inquest for three days in January, but in a video recording obtained by the Sun newspaper he apparently claimed he introduced "red herrings" during his evidence and held back facts.

He then refused to re-appear at the inquest to explain discrepancies between his evidence and comments reported in the newspaper. At the time, the coroner said he could not compel him to give evidence because Mr Burrell lives outside the court's jurisdiction, in the United States.

The jury heard that Mr Andanson wrongly claimed to have taken the infamous toe-sucking pictures of the Duchess of York.

And Mr Macnamara, Mr Fayed's head of security, admitted lying in a television interview by saying that the couple's driver, Henri Paul, drank only "a pineapple juice" before the fatal crash.

Doubts over pregnancy

Mr Fayed, the Harrods tycoon, was described as the man who shone the spotlight on some of the most private details of Diana's love life because of his claim that she was pregnant.

Lord Baker acknowledged that Mr Fayed was among a group of relatives who had lost loved ones in the car crash which killed his son Dodi, Diana and Mr Paul.

Witnesses, including friends Rosa Monckton, Lucia Flecha De Lima and Lady Annabel Goldsmith, have stated there was no chance that Diana was pregnant. They noticed she had her period within the weeks before she died. Her former lover, Hasnat Khan, said the princess was "assiduous" in taking the contraceptive pill.

No tests to check if she was pregnant were conducted and embalming her body would not have hidden signs of a baby, experts have told the court.

The experts involved in the post-mortem examination did not notice a pregnancy, despite Mr Fayed's claim that the couple had told him of one on the telephone an hour before they died.

Uncertainty over engagement

Stuart Benson, Mr Fayed's solicitor, claimed Dodi had told him he had "exciting news", leaving him in no doubt that the couple were about to get engaged.

However Lord Baker pinpointed a mass of, at times, conflicting evidence from those who supported this view.

"It may be that some of those who spoke about the relationships in fact said more about their own evidence than they did about either of the relationships," he remarked.

He highlighted how Dodi's former butler, Renee Delorm, claimed to have seen Dodi down on one knee, touching Diana's belly, on the night of their deaths.

Mr Delorm did not mention the incident in his subsequent book about his life with Dodi, something he told the court was because he did not want to exploit the situation.

But there was laughter as the coroner observed: "He then agreed that he had no difficulty in giving that fact to a film company."

The coroner conceded that it was quite possible Dodi may have been considering proposing to Diana on the night of their deaths.

But he asked: "At the end of the day does the precise state of the relationship between Diana and Dodi really matter?"

Ring's meaning will never be known

Referring to comments from Mr Fayed's long-standing spokesman, Michael Cole, Lord Baker said: "Perhaps Mr Cole got it right on this occasion when he said in Churchillian style on 5 September and repeated it on ITV on 27 September, 1997, that if the planet lasted for another thousand years, people could still be wondering about the significance of the ring."

Mr Cole, sober-suited, and with his clipped style of public speaking, has often appeared in stark contrast to Mr Fayed's emotional style of address.

Five options for cause of death – and Prince Philip plot is not one of them, jury told

LORD Justice Scott Baker told jurors yesterday they could find Diana, Princess of Wales, and her lover Dodi Fayed had died accidentally or because of negligence.

Addressing the jurors after six months of evidence, the coroner said: "You have heard the evidence and it is your decision that matters and not anyone else's.

"You will have been reassured to have heard that Mohamed al-Fayed told you on oath that he will accept your verdict. No doubt the other interested persons will do likewise.

But he also warned: "Your duty is to find the facts and reach a conclusion on the evidence, and that transcends any desire, for example, to mark your disapproval of anyone's behaviour or to make a statement of some kind."

He said he and the jury – plus one Diana fan who sat through all the proceedings with the words "Diana" and "Dodi" painted on his face – were the only ones to have heard every word of the evidence.

Lord Baker then laid out for the jury the five verdict options but added: "I have determined that it is not open to you to find that this was unlawful killing by the Duke of Edinburgh or anyone else in a staged accident."

The five options are:

&149 unlawful killing by grossly negligent driving of the paparazzi in the following vehicles;

unlawful killing through the gross negligence of the driver Henri Paul;

&149 unlawful killing by the grossly negligent driving of both the following vehicles and Mr Paul;

&149 a verdict of accidental death could be returned if none of the above verdicts are established;

• the jury was also given the option of an open verdict.

He said the jury could add a sentence to any verdicts to draw attention to further factors behind the tragedy such as drink-driving, speeding or failure to wear seatbelts.