BBC.co.uk

Talk about Newsnight

Debates

Is the Diana inquest a waste of time and money?

  • Newsnight
  • 16 Jan 08, 11:16 AM

diana203x100.jpgTen years on an we're still reading tawdry headlines about Princess Diana.

So far her long-awaited inquest has heard a host of reheated conspiracy theories and evidence has included vital details such as:

Diana was called "a whore"

An "alternative therapist" believed Prince Philip wrote "cruel and disparaging" letters to the Princess

Diana had contraceptive pills in her possession, a witness claimed

A holistic healer claimed Diana's driver Henri Paul was a "maniac"

Do we really need to pay millions of public money for such details? Is the inquest a necessary exercise in transparency, or has it become a shameful circus? Let us know what you think..

Comments  Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 12:34 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stephen wrote:

It is difficult to contain oneself when answering this...Yes, of course it XXXXXXX is.

  • 2.
  • At 12:34 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sam Stakes wrote:

A huge waste of time and money. The actual inquest should focus merely on incidents leading to her death.

In the name of "conspiracy theory", the judge is admitting all potential lines of questioning. This will never end!

  • 3.
  • At 12:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Go Dutch wrote:

Diana who?

  • 4.
  • At 12:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • M Webb wrote:

Why can we not just let her rest in peace.

If there really was a cover up then no amount of inquiries will ever unearth the truth behind events in Paris.

It is a shameful waste of time and money to continue with this useless inquiry.

  • 5.
  • At 12:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nic Brough wrote:

If it would have the effect of getting all the conspiracy theorists to shut up (either way - whether they're right or wrong) then it's worth it just to lay the poor girl to rest and let her family move on. I'd certainly appreciate not seeing it on the news any more.

Much as I don't care about all the florid details, the press is there to report on it, and I don't blame them for it.

Unfortunately, I doubt this will stop any of the arguments, so ultimately, it's a complete waste of time and money.

  • 6.
  • At 12:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andy wrote:

Complete waste of tax payers' money. She died in a road accident. End of story.

  • 7.
  • At 12:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • garth knoll wrote:

I think Di would have preferred to "see" all these millions disbursed amongst her favorite charitable causes

It is, as you say, "a shameful circus". Poor Diana, the poor young Princes, poor Price Charles. They're all going through this farcical nightmare because Al Fayed has the money to string things out over years and years.

It's a waste of time, money and feelings. Al Fayed, get used to it: No-one intentionally caused this. Waste your own money if you want to, but stop wasting ours!

  • 9.
  • At 12:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Rose wrote:

The only thing wrong with this inquest is that it is YEARS TOO LATE...

  • 10.
  • At 12:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sam wrote:

Yes I think it is time to end this. It is ridiculous and must be painful for her family to have to constantly read these headlines. Most of the comments are just speculation or personal opinion not fact. A large amount of the comments made seem to be nothing to do with her death at all completely inappropriate to be discussed at an inquest into her death. This is costing the tax payer an enormous amount of money, money which could be put to better use. Nothing will be resolved as a result of all this questioning because we will never know for sure of what happened. In my opinion it was a tragic accident.

  • 11.
  • At 12:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Hugh Devlin wrote:

YES & YES

  • 12.
  • At 12:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alex Gordon wrote:

no more or less so than the royal family. We pay millions to have a royal family because,against any notion of democracy or fairness, there is a consensus to retain them . Many people get much pleasure from the royal family ( heavens only knows why) so we accept them. This crazy inquest is simply an extension of the principle that benefit is gained by wasting money on the royal family and many people will have been thoughly entertained by the "show"; whilst i pity those that are following the inquest, they should be allowed their weird pleasure.

  • 13.
  • At 12:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nik Jones wrote:

I disagree with the public money being spent, but in the interests of transparency and openness then I think it regrettably necessary.

The verdict on whether it has been a success will be, once finished, whether conspiracy theorists still fill up the tabloids with their twisted ideas or whether they will finally shut up.

  • 14.
  • At 12:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Graeme wrote:

Quite why the nation is pandering Mohammed Al Fayed's ridiculous notions of conspiracy is beyond me. We already know how she died and who was responsible, wasting public money on this fiasco is outageous.

  • 15.
  • At 12:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Fleetwood wrote:

Bread and circuses for a generation brought up on celebrity sleaze. It benefits no one but the newspapers whose circulation suffers if the headline does not include either Diana or house prices.

Time to lay the poor woman to rest for everyone's benefit.

  • 16.
  • At 12:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • E Sharp wrote:

YES ! Drop it now. Pay out no more good money to appear stupid.

  • 17.
  • At 12:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Philip Ross wrote:

This is undoubtably a total waste of public money brought about by a wealthy, influential, deluded and bitter man. We have hangers-on queueing up to give their unsubstantiated ideas of what they imagine Diana may have been thinking. The circus should be closed as soon as possible.

  • 18.
  • At 12:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Kim wrote:

Yes yes and yes - please let us stop wasting money on this. She's been dead for ten years, lets move on for pity's sake. I'm fed up with seeing this all over the papers and people making money off the back of it. Surely we have better things to spend money and reporters time on.

  • 19.
  • At 12:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • giles bovill wrote:

the inquest was I beleived meant to focus on her death and the events leading up to it. It has become a complete circus and a total waste of tax payers money. How the judge continues to let it roll on and muck up dirt which has nothing to do with the actual car crash or events leading to her death is unfathomable.

  • 20.
  • At 12:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • l.e.dempster wrote:

this ia a total waste of tax payers money I dont believe there was a conspiracy to kill Diana.
l.e.dempster

  • 21.
  • At 12:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Hopkins wrote:

"Do we really need to pay millions of pubic money for such details?"

Freudian or deliberate slip?

  • 22.
  • At 12:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Brela wrote:

Yes, its a circus, its on the news and people watch it, that why it's on the news. Her poor kids!

  • 23.
  • At 12:44 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Will wrote:

I doubt whether there's any value in it. Definitely nothing for the general public. Perhaps the people involved derive some benefit, but I don't see the Princes involved and all the rest look like faded variety stars - looking for limelight. Please make it stop!

  • 24.
  • At 12:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Kitching wrote:

This is an absolute waste of public money, headlines today show many people without access to an NHS Dentisr, surely these monies can be better spent than on re-hashing polemic recollections from 1997 and before. I didn't have much time for Diana when she was alive and much as though I regret her untimely death, we don't require this in 2008, the 'Diana Industry' is surely not short of a few bob!

  • 25.
  • At 12:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Frank Rowett wrote:

As this enquiry has been instigated by Fayed, it seems only fair that, if there is no supporting evidence to his claims, he covers the cost incurred setting up this "farce". Is it not time that this woman was put to rest and her children saved the heartache of going through her death again and again.
Will Fayed accept the findings if they prove his accusation unfounded or will there be yet another "trial?" at the public's expense.

  • 26.
  • At 12:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stig Ehnbom wrote:

Absolutely shameful circus

  • 27.
  • At 12:46 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sue Quinn wrote:

It is ridiculous but merely a further expression of the distorted celebrity culture by which we are becoming increasingly dominated. It provides opportunity for yet more tasteless grandstanding by those who laughingly call themselves friends (her rock, anyone?)and easy space filling for the tabloids. But isn't this what we have come to expect? We get what we deserve, don't we?

  • 28.
  • At 12:46 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Readman wrote:

"Circus" comes close to describing this ridiculous waste of money, but doesn't do justice to the full grotesque horror, prurience and black comedy involved.

And what will be achieved?

Those who believe in conspiracy and see sinister forces at work won't change their minds, or stop believing in their paranoid fantasies.

  • 29.
  • At 12:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • stewart wrote:

I could not agree with you more. Surely our legal system and taxes should be used to deal with matters more imporant than the fantasies of an embittered foreign national

  • 30.
  • At 12:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Steve Savi wrote:

The short answer: No, we should not pay for this. Yes its a waste of time and money.

The long answer: Diana was a wonderful person and what is good, noble, pure and kind - these are the things we should focus on; the memory and legacy of her work to highlight the plight of others should be where the money goes.

Her own frailty and the symptoms of a difficult public life and troubled personal life should be of no concern in the scope of a public enquiry.

Just as the media lost sight of Mother Theresa and her contribution during the same weeks of Diana's death; once again the media is loosing sight of the real story.

Perhaps it is as much a damning report of us - the public - and our insatiable desire for tabloid press as anything else

  • 31.
  • At 12:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • John wrote:

I'd rather the government spent millions on this entertainment than all their quangos, bureacracy & Olympic Games mismanagement.

  • 32.
  • At 12:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Pam Wallace wrote:

I personally believe it is time that Diana was allowed to rest in peace. It must be a continual nightmare for her sons to hear on a daily basis what everyone else says or thinks about her.
She was a wonderful person and did more good than was expected of her, she was a loving mother and wife, when allowed, so those are the parts of her life that should be remembered, not what some people are saying in the hope that they are going to become famous for. I think that it is terrible of them to use her for such a purpose. If anything is to be said in public about her, then let it be by her children and her close family and friends, those are the ones who know the truth.
P. W.

  • 33.
  • At 12:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Gerry Wade wrote:

It is a total waste of money but it is driven by an individual with pots of money to waste. Contrast the resources being devoted to this case with the deplorable way the families of service men and women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan waiting to know the circumstances of their death are treated.

  • 34.
  • At 12:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Denis Hall wrote:

I don't think so, as even though there may not have been a conspiracy as such, it reveals gross amounts of incompetence .

My main point though is to express my irritation with the BBC's increasing tendency to mention the price of everything. How can 'taxpayers', 'ordinary people, or 'local people' - your terms not mine - ever understand what this represents when it is not set in a proper context - it is clearly used as a tabloid-style emotive mechanism rather then as a genuine attempt to educate the audience

  • 35.
  • At 12:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andy wrote:

I never thought I'd find myself agreeing with Piers Morgan but I thought that his recent comments on Question Time on this subject were spot on.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of him or his theories, the fact is that Mohammed Al Fayed lost his son in that crash, and he has every right to expect the authorities to try to establish the truth what happened on that night, just as any member of the public would.

  • 36.
  • At 12:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Dolores Nutland wrote:

Yes of course it's a disgraceful waste of public money. It serves no useful purpose. Cicus is the word.

  • 37.
  • At 12:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Brian Hillyer wrote:

Diana's death WAS a tragedy but I'm sick of all the publicity surrounding the court case etc etc.
It's 10 years now, what in the world are the media expecting, a resurrection??

  • 38.
  • At 12:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Lorna Ashton-Scott wrote:

I am totally dismayed by some of the salacious comments that are being revealed. I think the inquest is undignified and nothing more than a circus. I was never a fan of Diana or any other royal. However, this inquest is disgusting and must be horrendous for her children. I have no idea what some of the information that is coming out has to do with her dying in a car crash. This seems to be about Al Fayed gaining some comfort from the world knowing that his son was engaged to Diana (according to him)! There seems to be some agenda to make their relationship appear as legitimate. What this has to do with her death, I am still struggling to understand. Why did we need to know she was on the pill? She is being laid bare in death in an appalling manner. It is ghoulish and sickening and I for one wish it would all come to an end and let her rest in peace.

  • 39.
  • At 12:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Buyondo wrote:

It is IMPORTANT and to find out the truth, many opportunist may have used this to have there stories but the truth is needed, to the children and all those who value humanity.
The issue of cost is key but this should not stop people looking for justice, truthness and causes. How do we obtain the truth, is another thing but it is needed even if it is ten 30yrs.Diana reign was bigger than the amount of money you think, and her contribution to many lives is much better that the value you are attaching to it.

  • 40.
  • At 12:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • J. Roos wrote:

In civilised countries we have inquests because we must. The question suggests either that it should not have been held or it complains because the participants did not manage to generate a new story. Worse, the BBC is by its question suggesting that the public should have a say over whether or not a particular inquest goes ahead. People find it entertaining. And those who don't should perhaps then take the time to reflect on the ethics of the question. It is as mindless as the gossip from the inquest itself.

  • 41.
  • At 12:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Joan Lohnes wrote:

Let the poor woman rest instead of turning her life into a circus

"Is the Diana inquest a waste of time and money?"

Yes.

Perhaps after this, we can launch an inquiry into whether NASA really went to the moon and whether Elvis is really dead. Ten years should just about do it.

  • 43.
  • At 12:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Buyondo wrote:

It is IMPORTANT and to find out the truth, many opportunist may have used this to have there stories but the truth is needed, to the children and all those who value humanity.
The issue of cost is key but this should not stop people looking for justice, truthness and causes. How do we obtain the truth, is another thing but it is needed even if it is ten 30yrs.Diana reign was bigger than the amount of money you think, and her contribution to many lives is much better that the value you are attaching to it.

Thank you

  • 44.
  • At 12:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Mr.Peter Roy Tennant wrote:

We the public have the right to know who killed her, she was no angel but somthing smells at the TOP LEVEL.

Peter

  • 45.
  • At 12:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stephen Drake wrote:

The entire theatrical performance that the inquest was always going to be is entirely a waste of my money as a taxpayer. I neither cared for the so-called people's princess during her attention seeking life nor afterwards. She is dead, let her children live with their memories without the waste bin of her life being emptied any further publicly.

yes, waste of everything.
AW

  • 47.
  • At 12:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Michael Hallam wrote:

Of course it should be canceled - but then what would all those poor lawyers do?

  • 48.
  • At 12:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Duncan Cooper wrote:

The enquiry is absolute rubbish, if there was anything remotely suspicious about her death then it would be a crime and dealt with using a real trial.
This is just a circus for lonely people to pretend they knew the princess and for 'close' people to show off.
An expensive public funded 'reality tv' show.

  • 49.
  • At 12:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Lightfoot wrote:

It has been clear from the start that this inquest would be an outrageous waste of public money. All it seems to be achieving is to confirm that most of the principals involved were neither very nice nor very bright. If Newsnight is planning a piece on it I hope you will give full coverage to the decision process by which the inquest was allowed to proceed and who should bear responsibility for it. A cost breakdown would also be interesting, and who will be paying for what.

  • 50.
  • At 12:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Steve wrote:

An utter waste of money, but also possibly what many people in the country want and are interested in. Perhaps the tabloids and other media outlets who are lapping up every word should be picking up the bill rather than the government subsidising conspiracy theorists and royalty-obssessed fantasists.

  • 51.
  • At 12:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Harry wrote:

One more vote for "shameful circus".

  • 52.
  • At 12:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alastair Ross wrote:

Frankly yes, it is a circus, and I feel very frustrated by the waste of money on this nonsense. Neither Diana nor Dodi Fayed are coming back because of this further "inquest". And if Al-Fayed does not get the result he wants - as seems utterly certain - will we just have to endure more costly badgering for more costly "enquiries"? Sometimes it seems we live our lives rewriting the past.

Meantime our local council is critically short of funding for renewal of the school estate that is in sore need of replacement. Each year Aberdeenshire is sold short by about £75M of revenue because of arcane funding rules and the high growth rate of the county. We have no cash at all in the capital budget for schools renewal - cash that needs to be invested in the future of our children not re-writing the stories of the past.

For the cost of this so called inquest we could build a brand new secondary school. And I'll bet there are other councils across the nation that could use the money just as wisely.

Have we got our national priorities right? I think not.

  • 53.
  • At 12:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Tom Aldridge wrote:

I thought it was an inquest to ascertain how she died - not how she lived!
Anyway as Molesworth say 'any ful no, she didn't clunk click every trip!'
£10m (Diana)+ £50bn (Northern Rock) + £120m (Bloody Sunday).
Land Rover/Jaguar & British Steel- Indian?
The toll road -Australian.
Electricity - French.
Airports - Spanish.
Hain - incompetent.
Illegal immigration + benefits.
Political correctness.
Wembley without a roof or a car park!
We are the laughing stock of the world

  • 54.
  • At 12:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ian Wright wrote:

All I have seen from this so-called inquest, is the Al-fayed camp raking up all the past history between Princess Diana and the Royals.


The evidence from around the accident has been covered. now we appear to be trying stick our noses into Princess Diana's private life upto her death.

Surely the idea of an inquest is to determine what caused the accident and subsequent deaths. I cannot see how some letters from the Duke of Edinburgh, have any relevance in this inquest at all.


So far we have found out that rather than the untaouchable princess people said Diana was. We have seen a flawed human being rather like everyone else out there. Even worse we have told about what medications and time of the month she was at. I feel this trial just goes on and on, because Mr Al-Fayed has plenty of money to burn. One also has to wonder at the cost to tax payers of this country. When you consider the inquest in france has heard more or less the same evidence, i cannot see any other outcome.

  • 55.
  • At 12:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • richard wrote:

The inquest is disgusting. In every way.

Anyone else wouldn't have this public exposure.

It's not even an inquest. It's a circus.

  • 56.
  • At 12:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • jean wrote:

An absolute waste of money that could be better spent. Even if it were a conspiracy the truth would never come out.

  • 57.
  • At 12:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • D W Allmark wrote:

If the Met' had made inquiries earlier then perhaps this waste of cash would not have arrisen.

D W Allmark

  • 58.
  • At 12:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Laurence P. Ryan wrote:

Yes, It IS time to call a halt and let Diana rest in peace. At this stage she has a right to some dignity even if only for the sake of the sons she so loved.
L. Ryan.

  • 59.
  • At 12:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jonathan Nixon wrote:

Complete waste of time/money/TV time. Who, other than readers of the tabloids, is really interested in this and/or thinks that anything meaningful (other than 'accidental death') will come out of this?

  • 60.
  • At 12:57 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Hazel Robbins wrote:

Of course it's a huge waste of time and money. No new evidence is going to come to light now.
Diana's death was one of those unfortunate events that nobody wanted to happen and there is nobody to blame. So it's difficult for those closely involved to come to terms with. I hope after this we hear no more about it - I'm sure that's what her sons would want.

  • 61.
  • At 12:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Larry wrote:

Well, that depends on your view.

To many it is of great value to hear that women who sleep with arabs are whores and to others it is a waste of time and money, because they already knew that.

Clearly the whole thing has turned out to be a circus and with almost complete certainty there will be no insights of value generated by the inquest, but such is the governnce of this country.

priorities, priorities...

  • 62.
  • At 12:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • rajendra wrote:

whether it be diana ,monica ,benezir or sonia gandhi be it inquest of adultery or hagemony no one should feel mortified on any of these !
today the whole world has come close and more transperent.the days of monarchy has gone we are living more in star trek era than dominion.today we have more electronic relations than humane we are heading more towards a horizon where there are only two identities based on sex i.e. male and female determined by electronic formulations.

thanks & regards

  • 63.
  • At 12:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jeremy Ross wrote:

of course it is but people can't let go.
there is a feeling that at the time, and I was 25 then, she was doing damage to the country, that the royal family was out of touch, there was a feeling of conspiracy that it was all so convenient, a huge crash under a tunnel, a fiat that no one traced, it all led to the feeling that something had happened and it's this feeling that is now being aired. Tony blair saved the royal family and things moved on. If there was anything of substance it probably was covered up years ago, now justice "is being seen to be done". will it get anywhere? of course not. but Diana always did sell papers and gives good coverage....

  • 64.
  • At 12:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nick wrote:

I can't believe that this is still news and being raked over in such a crass fashion. And all because a wealthy grieving father can't accept that one of his own employees was responsible for the crash.

She's dead, it was an (avoidable) accident; move on, nothing to see here.

  • 65.
  • At 01:01 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Michael McNab wrote:

All I think about this is that I really, really hope it's not on Newsnight tonight. There's real news out there guys.

Thanks,

Michael

  • 66.
  • At 01:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Matt Pomroy wrote:

The circumstances around her death were suspicious at best. So when an independent inquiry by Lord Stevens suggests that the case was ‘far more complex than any of us thought’ and turns up ‘new forensic evidence’ and witnesses then it is a worthwhile exercise.

Those complexities could prove to be vital evidence that not only clears up the causes but potentially implicates the Royal family, MI6, etc or clears them and lets the matter finally rest.

But sadly it seems that every time there’s an enquiry, all it generates is more conjecture and another front page for the Daily Mail.

  • 67.
  • At 01:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Farrell-Vinay wrote:

"Do we really need to pay millions of pounds for such details? Isn't it time to call this shameful inquest what it is - a circus?

Do we really need to pay millions of pubic money for such details? Is the inquest a necessary exercise in transparency, or has it become a shameful circus? Let us know what you think.."

I think you might check your emails before sending them.

  • 68.
  • At 01:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Richard Rutter wrote:

In a word, yes, it is a waste of money. I find it difficult, if not impossible, to give credence to much of the 'evidence'. Many witnesses are simply using the occasion as some sort of platform and there's no way to corroborate much of what has been said. (EG personal conversations between the Princess and a single member of her staff.)

  • 69.
  • At 01:06 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Yvonne Wagstaff wrote:

This inquest is an appalling and unneccessary intrusion into the life of one who sought to do her best in the light of her situation. She brought very great happiness to many including her children - who must by now be enduring most painful suffering at the gratuitous revelations of Diana's once private life. How can all this possibly throw any light on the mechanical reason for the car accident?
Cruel and callous are those who seek to discredit her in order to gain some sick satisfaction from these attempts to cast blame on persons unknown. Will she rest in peace? I think not.

  • 70.
  • At 01:07 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alex Mitchell wrote:

Yes, this inquest has become a shameful circus. The cost of such an exercise is an awful drain on public money but what is even worse is the way this poor woman is not allowed to rest in peace. Her sons are forced to live with sensational headlines while the inquest and media continue to invite all and sundry to stand up and have their say - regardless of whether what they have to say is relevant or even true. For goodness sake put the whole sorry tale to bed.

  • 71.
  • At 01:08 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alan Duncan wrote:

This inquest is a total waste of time
and more important, a total waste of
Money; What about her son's, what
effect is it having on her son's.
Let her now rest in peace, and may she rise in glory.

  • 72.
  • At 01:09 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sergiu Gheorghiu wrote:

I think people should move on and leave Di and Dodi to rest in peace. Whatever happened, it is highly unlikely that she would have married him, obviously she was not pregnant, and now we're sepnding millions to find out what? She wrote letters, she received letters.....

The princes must feel awful watching and reading about this circus in the media.

Lets all have a life and stop peeping into others'

  • 73.
  • At 01:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Lesley wrote:

It's absolutely appalling that it has taken 10 years to come to an inquest and that Mohammed Al Fayed has been allowed to make these ridiculous allegations.

Whatever you think about Paul Burrell, I do not like the way he is being treated as if he were on trial. The questions he is being asked in such a hostile manner just do not seem relevant to how Diana died.

Your joking of course!

Of course its a total waste of the taxpayers money and court time. Because even though we are 99% sure that a murder took place, 99% sure who ordered their denmise, 99% sure that Henry Paul was drugged by injection at the scene the truth must NEVER be known.

Burrel should be hung up to dry. The guy sure is acting weird (answers given by him in court) to say he was in love with Di, we knew he was and if anyone could have brought the real purpertaters to justice he could have. What Burrel for the second time would rather do is protect the big house.

There are reasons why the Queen shivers in her shoes each time Burrel is brought to court.

He has let down our Princess very badly.

  • 75.
  • At 01:11 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Kevin Cranston wrote:

Off course it is a waste of money and has become a circus. All sensible people have long ago accepted that it was an unfortunate but avoidable accident and that the lessons to be learnt are

1. Dont Take a Lift with a Driver and
2. Always Wear a Seat Belt.

Time to move and accept that nothing can change what happened.

  • 76.
  • At 01:12 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • G Rangarajan wrote:

It is an absolute waste of time and energy not to speak of the money involved. Let us allow her to rest in peace whatever that might be. This continued saga helps only the tabloid press to be in business and the insignificant persons involved to become heros. One wonders whether the British Justice System is so impotent that it cannot put this matter to bed.

  • 77.
  • At 01:12 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Frank O'Brien wrote:

As a Republican I get angry that so much time and money is spent fawning to a class which should have gone long ago. As part of this hangover of Empire, the life and intrigues of princess Diana or any of the royal family is fit only for the prurient.
Diana was a tragic character among many royals who died in the fast lane. Had they worn a seatbelt, it could have saved both passengers lives.
There are many people who have tragedy in their lives that deserve support, who often don't get it.
Please, Don't waste any more of our taxes on this charade.

  • 78.
  • At 01:12 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Bernie R wrote:

Everything about the royal family is a shameful circus which we shouldn't be paying for. What we are getting for our money in this case is far more valuable to us than what we usually have to pay for, which is to keep these deranged and inbred tossers in a disgusting degree of luxury.

It is showing them for what they are, greedy, status-driven air-heads, the undeserving rich.

Worth every penny.

  • 79.
  • At 01:13 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jan wrote:

I believe it's now less about Diana and more about people in authority treating us as if we're idiots - as they seem to be doing more and more often - and us demanding that they be accountable to us. The entire world is the jury in this case and we want to feel that we've been told the truth.

What gives those in authority the right to pull the wool over our eyes about important matters such as the sudden death of the mother of our future king, the highly disturbing unexplained deaths of the Deepcut recruits - still no truth or justice there despite the enquiry - and even what is going on in the EEC?

  • 80.
  • At 01:13 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Daniel wrote:

Yes the inquest is necessary. People are still very skeptical about the circumstances of Diana's death and one can understand why when we have all had to wait ten years for this inquiry which should have been held shortly after Diana died. Late is better than never, even if precious few new insights are coming forward.

  • 81.
  • At 01:15 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Hannah Phillips wrote:

It is certainly a waste of PUBLIC money. However I am not so sure as to whether it is a waste of PUBIC money as your email suggests!!
I shall be interested to listen to the discussion on such a topic?

I agree time to close the book

Is the 'pubic money'a typing mistake or a hidden joke linked to the revelation of what Diana was called?
I think an inquest is legitimate and should be paid for by both families involved, not just by one.
Silvana

  • 84.
  • At 01:17 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jean young wrote:

I think anyone who cared about her would let her rest in peace.

  • 85.
  • At 01:17 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rosemary Konotey-Ahulu wrote:

As long Mr Al-Fayed can find lawyers willing to do his bidding this circus will continue.

  • 86.
  • At 01:18 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Angela Dodds wrote:

Quite simply, this inquest has become a shameful circus. If true, none of us need to know these details about the Princess - if not true, then we need to hear them even less. Diana has a family and friends; how hurtful must all this be to them? And what damage is it doing not just her image, but the image of Britain as a whole in the eyes of the world? An inquest is an enquiry into the cause of an unexpected death, so why should we be told 90% of what is being said in the coroner's court?

  • 87.
  • At 01:18 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jean Hardy wrote:

I just wish that, for the sake of that poor young woman and of her sons, she could be left alone.

  • 88.
  • At 01:18 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Douglas E Walker wrote:

This so called `Inquest` is an abserdity, unwelcomed and unnecessary.

The only people to benefit are the lawyers, the press, and not even the Harrod`s owner (on behalf of his son) can be happy or benefit in any way.

Whoever is responsible for this `circus` should be ashamed and bring it to a close. Ten years from the death of Princess Diana we should not be faced with this unnecessary interegation.

All that should have been required were the facts of the accident in Paris to se submitted to the coroner.

Then her sons, now much older, could have put her to rest, proceeded to put this behind then, and been able to grow into the sons we all respect, without enduring this defamation of their mother.

  • 89.
  • At 01:20 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ajit wrote:

Complete waste of time & energy,wonder what we going toachieve out of it.

  • 90.
  • At 01:20 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Matt wrote:

I agree with the proposition that the Diana inquest is a shameful waste of time and money. I shudder to think how much this is costing the taxpayer - that, on top of the cost of the re-investigation into her death. My father in law lost his pension after decades of contributions when his company was sold off and like so many in his position, he's facing an impoverished retirement. And here we are spending untold millions heading towards an inevtiable "accidental death" verdict into the untimely death of a playgirl. Talk about warped priorities. Good for Newsnight to reflect what so many people must be thinking.

  • 91.
  • At 01:21 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Evniki, London wrote:

No, no, no, we don't want more of such details;who really cares about all these apart from the few who have other motives or make money out of it. It is indeed a shameful circus and a waste of the taxpayer's money.

  • 92.
  • At 01:22 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Neil Martin wrote:

If we had any confidence in any sort of official enquiry then this inquest would be mandatory. Since we are now accustomed to all official enquiries being nothing more than whitewash exercises, this inquesthas become a senseless waste of taxpayer money. For that reason alone it is a shameful circus, never mind the kind of evidence being led.

  • 93.
  • At 01:23 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nigel Bane wrote:

She was "loved" and admired by many but the "accident" is now history and no amount of investigation is likely to unearth any new info. Let's move on.

  • 94.
  • At 01:23 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • A Russell wrote:

Of course it's a circus thats what the establishment always intended it to be. Throw enough mud and some will stick.

  • 95.
  • At 01:24 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Terry Willingham wrote:

The answer to your question is YES (in 72 point bold italic).

  • 96.
  • At 01:25 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Susanna Fox wrote:

Yes — a total waste of time and money. If Al Fayed's claims (i.e. Diana was engaged/pregnant/murdered by Prince Phillip or MI5) are found to be baseless, he should pay the entire bill for this farce.

  • 97.
  • At 01:27 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • EDWARD SYNGE wrote:

tHE ENTIRE SHOW IS SYMPTOMATIC OF THE SICKNESS THAT PERVADES OUR SOCIETY,THE NEVER ENDING NEED FOR DRAMA.
ANYONE WHO KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT AL FAYED WILL BE LACKING IN ANY SURPRISE FOR WHAT THE REPULSIVE SPECIMEN HAS DONE.

  • 98.
  • At 01:27 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Leo A. wrote:

Diana was a 'modern' woman ! She epitomized the life styles of so many young women these days in the UK. She had married into a highly traditionalized situation, the Royal Family no less , but her expectations were at odds with their conventions ! The whole thing went lop sided! Charles took up with his 'real' love , Camilla and Diana reared up on her haunches and rebelled! She went off on her own jaunt sticking up two fingers at any attempt to force her into docile submissiveness and went off to do what any self-respecting 'liberated' young woman would do ....have a lot of men and a good time ! Of course , there were her responsibilities to her royal status , after all her sons were princes and heirs to the ancient British throne so she had to be seen to be dedicated to good works ,,,,and mines were a viable cause !


Unfortunately, life catches up with us all in the end on one of her escapades with playboy Fayed his manic , drunken and drug crazed chauffeur wrapped their vehicle up around a pylon and her life ended.
In the last ten years her life became legend and she became worshiped by all the liberated bimbos all around the world.
But Fayad senior devastated by the loss of his son seeks reconciliation with his own troubled soul and has incurred yet another probe into the cause of his son's premature death !
The media relishing any controversy involving Diana, conspiracy and the royals go along with it and we poor taxpayers are bombarded with reams of useless information which if anything just serves to tarnish the glorious memory of the 'bimbos' princess !

It's all vulgar and crass and is indeed a circus1 It's an aspect of the decedent times we live in !

A halt should be called forthwith !


  • 99.
  • At 01:29 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nicky wrote:

It's pitiful!! This stuff is not interesting, the people unlikeable.... The whole thing is a waste of public time and money which could be better spent of real people and public services.

  • 100.
  • At 01:30 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Cohen wrote:

The farce only continues because of Al Fayed's absurd claims. When this inquest is over he should be sent the bill, and prosecuted for employing a drunk driver.

  • 101.
  • At 01:31 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • newsniightjunkie wrote:

I agree. Also it strikes me that until Fayad gets the verdict he wants, that prince philip is guilty, there are going to be any number of enquiries.

  • 102.
  • At 01:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Mumby wrote:

Maybe they could cancel the inquest and use the money to pay the police the extra 0.6% this year.

Away was going to be and proved to be a complete waste of time.

If she was SO concerned about been killed in a car crash - then maybe she would have worn a seat belt.

  • 103.
  • At 01:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jane wrote:

She was a waste of time and money when she was alive.

She is a waste of time and money now she is dead.

The public demeaned the personal grief of those who knew Diana to whom she was of value.

I was deeply saddened by the ridiculous flowers etc after her death. One women on tv said at the time she was 'more upset than when her own father had died'. This annoyed me greatly about the state of the nation and our obbsession with celebrity above those close to us.

Think of this in context of the people who die alone forgotten by their family to have a funeral with no one there!

Even with an enquiry - the conspiracies will not stop - they will just be fuelled!

  • 104.
  • At 01:36 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Elliott wrote:

I think it is discraceful that we allow some rich arab living in our Country to openly accuse our Royal Family of conspiracy & murder. If he were to do the same in his own Country to their Royal Family, he would undoubtedly have his head lopped off. We then patronise him in his fantasies by funding this farse we call an Inquest and allow unsubstantiated nonsense to be given in "evidence"
The British People or more to the point the British Authorities must be 'mad' to allow such a thing to happen.

Sadly it has been turned into a circus as the crucial questions are not being asked. What was in the letter to Paul Burrell from Diana that said 'What a secret Paul, the tide is turning' - Why isn't anyone asking what secret? One to die for? And why 5 days after her death did Mother Teresa die? Why did they perform an exorcism on an old woman who had just lost a very close friend? Are the deaths linked? Answer that and your part way to the real reason for Diana's death.
As for her sons they should want the truth royalty or not, or maybe they're just as content as everybody else to live the lie - it's easier.

  • 106.
  • At 01:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Hicham wrote:

I believe that truth has got no price!! so , the answer is of course....YES.

  • 107.
  • At 01:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Michele wrote:

It's a shame that people can't see that half the problem is that there are certain people out there who like stirring up trouble for both the Royal Family and for England.
The inquest should have been limited to just in France. After all, that is where they died! IF these people wanted to stir up trouble, why wasn't it done then!

  • 108.
  • At 01:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • nick ruddock wrote:

Largely agreeing with your pre-amble I can't help realising that it is inevitable, in this media climate, dictated by the all pervasive tabloid and media hegemony, which seems to have 'tumourised' on the back of the 1970's demands for more access, more human rights, less secrecy. Which may I hasten to say I supported and still do.

The red tops, and doubtless the less vilified ex-broadsheets, have enabled their proprietors the opportunity to trivialise democracy, demonstrations for improvements, etc, while purporting to support such issues; actually they only discuss personality, and peripheral aspects of the issues. Either that or write so incomprehensibly and obliquely that one requires a doctorate in philosophy to discern, and one cannot be bothered; as the proprietor knows full well.

What the Butler saw seems to have finally been uncovered for what it seems to me; the shameless need to be recognised and famous. I do not doubt his love, sincerity, care, of Diana, during her lifetime. But he has joined the industry ever since being acquitted at the Old Bailey. Indeed has played his most recent hand with dexterous aplomb.

The reasonable and tangible grief of Al Fayed has become wharped, twisted into hatred, vendetta by what were originally reasonable queries in any mind, and crossed also my own.

While the prurient imaginations of the proletariat are constantly fed by the fourth estate with anything which fails to enlighten, it is unlikely we will choose to diet.

  • 109.
  • At 01:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jo wrote:

Of course it is a necessary evil. Princess Di was not only the English Rose or even the British Princess, she belonged to the world. Everyone was mesmerized by her beauty not only physical beauty but her inner beauty as well. Many of us loved her.

Do you seriously think that "the billions" that are being spent on this inquest would be spent on something of interest to you?
The lack of money is the root of all evil, but this money is being spent on something very worthwhile.
She predicted her own demise, now where, I wonder, did she get the idea? Was it something Charles said to her in the heat of anger, or perhaps Philip?
Leave it alone and let us all find out. Have a good day...

  • 110.
  • At 01:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • rosebud wrote:

After reading the Newsnight note all I can say is, if it indeed a circus, then they should stop interviewing the clowns. Even if they interviewed the security services, they wouldn't get an honest answer. It is all a bit sad really.

  • 111.
  • At 01:46 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul wrote:

Maybe the inquest is justified, but the dedication of so much media time to it is not.

  • 112.
  • At 01:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Tom wrote:

It is sickening and shameful, a stage for fantasists, fetishists and fools like burrell who will doubtless write another volume of "discreet" memoirs off the back of it.

  • 113.
  • At 01:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Joan wrote:

I think that it's shameful. The poor woman is dead, let her rest in peace. The things that have been said about her waited until she was gone to smear her name. Princess Diana was the most humble, likeable, person ever to come out of the royal family. If these things had come out when she was alive, at least she would have been able to dispute these claims. Let the poor woman alone, she did the best she could.

  • 114.
  • At 01:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Col Dee wrote:

I agree that the inquest is a waste of money. I also it was the media to blame for it being set up in the first place.

All the 'evidence' has shown to date was what Diana seemed always to be neurotic and paranoid.

Somethings are best left unsaid, and if this inquest had not taken place she would still be held in high esteem and adored for what she appeared to be.

  • 115.
  • At 01:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Bryan wrote:

It's a massive waste of money. Not to mention the fact it is simply very very boring! Even if it came out she'd been killed by a team of ninjas I'm so past caring I doubt I'd bat an eyelid. It was a shame for her kids when she died. It should be left alone now before the body is exhumed and paraded through the streets or some such similar nonsense.

  • 116.
  • At 01:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • rob pilch wrote:

this is a disgusting waste of public money and time; it illustrates that access to "justice" depends on how much money you have; it is a sad reflection on our society that people will actually tolerate this happening; if Mr Al Fayed does not get the answer he wants or believes he should get he will ask it again.

  • 117.
  • At 01:57 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Simon Hunn wrote:

This inquest is a complete waste of public money; broadly speaking it would not be happening if it wasn't for the fantasies promoted by Mohammed Fayed. If he is so insistent that there is a conspiracy behind her death, then he should pay for the luxury of having his day in court. The French investigation some 10 years ago indicated that Henri Paul was drunk and that he drove too fast and erratically. What more is there to say?

  • 118.
  • At 01:59 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Henry wrote:

You ask: "Do we really need to pay millions of pubic money for such details?" I think the answer is definitely no!

  • 119.
  • At 02:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nana Yaa wrote:

Did I read pubic money in the email or was it just my eyesight?

Anyway, I do think Diana should be left alone. Whatever our impressions of her, she had two boys who have to live with this interest and lack of privacy for their mother's life constantly. I doubt whether those of us who had children would want them to go through that.

And who is perfect? I'm sure she regrets some of the choices she made but can she undo them now?

Let us leave her to rest in peace and focus on the goodwill that she spread.

  • 120.
  • At 02:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Lee Roy Sanders, Jr. wrote:

Strategically set, radio controlled bombs used to cause a wreck and make it look like a accident of human error.

I don't think that is going to be exposed to the public any more than it is being done right here.

Princes Diana she didn't want to be used and degradation was not her idea of dignity.

She may well have learned something about the world that she was not wanted by outside governments to know. She was active in charitable humane ideals.

There are so many terrible things that government spies do to sway the world to actions against what is good and right. They pile up martyrs and victims, stepping upon them as a foundation of their profession.

  • 121.
  • At 02:11 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Pandora wrote:

Shameful, disgusting and surreally obscene in every way.

How ghastly to see what's left of that lovely, elegant, girl's memory picked over and ripped to pieces in a modern Greek tragedy.

And appalling for her boys, who not only lost their mother but have to suffer this.

How could this possibly be allowed to happen?

  • 122.
  • At 02:12 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • jjpullan wrote:

I also find it distastful that very personal details of Princess Diana's life are being disscussed so publicly and am horrified at the cost of the inquest. However unless we do have everything regarding her death looked into ,in way that no one can doubt its truth, this poor woman will never be allowed to rest in peace. I only hope this inquest does serve this purpose.

  • 123.
  • At 02:32 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Victoria Isherwood wrote:

NO. For want of a better word, it's entertainment. There's clearly a huge appetite for it: Diana's death is probably the main reason a sad little rag like the Express is still selling. We pay millions in public money on - say, Jonathan Ross, and I suspect Mr. Paxman earns many times a doctor's salary - all public money, too. So, let's have the circus. It's fun. Especially Paul Burrel - well, he certainly cheered up my day. More!

  • 124.
  • At 02:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • brian parker wrote:

Hi I canagree with almost every thing that has been said and wriiten about this poor unfortunate Family I think it is thoroghly disgusting that all this dirt has been raked up again and againwhat must it be like for those poor boys continually having to put up with this muckraking going on almost daily with a mother they loved so much and ithink almost all the population did. I wonder if there is any human being could honestly stand in front of a mirror and swear they have never done anything they are not ashamed of I dont think so!!

  • 125.
  • At 02:34 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Howard wrote:

Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes! The inquest is a shameful, wasteful and humiliating affair fuelled by unhealthy voyeuristic inclinations. Nothing can ever be proved so move on!

Diana was a wonderful, loving individual. She had faults - but we all do. I suggest we all remember her beauty and her achievements - not some unfettered ramblings from those with personal agendas and questionable morals.

  • 126.
  • At 02:36 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Clive Gifford wrote:

Absolute waste of time and money to satisfy the paranoia and ego of one man whose anger at the establishment knows no bounds.

  • 127.
  • At 02:37 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Mike Carter wrote:

I find it fascinating Diana is still being portrayed as either wronged heroine or pantomime villain.

I find myself wondering about how high profile women are treated generally.

Would we - for example - have an inquiry if Prince Charles had died in similar circumstances?


  • 128.
  • At 02:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • I.Eilbeck wrote:

I agree, this inquest doesn't make sense and "Mr FUGGER" might be enjoying making the taxpayer pay a lot of money for just nothing.
But I must say, too many of us might be longing to learn more about Diana's very private secrets and might not mind wasting all this money - at least they might get some excitement out of it.....

  • 129.
  • At 02:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Kay Sutherland wrote:

A complete waste of time & money to probably everyone but the Daily Express & the Daily Mail!!!!

How on earth would they sell their appalling newspapers without either Diana or Madeleine McCann!!!!! Proves that some people (I don't personally know any!) that are still interested in conspiracy theories!!!!

  • 130.
  • At 02:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Tyrone wrote:

This whole thing is the product of the printed media who need to perpetuate this saga to maintain their circulation numbers. This is not (new) news. The sooner responsible news organisations took the decision not to report the lurid detail of every element, the sooner this would go away and give us all a break.

  • 131.
  • At 02:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • G Morgan wrote:

'Hello!' magazine but without the funny pictures. Base.

  • 132.
  • At 02:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Jenner wrote:

It's a waste of time and money for Newsnight to be even discussing this issue at all, considering the more important things going on in the world.

And it's a waste of my time and money commenting on this!

  • 133.
  • At 02:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Marc Jones wrote:

"Drunk driver, no seatbelt." I could have done this for a fiver and would have thrown in 50 commemorative mugs to mark the occasion.

  • 134.
  • At 02:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Simon Napier wrote:

Do you need us to really answer this?

It is NuLabours equivalent of throwing christians to the lions in the colleseum. Keeps the plebian masses distracted from asking serious questions of the government and its actions.

  • 135.
  • At 02:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Yvonne Wagstaff wrote:

If there had been a referendum on whether there should be a court case like this, judging from the overwhelming replies on this blog, the answer would have been NO NO NO.

  • 136.
  • At 02:57 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Tyrone wrote:

This whole thing is the product of the printed media who need to perpetuate this saga to maintain their circulation numbers. This is not (new) news. The sooner responsible news organisations took the decision not to report the lurid detail of every element, the sooner this would go away and give us all a break.

  • 137.
  • At 02:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Tracey M Petsivas wrote:

We have had an enquiry, an investigation, now an inquest. All are simply dredging up the same old stuff, plus some new stuff to keep people interested. What more can be achieved, nothing as far as I can see. Let poor Diana rest in peace.

  • 138.
  • At 03:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Keith Richards wrote:

There is clearly a concencus amongst sane folk that this is a charade driven by one frustrated man who has the wealth to pay for it himself, but chooses not to do so. But can it be stopped? And if so how and by whom?

  • 139.
  • At 03:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Patrick wrote:

It has been well documented that Princess Diana was not wearing a seat belt and that had she done so she would have survived the car's impact in the tunnel.

Her failure to wear a seatbelt was a matter of personal choice which was at least foolhardy and arguably suicidal given the speeds at which the car was travelling.

If she was party to a preconceived plan to outpace the paparazzi then she CHOSE to ignore the sensible option of fastening her seatbelt before departing.

If, on the other hand, she was unaware of any such plan, or if Henri Paul suddenly took it upon himself to drive at high speeds, she had ample opportunity at any time over the distance travelled to CHOOSE to safeguard herself by quickly fastening her seatbelt and reducing the risk of fatal injuries.

Her failure to do so amounts to contributory negligence on her part -she CHOSE not to protect herself from the risk of fatal injury.

Did she normally elect not to wear a seatbelt on a plane flight or on a ski-lift? One suspects not.

Did she usually wear a seatbelt as a driver or rear seat passenger? If not, commonsense would have dictated that she wore a seatbelt for that particular journey.

To repeat, the failure to fasten her seatbelt in the context of very high speeds in a built-up area might be perceived as not just foolhardy but bordering on the suicidal.

In the light of the evidence that wearing a seatbelt would have prevented fatal injury, the conspiracy theories etc (which have been compounded by Paul Burrell’s long term assertions and exaggerations that he knew more than he in fact did) might well be regarded as purely academic and peripheral to the central issues surrounding her death and consequently a waste of millions of pounds of public money.

If Diana remained deeply troubled by fears that Prince Charles or other members of the Royal Family or indeed others were conspiring to end her life then she failed to acknowledge those fears when she CHOSE not to take adequate steps to safeguard her own wellbeing by adopting the simple and instant expedient of fastening her seatbelt before setting off on, or at any time during, her fateful journey.

Presumably these are factors which the Coroner will have taken into account during the course of the Inquest.

  • 140.
  • At 03:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Michelle Roberts wrote:

Yes of course it is a complete waste of time and taxpayers money again!

  • 141.
  • At 03:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • M Smith wrote:

Poor little rich girl meets playboy, while playing footsie with the British press about her former marriage. Loving every minute of the attention, playboy plays fast and loose with safety, and they are driven at high speed on an unnecessary journey by a drunk employee. Both die.

Cue 10 years of endless media hype, conspiracy theories, mock grief, mass hysteria and celebrity style gossip.

Yes all that and this "inquest" are a complete and utter waste of time and public money.

  • 142.
  • At 03:11 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • mebosa ritchie wrote:

total waste of money
send fayed the bill as he wAS THE ONLY ONE WHO FELT THIS WAS NEEDED
the barristers especially mansfield are only in for the money

  • 143.
  • At 03:14 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • anon wrote:

i think it is disgusting how such a large sum of money can be spend on useless activities, such as this one, and be condoned simply because it is associated with a member of the royal family. i highly doubt that Diana, a woman who beleived greatly in helping others, would agree with these use of money. it could be put to a much better use...

  • 144.
  • At 03:28 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • John Walters wrote:

i believe that, unless the commision that is investigating the tragedy that happened with princess diana can come up with anything new, then it is a complete waste of time and money that could be spent on other things, like trying to reduce the budget deficit or paying for more nurses and doctors working for the nhs. it is just a shame that the people of the great island of britian need to rehash all of the buffounery that happened after the tragic death of princess diana in the press and on the tele.

  • 145.
  • At 03:36 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Graham wrote:

Considering that it is Mohammed Al Fayed that has hatched the conspiracy theories behind this whole sad thing, then surely it should be him that foots the bill!
Or is that too much common sense?

  • 146.
  • At 03:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • stan jacobs wrote:

After all these,years Let the poor girl rest in peace. enough is enough.

  • 147.
  • At 03:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Steve wrote:

No, not a waste of money. It has flushed out some new detail, and, moreover, justice has to be seen to be done. It's a shame it wasn't progressed with immediately, and that more pressure wasn't put on people to attend in person. I have been surprised how flabby the interrogations have been. Some of the witnesses have been allowed to get away with what seem to me to be deliberately woolly statements.

  • 148.
  • At 03:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andrew Green wrote:

Its many years now, (many people have been born or arrived here who have never even heard of Diana). What is actually going to change, no amount of handwringing and navel gazing, raking up old muck that actually nobody is interested in, (apart from those parts of the media that need to fill space), and don't keep wheeling out the old one about in the "public interest" how the hell do they know about what the public thinks. In this country thats just an assumption as nobody from the media upwards even rubs shoulders in everyday life on a mass scale with the public. Thats just self justification. Leave the lady alone to rest in peace remembered for the good things she did and in consideration to her children, which in the end is all pretty much what anyone of us could hope for.

  • 149.
  • At 03:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ken wrote:

There is little point in trying to get to the truth against "The Establishment" so why bother wasting public funds when it could be put to good use.

Lets hope this farse ends soon and our Princes and her family can rest in peace.

  • 150.
  • At 03:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Tete Cobblah wrote:

Why can't Diana's soul be allowed to rest in peace? It is nauseating to see people cashing in on her death.The amount of money spent on the inquest pales into complete insignificance when compared to the millions of pounds people are getting and will get from all the juicy stories being told about her.Please give her soul a break!

  • 151.
  • At 03:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stephen Hodges wrote:

Other than to allow a bitter, twisted and discredited business-man ( wasn't he found unfit to give a British passport to years ago ? ) get his face in the papers, a total waste of time. It started with all that fake mass hysteria at the time of her death. Whilst she is missed, it is surely time to accept that died in a traffic accident driven too fast - and was not wearing a safety belt. Her wonderful sons need to be able to put this behind them and move on with their lives. God save the Queeen.

  • 152.
  • At 03:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter T wrote:

I've trawled through the 140 replies that are displayed above and did not see any that are supportive of the inquest. Which surprises me. I thought I was in a minority of thinking it was a dreadful waste of money and it was undoubtedly hurtful to her sons. I'm not bothered about Prince Charles - he deserves all he gets - and it is all driven by Mohammed Fayed. The man who a government inspector wrote could not be trusted to run an business in England.

I think a way should be found to make him pay for the whole useless exercise.

  • 153.
  • At 04:01 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ellen wrote:


The French have already held an inquest. With or without this inquest, speculations about Princess Diana's death will never be put to rest, so why have it? (The exhaustive Warren Report did not end speculations about the assassination of the President of the United States, John F. Kennedy.) Public funds can be put to better use.

  • 154.
  • At 04:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Michael Pearson-Adams wrote:

I'm not exactly sure what they plan to find but they are definitely doing it the wrong way. The only thing this is doing is digging up sad memories for alot of people and continuing the great story excuses for the rag magazines who love gossip and scandal.
Let the girl rest in peace.

  • 155.
  • At 04:08 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alan Hall wrote:

I have always maintained that this 'circus' was being laid on to one end only - to attempt to prove a ridiculous conspiracy theory.

Since Diana was in Dodi's company, in the care of an Al Fayed bodyguard and driver, leaving one of their hotels in one of their cars, all as arranged by their staff, if there is a conspiracy aren't we looking under the wrong stones?

  • 156.
  • At 04:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • William sheehy wrote:

It is time to move on and let all
of the people involved rest in peace.

  • 157.
  • At 04:13 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • John Andrews wrote:

Huge waste of money. All caused by Mohamet Al Fayed who is a bigot and self-publicist. He should pay all public costs, heaven knows he barely pays UK tax!

  • 158.
  • At 04:21 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • michael hirst wrote:

Put simply - YES

  • 159.
  • At 04:22 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter wrote:

Diana has been dead ten and a half years. Isn't it time she was allowed to die.
Build a bridge and get over it. No money wasting inquiry will bring her back, so stop it now, let those that died rest in peace and their loved ones left behind move on. The rest of the world has.

  • 160.
  • At 04:23 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Liz wrote:

Of course it's a waste of money. How many other people who died in a car crash because they weren't wearing a seat belt would get this kind of inquest?

  • 161.
  • At 04:27 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rita wrote:

Absolutely a waste of time and money!

  • 162.
  • At 04:31 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Steve wrote:

Of course it's a waste of money.
I do beleive there was something behind it all, but supposing, lets just say the whole thing of the royal family having her bumped off is true - they are not going to be held up to it, or even found guilty of it because it would ruin the country.

so..... why bother with any of it

  • 163.
  • At 04:32 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • michelle hulmes wrote:

I think that Diana should be left in peace. I think raking in all up again must be upsetting for the two young princes

  • 164.
  • At 04:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • sigrami wrote:

If she had worn a seatbelt she might still be with us.
Total waste of time and money.

  • 165.
  • At 04:34 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jack Hollands wrote:

It's so boring I don't even know where to start. This reluctance to move on is just pathetic. Whoever's presiding over this joke must be suicidal at all the conspiracy theorists. What a waste of time and a massive annoyance to have to wade through the news about it every day.

  • 166.
  • At 04:36 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jane wrote:

Famous can die in ordinary ways too (i.e. via drunk drivers). We are effectively paying for one mans grief counselling. It is time this was stopped so that all the relatives can move on and we can stop paying for this complete waste of time!

  • 167.
  • At 04:36 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Roz Briggs wrote:

There was too much time spent over this in the first year let alone 10 years on! Let the dead rest in peace and give those left behind a chance to remember the good times and forget the rest. I certainly would not want any of this if it was a relation of mine. The money should be used to improve hospitals and schools.

  • 168.
  • At 04:36 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Joan Robinson wrote:

All the intimate revelations are irrelevant and deeply intrusive into the Royal family as a whole. We all know repeatedly that Diana died in a car crash. Dear God . Leave it at that. Let her memory rest in peace. I feel like we are trampling over peoples grief. Waste of money .Oh yes. Please Mr Fayad stop now.

  • 169.
  • At 04:37 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • A Pearce wrote:

I think it has been a total waste of
tax payers money - the outcome still the same - Diana died - nothing can change that

  • 170.
  • At 04:37 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Josephine Collis wrote:

Isn't it about time we let a Mother, who had an untimely death, rest in peace - just for the sake of her children?

This trial is a scandalous waste of money.

  • 171.
  • At 04:37 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Gordy wrote:

The Royal Family are a waste of money. The inquest is also a waste of money in that even if there was a conspiracy, it would never be acceptable to implicate the royal family in a murder. A proper investigation should have been undertaken at the time.

  • 172.
  • At 04:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • James Smith wrote:

Of course it's not a waste of money!

I look forward to seeing Princess Diana come back from the grave before giving a rousing interview to the Express about 'How Phil ordered my murder'.

Surely that's the point of this inquest, to bring her back?

Clunk Click every trip

  • 173.
  • At 04:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Giles wrote:

I personally cannot see what all the fuss is about. A woman who I didn't know, who had no direct impact on my life died 10 years ago. WOW!
Get over it. It was a car crash, these things happen.
What a waste of effort and money.

  • 174.
  • At 04:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • dee reynolds wrote:

Is ANYBODY even INTERESTED in what the outcome of this circus is ? I feel about this the same way that I feel about seeing Britney Spears or Paris Hilton in the news every day - saddened and sickened that it is deemed newsworthy at all, and that it has all come to this - She is ten years dead, at the time I was very sorry for her sons, and for those who loved her, but now im over it, and so should everyone else be
incl: Fayed - tell me, if this whole revolutionary tribunal turns up that she wasn't 'bumped' off and that it was indeed the tragic accident we all know it to be .. does the court find against Fayed for wasting police (and all of our) time and money, and award costs accordingly ?? Sadly I doubt it.

I am fed up to the back teeth with the story, the pictures on the front of certain newspapers and Mr Fayed's stupid conspiracy theories.

It WAS a tragic accident. We all loved Diana and history will recall how her counrty dragged her name through the mud for so many years after her passing

  • 176.
  • At 04:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris wrote:

Of course its a waste of time and money she was not as special a many would like to remember. She was selfish and controling and used the press for her inflated ego then ran away crying to the nearest sap who would listen. She needded to grow up and so do the British public and acept this was a tragic accident that could only have been prevented if she hadnt got into the back seat of a car driven by a drunk

  • 177.
  • At 04:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Margaret wrote:

yes, a waste of money. She was too young to be married to Prince Charles. She knew exactly what her life would be having known the Royal family since a child. Prince Charles should have married Camilla in the first place. Diana slept around and was indiscreet. I feel sorry for her sons - no wonder they are party boys - but it must be dreadful to hear all these tales. The fact that seat belts were not being worn is their own fault. What was the bodyguard thinking about? And Paul Burrel is a despicable character.

  • 178.
  • At 04:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ann macleod wrote:

yes i believe it is a waste of time when will people let her rest in piece?

  • 179.
  • At 04:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Martin Brignall wrote:

I always try to feel pity and compassion for the Royal family and anyone who gets involved with them, believing that to be born into 'it' is a real curse - as you have no hope of a life anywhere near normal and are almost certain to develop mental/psychological illness as a result of their strange life.

Diana showed many symptoms of too close an association with them and so, as one human to another, I feel very so for her unhappy experience. Who knows what happy life she might still be leading had she not been so pretty and attractive to the Royal family as a bride for Charles (who should have been allowed to marry his current wife before her first marriage)?

However she is no longer around to be concerned about and so my summary feelings are of stunned disbelief, really, that our nation (or a significantly large part of it)can be so mawkishly emotional about anything and everything to do with her.

It has all been a vast waste of money and time as it will solve nothing for those who believe in her god-like status. She has become the deity at the centre of her cult, to her superstitious and irrational devotees.

This will run and run!

  • 180.
  • At 04:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • stephen wilmott wrote:

what a complete waste of time and effort, We have been over this ground so frequently how can you ever expect any conclusion to this after 10 years. any cover up it will come from the highest of levels and will never show.. or could it possibly have been a terrible accident?

  • 181.
  • At 04:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris wrote:

Of course its a waste of time and money she was not as special a many would like to remember. She was selfish and controling and used the press for her inflated ego then ran away crying to the nearest sap who would listen. She needde to grow up and so do the British public and acept this was a tragic accident that could only have been prevented if she hadnt got into the back seat of a car driven by a drunk

  • 182.
  • At 04:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • John Melville-Smith wrote:

Following the inevitable conclusion of this farce - that Diana was the victim of a road accident caused by a combination of alcohol and speed - is it not time to reverse one of the less justifiable decisions of the Thatcher governement and revoke Al Fayed's right to continue living in this country. Harrods, and the rest of us, will survive without him very nicely.

  • 183.
  • At 04:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Roger Brown wrote:

I have no opinion as to the cause of Diana's death but if it was an accident then so be it. But...let's just suppose for a moment it was murder by person or persons unknown on behalf of either the state or the monarchy. Does anyone really believe that is the verdict that would ever be returned? Come off it, whatever the cause the verdict will be accidental death however long the inquest goes on and no matter how much it costs. Yes, end it now, but it should never really have started in the first place.

  • 184.
  • At 04:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Adrian wrote:

An inquest is fine but it isnt really solving anything as its being used to vent opinions and greivances.
No one has realy asked the right questions as it seems to have been assumed that she was murdered/assasinated which she wasnt.
It was an accident that she died. Yet the right questions to get to the truth are still out there.

Also Dianna wasnt all good all the time in fact she probhably had more relationships after marrying than the majority of married couples ever have.

  • 185.
  • At 04:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Gary Langdon wrote:

A total waste of tax payers money. not too many years ago ones head could have parted company from ones body for accusing the royal family of the things Al Fayed is. She was a rich whore. (a call girl) with a pathetic smile. Charles is better off without the old bag.

  • 186.
  • At 04:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sheila Mason wrote:

Yes I also believe that this inquest is a waste of time and money.I also believe that the wrong agenda is being followed, isn't an inquest about how some one was died. We should not have all of the "gossip" given out. Apart from anything else it is degrading the victims.Of course Mr Fahid is still grieving and needs to find a cause but this will not be done this way. When this fiasco is finally over I hope he accepts the finding and lets his son and Diana rest in peace and the Princes put all of this behind them.

  • 187.
  • At 04:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ciaran Gallagher wrote:

Well, I would normally say it's a waste of time. Enough of our money is wasted on the Royal Family. Especially in N.Ireland when these people mean nothing to us. And even if I was British I would still be wondering why I pay for another family to be in luxury, when they don't do anything to deserve it.
But anyway, I still think it should be investigated because you never know what's being covered up!

  • 188.
  • At 04:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • james wrote:

An inquest has to establish the cause of death. As any sensible person knows she died in a car accident. A complete waste of money; except of course for the lawyers. Is that what it is for? Lawyers emoluments?

  • 189.
  • At 04:44 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stephen wrote:

not only is it a waste of time and money but this "inquest" only gives more air-time to some pretty odious people, charlatans and hangers-on. I am no royalist but what a continuing tragedy for Diana's son's. For goodness sake get over it, move on she Died In A Nasty Accident (conspiracy theory or what!!!!??). Or are we to have inquests on the death of hitler, stalin, Napoleon, Jesus, Boudicca etc etc???

  • 190.
  • At 04:44 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Mark Hull wrote:

A complete waste of taxpayer's money.

At the end of the inquest will we really know any more than we do already? I doubt it. It will simply conclude that it was a car crash and the driver had been drinking.

It will not bring Diana back and simply provides a few tabloid headlines in the meantime.

  • 191.
  • At 04:44 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rob Mackenzie wrote:

This is just dragging up bad memories from the past let a fine lady rest in peace

  • 192.
  • At 04:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Bark wrote:

A terrible waste of public money

  • 193.
  • At 04:46 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • James Clarke wrote:

Of course a complete waste of money, but in cost terms a drop in the ocean compared with the 3rd Bloody Sunday inquiry.

  • 194.
  • At 04:46 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Edward Rogerson Glasgow wrote:

Can we please have a moratorium on all things related to Diana. This would give her sons and the public a respite after 10 years of this issue. I know of none of my friends who have any interest in what is happening other than to say this is a total waste of time and money.
Enough is enough !!

  • 195.
  • At 04:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Clark wrote:

A complete and utter waste of public money. If the conspiracy theorists are so convinced that it was not an accident let them bring a civil action against those they think are responsible.

  • 196.
  • At 04:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Audrey dawson wrote:

An absolute waste of money as the rumours will still continue throughout history.

  • 197.
  • At 04:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ant wrote:

Definitely a waste of time and money, what are they trying to prove? Just let the past be and spend the money and effort on something worthwhile.

  • 198.
  • At 04:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Adam Hicks wrote:

Well depends how you look at it, in regards to whether its a waste of money.

It is certainly a waste of time, and a talking shop, to establish what exactly happened. Why don't people just get it, the women died in a car accident, which is tragic in itself.

Waste of money, well I'm sure all the media and other vultures think its well worth the money, because they'll make a fortune. Its a sad sad state of affairs really. As per ususal it is the taxpayer who will pay for it!

Sooner its over the better, and then the media and everyone else can actually focus on world issues that truly matter, such as poverty, inequality and conserving the environment.

  • 199.
  • At 04:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ced wrote:

If it had been a conspiracy they should have got her to ride a bike, that way when she was killed on the road no one would have said a thing.

Waste of money

  • 200.
  • At 04:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Shivaji wrote:

Diana is just like any human being, and it insane to go on and on about this for the last 10 years

there are beeter things to spend the funds on, er how about feeding the children in africa? how about spenind on medical researches? how about funds being spend on public transport and the welfare of the public rather than one individiual and spenind the money for the welfare of Buckingham Palace!!!

  • 201.
  • At 04:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ames wrote:

Yes she was a special woman, but just a woman all the same. There are thousands of accidents, and even worse, murders on a daily basis, and none of those get this much attention. A completely unecessary use of money, time, and emotional stress.

  • 202.
  • At 04:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ian roddy wrote:

Yes it is a waste of time and anybodys money

  • 203.
  • At 04:49 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Julie Holland wrote:

Yes - a complete and utter waste of money. Let her rest in peace. I'm sure William and Harry must be upset over and over again with all this being dragged up time and time over.

  • 204.
  • At 04:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alan Childs wrote:

What really annoys me is that this isnt the first inquest as a french one was already done and came about the result it was mearly an accident. An UK inquest into the french inquest stated there was no corruption in that decistion.
So this inquest doesn't even seem constitutional (on a European scale) and everyone seems to know the only reason for this UK inquest is Mohammed Al Fayed not being able to accept the loss of his son.

  • 205.
  • At 04:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Claudia Stein wrote:

The NHS would have been pleased to receive the millions of pounds that are now spent on this absurd, farcical circus which does nothing but pander towards the sick hunger of this nation for celebrity "news". The Princess' death was a sad and tragic event for the whole world but BBC would re-enter the realm of serious news reporting if it gave this D-ollywood drama the room for reporting it deserves - namely nil.

  • 206.
  • At 04:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Emma wrote:

How much speculation over something that happened 10 years ago, that was after all only a tragic accident. Let the poor woman rest in peace.

  • 207.
  • At 04:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Robin wrote:

Yes. I think it's a disgrace that this stuff is being dredged up over and over again. Why doesn't newsnight do a feature on Mother Theresa (who died at nearly the same time as Diana) instead?

  • 208.
  • At 04:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Ginsberg wrote:

This tabloid jamboree taken along with the £100 million spent on the Bloody Sunday enquiry shows how the administration of justice is getting out of control. The inordinate cost, length and delay in these legal cases serves no one well apart from the lawyers.

  • 209.
  • At 04:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • R Morris wrote:

Everyone on here seems to be focussed on Diana, i guees al fayed cannot let it rest until he has heard all and sundry in court, surely if your own son died in a car crash with a princess you've got a right to know how and why. If a serviceman died in Iraq and the circumstances were "dodgy" the public would be screaming blue murder until the truth came out and we'd have inquiry after inquiry, sadly, I dont think that the truth will ever materialise.

  • 210.
  • At 04:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Bernadette Erskine wrote:

A ridiculous waste of everybody's time and taxpayers money. Is anybody actually interested any more?
Al Fayed is too full of his own self importance and is lucky to have the funds and influence to pursue such an inquest.

  • 211.
  • At 04:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • nick wrote:

It is a waste of time, I'm so sick of her being at the front of the newspaper every day if she died 10 years ago. Why can't we just remember her and leave her be? It was a tragedy but nothing can be changed so they should spend all the money on aid and the NHS.

  • 212.
  • At 04:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • D Horton wrote:

Diana was a waste of time and money.

  • 213.
  • At 04:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Trina wrote:

I think they should let her rest in peace. And I am sure the money could be better spent elsewhere!

  • 214.
  • At 04:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • J BEATSON wrote:

I thought this inquest was to try and determine how she died not to dig all the dirt up about her it seems has if this has turned into some kind of witch hunt. Its time to move on nothing will bring her back.

  • 215.
  • At 04:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • WaveyDavey wrote:

Unbelievable !!

It will still not stop anyone who really believes that it was murder from thinking that.

Who else cares ?

  • 216.
  • At 04:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Fraser Britton wrote:

If seat belts had been worn by the passengers in that car surely the deaths would have been avoided. Did the security services arrange for them not to wear the belts? Any conspiracy theory must fall in the face of the negligence involved in failing to comply with the law on seat belts?

  • 217.
  • At 04:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • DIANE JONES wrote:

YEP!

  • 218.
  • At 04:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Veronica wrote:

I wonder whether this much time and money would be spent on any other death inquiry...
Just imagine they could actually put the money into NHS, eduction, public sector, but no the Diana saga goes on and on and on...

  • 219.
  • At 04:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Mathew Claridge wrote:

Complete waist of time unless of course you're selling newspapers.

The only lessson learned is:-
'Belt up in the back'.
Not what Al-Fayed hoped to proove.

  • 220.
  • At 04:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • JMC wrote:

The real question is why it is happening at all. France is a "civilised country" within the EU, and enquiry made there should be sufficient without a further inquest. Any UK citizen should have the right to ask the authorities here to have an inquest if they feel that the inquest made abroad is not sufficient - but especially in the case of countries within the EU, it would seem logical that there has to be further evidence which could change our view of the death to justify it.
In this case, Dodi's father is not a UK citizen, and so far (although I am so bored with it I have not read too much) I have heard no relevant new evidence. There was a car crash. She died because she was not wearing a seatbelt (the bodyguard survived and he was in the front). I have not heard any more useful information so far, although the media tend to concentrate on reporting salacious details rather than facts.

  • 221.
  • At 04:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Greg Hiller wrote:

Yes we certainly do need an inquest. It should have been allowed very much earlier. That's not to say that it has any chance of unearthing the source of any real high-level wrongdoing however, should there have been any.

The years of delay have not been caused by Mr. Fayed, and whatever the government thinks of him, he certainly has a right in this case to demand an inquest; and I'd have thought one was certainly required by the Country for Diana, princess of Wales.

Although, by nature, a lot of very personal details are being aired in this case, I don't feel that one can speak of anything resembling a 'shameful circus' at all.

One last point: The chance that this car crash in Paris was a normal, chance accident, is infinitely small; seen the situation and quite real fears for the establishment that were suddenly thrown up at the time.
If it was caused on purpose, it wasn't the British who carried it out, but the French secret service. There wasn't enough time for the UK to have organised and effectuated it. Also, it wouldn't have been the idea to kill her in the crash itself, but later, in hospital.

  • 222.
  • At 04:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Stitt wrote:

I am a republican and saw Diana as a trivial and self serving media sensation. However, even though those kids were brought up in the dysfunctional environment of monarchy, they are human, their mother was human and so is their father.

Some of the personal remarks made in the press about Camilla have been outrageous and would hurt a person with elephant's skin. The dire depths the Diana inquest is digging to just ignores the feelings of those who knew her and cared about her. It's filth and an outrageous intrusion into a family's private life. What will the inquiry conclude? It was an accident, only the paranoid, and clearly unbalanced, Muhammad Al Fayed believes otherwise.

Whilst I feel human sympathy for the poor sods who were Diana's offspring, the waste of public cash on this fiasco adds weight to the argument for abolition.

  • 223.
  • At 04:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nash wrote:

It is total loss of money, time, energy and all available resources. Please stop it and focus on important matters like economy, employment etc.

  • 224.
  • At 04:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris wrote:

I can fully appreciate why people want an inquest into the death of a lady with the stature and respect of Lady Diana, however, I fail to see what good it will do. Maybe prosecute those who are to blame and I am all for that, but if you want that then I feel it should be done with the money of private individuals of whom this will benefit and who this means a great deal to.

Its not a waste of money as Diana done so much for so many but that is my personal view and I suspect the view of the minority

  • 225.
  • At 04:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ken jesssett wrote:

Of course it is a waste of time. And if it wasn't for the constant and insane pressure brought my Dodi Fayad's father, this wouldn't be happening now.

Enough already. We were stunned at this tragedy, but we have to move on.

  • 226.
  • At 04:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Robert Hamilton wrote:

Absolute waste of time & money. Mohammed Al Fayed should be made to pay all the costs involved.

  • 227.
  • At 04:57 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ken jessett wrote:

Of course it is a waste of time. And if it wasn't for the constant and insane pressure brought my Dodi Fayad's father, this wouldn't be happening now.

Enough already. We were stunned at this tragedy, but we have to move on.

  • 228.
  • At 04:57 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Annie Nicolle wrote:

Difficult to come down on one side or another. Certainly, I feel that an enquiry of this nature should have been undertaken at an earlier time in the saga. There are two distinct issues as far as I can see - 1., the Judicial Enquiry, absolutely right, and 2., The Media circus, absolutely wrong!
For the media, this is not about 'the public's right to know', it is about money. That's it.
I hope a truthful, balanced verdict is reached and then the people most closely associated with it all can maybe set it aside a little bit.

  • 229.
  • At 04:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris wrote:

Of course its a waste of time and money she was not as special a many would like to remember. She was selfish and controling and used the press for her inflated ego then ran away crying to the nearest sap who would listen. She needded to grow up and so do the British public and acept this was a tragic accident that could only have been prevented if she hadnt got into the back seat of a car driven by a drunk

  • 230.
  • At 04:59 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sheila wrote:

Of course it is a waste of time and money. It was a tragic accident. Leave her to rest in peace. Oh and she is Diana, Princess of Wales, not Princess Diana

  • 231.
  • At 04:59 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Toby wrote:

Nothing will come out of the inquest that isn't already known. Only those who need to maintain their 'high' profile are interested for their own greedy self serving selves. I don't know what is less interesting? The inquest into the death of Diana or the US primary's both of which will be drawn out for months on end. No real citizen of this country is really that interested. Both equal of course in terms of financial waste. Still at least it provides some cheap 'filler' to the news these days!

  • 232.
  • At 05:00 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • The Larker wrote:

Yup. A total waste of public money. End it now.

  • 233.
  • At 05:00 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Heveen wrote:

Poor woman she was chased by the media when was alive which made her life hell and it is still the same even after 10 years of her death! The media destroyed her and it continues to do so even after her death by destroying the nice memories of her. Please let her rest in peace. If her death was planned surely it will never come out, so yes it is a waste of time and a prolonging of the suffering of those who love her.

  • 234.
  • At 05:00 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jose Shivers wrote:

Yes it is a wast of time, conspiracy or not. She is dead, we will never be able to prove beyond doubt to everyone what happened either way.

  • 235.
  • At 05:00 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nicky wrote:

I think it is a complete waste of time and money and not to mention causing poor Princes William and Harry more heartache having their mothers life raked over yet again. Her death was a tragic accident. The inquest is only to satisfy Al Fayed but I don't think it will do that - he should be paying for this not the long suffering tax payer!!!!

  • 236.
  • At 05:01 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Hill wrote:

Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnn.
Al fayad is just peed off 'cos he can't have a British passport.
How much is all this costing us anyway because I'll bet it's the great British public who'll be footing the bill, and not the arab guy???

  • 237.
  • At 05:01 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris wrote:

Of course its a waste of time and money she was not as special a many would like to remember. She was selfish and controling and used the press for her inflated ego then ran away crying to the nearest sap who would listen. She needded to grow up and so do the British public and acept this was a tragic accident that could only have been prevented if she hadnt got into the back seat of a car driven by a drunk

  • 238.
  • At 05:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • doug moore wrote:

H-C Anderson wrote about a Magic Suit of Clothes which, if you believed hard enough, would be real. This woman is just the same. Mass hypnosis to which many people have succumbed. Fortunately I am the little boy who had never read the script and therefore take her for what she is. And ignore her. Acomplete and utter waste of time, money and effort. Leave her where she is and move on.

  • 239.
  • At 05:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nigel Trewern wrote:

The only winners out of this case as usual are the barristers and legal proffession.
A complete charade, and a total waste of public money.I suspect even Diana would be disgusted with this debacle.

  • 240.
  • At 05:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nick wrote:

She always was and still is part of the entertainment industry, and that is what this inquest is part of. It should be covered live on More4 as Celebrity Big Brother with all the witnesses held together in a shared household where we can see how they are getting on. If we cannot make a profit out of it that way lazy newspapers should be made to pay for it in proportion to how many inches of print they dredge out of it.

  • 241.
  • At 05:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Simon Spenser wrote:

It's too much and it's too late. Too much because it should be an inquest in to her death not a soap opera. Her death was an accident caused by Mr Al Fayed's employee. It's too late because it happened over ten years ago - how can people possibly recall what happened ten years ago.
What it has served to do is show Paul Burrell up for the sad, self promoting, deluded man that he is - was he really the hub of Princess Diana's life - and everyone else the spokes? It's a shame he can't remember which version of which secret he has or has not already sold. Some hub!

  • 242.
  • At 05:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Melissa wrote:

In my humble, tax paying opinion a complete waste of time and money!

There are so many other pressing matters going on in the
world and for some reason this seems to have taken precedence.

A pointless, time and money wasting excuse for additional publicity that Royal Family don't really need.

I'm not totally heartless but I just can't muster up any interest in this inquest at all. Show us something we really care about.

  • 243.
  • At 05:03 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Daniel wrote:

There came a point, several years ago when we realsied that this mystey could never be truly solved. We should have stopped then, further investigation is a waste of resources.

  • 244.
  • At 05:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ollie wright wrote:

Utterly tedious, utterly pointless. I dont think a program like Newsnight should ev en mention it. The Independent had an admirable policy once (though sadly no longer) of refusing to have Royal stories at all, I thnk you should emulate this.

  • 245.
  • At 05:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ian clark wrote:

i used to think Diana was a dog. Then i thought Camilla was a dog. Then i realised Diana was not that bad. After she was dead, i thought she's a babe but now she winds me up.

  • 246.
  • At 05:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • malcolm webster wrote:

this inquest had been and still is - a total waste of time and money.
there appears to be very few facts
in it. just a lot of biased
opinions from a lot of media people.
I am sure the outcome will not tell us anything new.
A sad event made even more sad by
this inquest

  • 247.
  • At 05:04 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • JAMES SHALE wrote:

The mass grieving that took place ten years ago was as ridiculous as this shambolic inquest.

Far too much time devoted to an over privileged aristocrat who died in a car accident.

  • 248.
  • At 05:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • William McAulay wrote:

I do believe that this is a waste of time and money - to what end do they wish to achieve.
Let them both rest in peace.

  • 249.
  • At 05:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ann Storey wrote:

Of course it is a waste of money. She died in a car crash and all we have learn out of it is 'wear a seat belt' and 'don't get in the car with a drunk driver'. If she had trully believed she was likely to die in a crash wouldn't she have belted up?
Having said that I have found some of it quite interesting.

  • 250.
  • At 05:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stu wrote:

Totally. Let her rest in peace and I agree get Al Fayed to foot the bill!

  • 251.
  • At 05:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Stanyer wrote:

TOTAL waste of money when people cannot afford to heat their houses or get a NHS Care Home or Dentist.

  • 252.
  • At 05:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Keith A Tearle wrote:

Whether she was as special as many people believe or not, the purpose of the inquest is to determine HOW she died not what colour shoes etc she had on at the time. Whether or not she was planning to marry Dodie etc is completely irrelevant.
She got into a car that was to be driven by somebody who was boozed up to the hilt because he did not expect to have to drive again that night. Surely end of story.
Why should taxpayers' money be spent on an inquest where ninety-nine per cent of the information being discussed does not contribute one jot to deciding how she died.

  • 253.
  • At 05:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • R Ray wrote:

The Independent newspaper summarised Fayad's reliability like this :
The reasons for his insistence upon conspiracy lie deep rooted in his past. Controversy has dogged Mohamed al-Fayed all his life. Even his name and date of birth are disputed. Born Mohamed Fayed he added the aristocratic prefix " al" to his name only at the age of 45. His date of birth, as recorded in a Department of Trade inquiry into allegations of dodgy business dealings, was 27 January 1929. Yet his self-penned entry in Who's Who lists him as four years younger.
Maybe we should bear this in mind when weighing up the likelihood of the Diana conspiracy being anything more than another of Mo's fantasies. Or maybe granting him a UK passport would get him to call off those big money lawyers of his...

  • 254.
  • At 05:05 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Kimberley wrote:

It seems that only Mohammed Al Fyed really wants this circus, I am sure her sons do not want to hear all this about their mother. It should never have happened like this. Those who did care for her only have her memory being tarnished and those who do not care are getting bored.

  • 255.
  • At 05:06 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Kieran wrote:

Absolutely a waste of time and money and I trust the Beeb aren't wasting any more by having an employee (again funded by public money)read all these comments.

  • 256.
  • At 05:06 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Russell Shepherd wrote:

Of course it's a waste of time and money

  • 257.
  • At 05:06 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alison Spellman wrote:

The whole episode is a tale of human tragedy from which no one emerges with any dignity.

Diana is shown to be as human as we all are, no better or worse than anyone who has graced this planet; no different to all those involved with this inquiry.

  • 258.
  • At 05:07 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Laurence wrote:

There are two sources of pressure to prolong the length of this inquest - one is the amount of money that Mohamet Al Fayed is willing to pay to get his point of view (i.e. that Diana was murdered by the British Establishment) aired as much as possible. The other is the British Media - who now seem to form an "establishment" of their own - who need this sort of "news" story to justify their existence. I increasingly find I reach for the off switch for most of the 'news' broadcast by the BBC (including Newsnight)due to it having become increasingly tabloid in content, rather than the objective and properly researched news it used to be.

  • 259.
  • At 05:07 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chrissie wrote:

I do believe it is, cant we leave her to rest in peace like any other normal person?

  • 260.
  • At 05:08 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sally Bell wrote:


Total waste of money and highly embarassing for her family and anyone else to read this awful detail....All because El Fayed refuses to acknowledge his employee was at fault.

  • 261.
  • At 05:08 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andrew Blake wrote:

yes, a waste of time and money, but wait, actually it's a vital cultural barometer of our celebrity-driven, post-political times. So we might curse it but future historians will bless it.

  • 262.
  • At 05:08 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ines wrote:

I believe they should let Princess Diana rest in peace...and also give her all the respect she certainly deserves...

We may never really know what really happened...all seems to me too dark and full of intrigues...

In any case the whole Princess Diana story showed all of us that pretense and lies mostly end badly... and that was the main reason why we are all still talking about her very tragic and untimely dead...

I will be very happy to see profound changes in the British Monarchy..that is becomme much more transparent and real... after all they are also human beings ..that is blood, flesh, bones and emotions...like everyone else..

  • 263.
  • At 05:08 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Steve Allan wrote:

A total waste of money, and as far as I can see forced upon us by the paranoid rantings of Al Fayed.

Drunk driver crashes car, some woman was killed, she was once married to some Prince in an outdated constitutional monarchy. The son of some rich man who owns a big shop also died. It was sad, and the world over reacted.

That was the story, I didn't care about it then, I really don't care about it now.

  • 264.
  • At 05:09 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • aussiebloke wrote:

Of course the inquest is a waste of time!
We should be more focused on what she achieved during her life than wasting tax payers money pointing the finger of blame at her death...
It would be like hauling the jewish community to court and asking them to answer for the death of Jesus!

Celebrate her life, dont squabble over her death!

  • 265.
  • At 05:09 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ian Wall wrote:

The one person to benefit from this inquest is Al Fayd as it is in his interests to be best associated with the Royal Family and be in the public eye. This is huge waste of money and this whole affair will only damage the monarchy cost the tax payers millions. The inquest should be stopped with immediate effect.

  • 266.
  • At 05:09 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Darren wrote:

The media circus still follows Diana including Newsnight and even me emailing this! It was a car crash at high speed in a tank of a car. Leave her alone now.

  • 267.
  • At 05:09 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Danielle wrote:

It is a waste of taxpayers money.
I totally disagree with this useless inquest which brings only trivia to light and is of no use to anyone.

  • 268.
  • At 05:09 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alison Spellman wrote:

The whole episode is a tale of human tragedy from which no one emerges with any dignity.

Diana is shown to be as human as we all are, no better or worse than anyone who has graced this planet; no different to all those involved with this inquiry.

  • 269.
  • At 05:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jon wrote:

I thought an inquest was intended to determine the cause of death and circumstances surrounding it, and a lot of what is being reported seems irrelevant to that in any way.
The purpose of this 'inquest' seems to be more to pander to the whims of a foreign 'businessman' of dubious background and questionable business practices. He isn't a citizen, he has slandered the royal family, been implicated in bribing a senior politician and - if I recall correctly - was declared by a Government department as unfit to run a business. So why is he still in the country and why is everyone bending over backwards to cater to what appear to be irrational ravings? Shouldn't the news media be trying to tell us WHY this is happening rather than gossip mongering?

  • 270.
  • At 05:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • jan wrote:

Like Peter, (Post 161) I'm surprised that there's so little support for the inquest - although I have to say Peter that there are several supporters of the inquest on this blog - you must have missed them!

This is not about Diana or Dodi but about justice needing to be seen to be done - as we would expect if anyone else were to come to a similar end.

I've noticed that there have been a number of comments about Diana not having worn a seatbelt, (i.e. it serves her right!). However I can recall reading that the clip on her belt was defective and could even have been tampered with.

Also, reports have said she was found crouching on the floor of the car. Could perhaps she have been so frightened that she felt safer crouching down where she couldn't be seen, and undid her seatbelt so she could do so? Might she have thought she was about to be shot and decided to hide?

There have also been several disparaging comments about the driver having been drunk. Again I've read that Henri Paul's samples may have been contaminated or even swapped.

Add to that the illegal embalming of Diana's body with no-one willing to take responsibility for having given the order, (until recently - scapegoat or what?) and several key people clearly involved in what happened refusing to speak to investigators... no wonder people believe there was a conspiracy to murder her - remember it's not just Al Fayed who thinks so!

This has to be either a cover up or gross incompetence. Conspiracy or not - someone needs to have their knuckles wrapped for not following the rules.

  • 271.
  • At 05:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Simon wrote:

I haven't read all of the posts here but have scaned over a fair few. If this blog is representative of the general public feeling, why are we being expected to pay for it? Incidentally if you haven't guessed, yes - massive waste of money. The poor soul died in a car accident, can't we move on and concentrate on the things that matter today?

  • 272.
  • At 05:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • bryan wrote:

This woman is even more annoying dead than she was alive.

  • 273.
  • At 05:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Toby L wrote:

It is a rediculous waste of money, but I don't think money is the real issue. The royal family, and especially the likes of Harry & William don't need to go through any more. This conspiracy theory is as bad as bad as the one that says Churchill knew about Pearl Harbour before it happned.

  • 274.
  • At 05:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Charlotte wrote:

The whole situation makes me angry so I can't imagine how her 2 sons feel! The memorial concert they held in the summer was to draw a line under the whole debacle and allow their mother to rest in peace. They are now forced to see intimate and private details of their mother's life and final few hours. If Al Fayed was so confident about the importance of the relationship between Diana and his son then perhaps he could have more respect for her family? When the verdict is recorded as an accident (again) perhaps he ought to pay back some of the money? or at least donate it to her sons charities.

  • 275.
  • At 05:11 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Dr Pierre B Marshall wrote:

Is far from being a waste of time!!!
discovery of the truth is never a waste of time . I live in France & have a very good knowledge of Medix & how hospital function. Why the ambulance
(SAMU)haven't taken Princesse DI and Doddy to the nearest First Class EmergencyHospital at a spit distance from the site of accident (Hopital Bichat in North of Paris). Instead, They were taken to a hospital SE of Paris situated at 4 miles distance away from the site of the accident ? Also, I read that the ambulance staff
have tried to resucitate. That has never been their Job. If resucitation was performed there must have been a doctor on board. Why the doctor in charge has taken so long to dispached to the proper hospital covering the accident takibg place in the north of Paris. Usually, resucitation, is performed in the ambulance on his way to the hospial in order to save valuable minutes ! Some questions are still answered ?

  • 276.
  • At 05:11 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ermintrude wrote:

Conspiracy, maybe? But if there was it was very well organised by those at the "top" and this inquest is unlikely to get to the bottom of it.
There was certainly enough motive to have her killed, but then this was probably just a tragic accident. I doubt we'll ever know. Huge sums of tax payers money won't get to the bottom of it, because if it was murder, then whoever did it is likely to follow suit if they open up and tell all, so they all keep quiet. After all 10 years has gone by so "they" have had plenty of time to perfect the cover up (If indeed there was one). I despair at the money being spent on what is surely a futile excercise

  • 277.
  • At 05:11 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • lucie wrote:

If every single adult in the UK published on this site their disapproval of the money and time spent on this inquest, would anything happen? I don't think so. What about you?

PS I think it is a huge waste of time and money and with absolutely no point because whatever the official outcome, there will still be people who will believe the opposite of whatever the ruling is.

  • 278.
  • At 05:12 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Michael wrote:

I genuinely believe it was a road accident. However, even if you did believe in a conspiracy, the idea that this inquest would reveal anything is laughable, especially after the events of the last few days. Anything that gives so much exposure to Burrell, Al Fayed, Michael Cole et al is the greatest travesty.

  • 279.
  • At 05:12 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David wrote:

It's a total waste of time and money. I'm not interested. Can't they all move on. It's another example of stupid news coverage. Going on and on and on and on and on and on about US elections is another one.

When will it be possible to let this fantastic, generous and kind woman rest in peace?

  • 281.
  • At 05:14 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Toby L wrote:

It is a rediculous waste of money, but I don't think money is the real issue. The royal family, and especially the likes of Harry & William don't need to go through any more. This conspiracy theory is as bad as bad as the one that says Churchill knew about Pearl Harbour before it happned.

  • 282.
  • At 05:14 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • R E Foster wrote:

Total waste of our money, serves no purpose other than the demands of a non british citizen

  • 283.
  • At 05:15 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Diana Wilson wrote:

Surely no-one could describe this disgusting spectactle as a serious attempt to find out how and why the Princess of Wales died. As the weeks go on it is apparent that it has two agendas - the first an attempt by Al Fayed to ease his conscience for entrusting the lives of Diana and his own son to an unqualified driver (so much for his public expressions of grief) and the second to so undermine Diana's reputation that the Royal Family will feel they have finally succeeded in their attemot to erase her memory. Perhaps one of the most relevant comments during this so-called inquest was from Dr Khan - that that miserable fountain was not a permanent or fitting memorial for a woman who, if nothing else, is the mother of our future King.

  • 284.
  • At 05:16 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • n/a wrote:

Even though she was special to us i think we should drop the case because it happened years ago and its a waste of money and policing etc time. All this media etc is wasting money and it can be spent on other things, how many times has this been in and out of the news i think it is pointless.

  • 285.
  • At 05:16 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • richard wrote:

There are so many other pressing issues that need investment far more than this.

Milking Diana's legacy is maybe a way of deflecting public interest away from them. Perhaps it's as one government minister was quoted saying after the 9/11 tragedy - "it's a convenient way to bury bad news".

Makes you wonder if this isn't more of the same.

  • 286.
  • At 05:16 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • roger wadman wrote:


Please can we not let this rest, why do we have to listen to a bitter arab shopkeeper, who is not british, keep coming out we ridiculous theories about the royal family.
It was a accident, so let those two lads get on with their life in peace.

  • 287.
  • At 05:16 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • a.non wrote:

Why is the inquest being held by the British courts under a friend of the royal family?

Aside from the dubious setup of people involved diminishing its credibility the death occurred in France and is therefore the jurisdiction of the French police.
Even if their verdict (whatever it may be) were true it will not quiet the issue.
JFK a perfect example.

  • 288.
  • At 05:16 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Simon Friend wrote:

I can not believe you are wasting Tax Payers Money even asking us to answer your question. Comment 59 has explained very well though!!!

  • 289.
  • At 05:17 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Martin Shanks wrote:

A waste of time and money? Are we talking about the Royal Family? Is so, the answer is yes.

If we are talking about the Inquest, absolutely not...IF we take action on the back of it and abolish the Royal Family and all remnants of an out-moded, parasitic institution. After all, the only reason they are in their position is that their fore-fathers were bigger gangsters than our fore-fathers

  • 290.
  • At 05:17 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Thomas West wrote:

So many unanswered questions around her death mean an inquest is long overdue. The possibility of the mother of the future king in a relationship with a muslim must have been unpalatable to the Queen. Democracy and integration in practice!
I think most people know that there were dark forces at play.

  • 291.
  • At 05:20 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Simon Parker wrote:

Complete & utter waste of time and money.Just another tabloid feeding frenzy,she died in a Car accident, that's it end of story, file & forget.

  • 292.
  • At 05:21 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Richard Hopkin wrote:

This is a vile waste of time and money and a bastardisation of the British justice system at the hands of Al Fayed. It appears the justice system can be bought out by a shopkeeper. What is more, I'm sure Diana would've revelled in the media attention. I for one am sick of this, and have been since 1997. End the inquest now, surely we've heard more than enough rubbish.

  • 293.
  • At 05:21 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • LBrown wrote:

With due respect for Diana and her memory, this is a misuse of precious public resources. It serves neither the public interest nor the interests of justice. Just last week a woman was deported to Ghana to face an early death, despite Human Rights legislation which is meant to protect us against such treatment. Where was her access to justice? In the light of Government proposals to squeeze legal aid even further, it is outragous that public funds are being deployed in a show trial perpetuating the ludicrous but lucrative theories of a few greedy newspapers who should know better. I have considerable sympathy with everyone who has lost someone they love in this tragedy. A grieving father may undertandably have strong feelings, but also ideas which do not stand up to the cold light of logic and reason, and a public inquest is not the appropriate arena to air them, and certainly not at public expense.

  • 294.
  • At 05:23 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • BingleyBugle wrote:

Seems to be part of a trend, cost attached to the Diana Inquest, Northern Rock....
What will they think of next? - How about above inflation pay rises for MPs?
Of course if the MP want to keep the spotlight of their greed - so lets keep the circus going, after all, you CAN fool most of the people most of the time!

  • 295.
  • At 05:24 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • JosPetrol wrote:

An absolute waste of time and money. Nobody is gaining anything out of this process. Digging up dirt about the royals and other high profile people is not in anyone's interest. We all know what happened, now let's move on please...

  • 296.
  • At 05:24 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • phil wrote:

No matter what happens, she's dead and will never be back. She isn't Jesus and won't magically re-appear. Yes its sad, but after 10 and a half years, move on

  • 297.
  • At 05:24 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • chris wrote:

Waste of time and very boring too although
if they didnt have an inquest the thickos who read the tabloids would think it was a cover up .

  • 298.
  • At 05:25 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Clarke wrote:

Whether right or wrong, the fact the BBC website has chosen to highlight this debate on its homepage, and that so far more than 180 have chosen to express their views, shows the considerable interest that still exists in the cause of her death - and the seemingly insatiable appetite for Royal "revelations".

  • 299.
  • At 05:25 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • bobby gohj wrote:

its only fair - what would you do if it was your family?

  • 300.
  • At 05:25 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • BingleyBugle wrote:

Seems to be part of a trend, cost attached to the Diana Inquest, Northern Rock....
What will they think of next? - How about above inflation pay rises for MPs?
Of course if the MP want to keep the spotlight of their greed - so lets keep the circus going, after all, you CAN fool most of the people most of the time!

  • 301.
  • At 05:26 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Dede wrote:

I hope this phrase sums it up:

"Let the Dead Rest in Peace".

  • 302.
  • At 05:26 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Chris Foster wrote:

I agree with comment 3.

Apart from the Daily Mail and Daily Express, WHO CARES????

Not me. A total waste of time and money, all to satisfy the ego of a shopkeeper.

  • 303.
  • At 05:26 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • E Miller wrote:

I think it is absolutely ridiculous that Prince Philip, Prince Charles or any other member of the Royal Family should be considered capable of arranging for the death of the late Princess of Wales. I have always found it very difficult to have any respect for Diana and am now finding it even harder. I have always considered her a very spiteful and paranoid woman (possibly a very sick one). If any other member of the Royal Family comes even near to emulating her behaviour they are hung out to dry and not idolised as she is and has been by much of the media. They blame all her faults on other people. Of course, the whole inquest is a complete waste of money. It WAS an accident caused by irresponsible driving and Diana might have lived if she had been responsible enough to have worn a seat belt.

  • 304.
  • At 05:26 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • L L SAUNDERS wrote:


The truth will never be told because
the establishment will never let it happen.A complete waist of time and money like most things in England today.

  • 305.
  • At 05:26 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • paul morris wrote:

It is outrageous that money can buy an inquest. To add insult to injury the British tax payer then has to foot the bill for running the inquest. I resent every penny. Diana died because she was too forgetful, arrogant or stupid to wear a safety belt. I don't think even MI5 with the help of Prince Philip influenced that decision.
outraged from
Winchester

  • 306.
  • At 05:26 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • E Miller wrote:

I think it is absolutely ridiculous that Prince Philip, Prince Charles or any other member of the Royal Family should be considered capable of arranging for the death of the late Princess of Wales. I have always found it very difficult to have any respect for Diana and am now finding it even harder. I have always considered her a very spiteful and paranoid woman (possibly a very sick one). If any other member of the Royal Family comes even near to emulating her behaviour they are hung out to dry and not idolised as she is and has been by much of the media. They blame all her faults on other people. Of course, the whole inquest is a complete waste of money. It WAS an accident caused by irresponsible driving and Diana might have lived if she had been responsible enough to have worn a seat belt.

  • 307.
  • At 05:26 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Lincoln Rasalingam wrote:

It was not only waste of money and time but most cruel to the two young princes's who do not deserve this unrelenting onslaught. If punishment ought to be dispensed with it should be to none other than Charles and Camilla, the heartless pair!

  • 308.
  • At 05:27 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • John McGll wrote:

Yes a total waste of money. Diana has been dead for 10 years now, this dragging out of so much detail of her life into the public domain is NOT going to bring her back to life, leave her and the memory of her in peace

  • 309.
  • At 05:28 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Radbourne wrote:

What strikes me about some of the evidence was that many of the witnesses,from Burrell downwards,have used their association with Diana to carve lucrative little niches for themselves.

And now they are exposed for what they are.I'm not a Diana fan but she seems to have been at the mercy of cranks & nutjobs who claim to have been her friends.

What might have been had she lived? I imagine it might have been like the relationship between Andrew & Fergie rather than as painted by some of these cranks.

  • 310.
  • At 05:28 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • H Rogers wrote:

Diana is dead! Very simply she should be left to rest in peace. This inquest has not respected the feelings of Princes WIlliam and Harry. Whilst I admired and respected the work she did in her role as a royal, even a royal deserves some level of privacy. I am not interested in any other details other than the fact that she died a tragic death and is missed by very many people. Leave her memory alone.

  • 311.
  • At 05:29 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Laura Hughes wrote:

yes yes yes yes yes it is a waste of time and money.

She died ten years ago, how much more can be gained from dragging up past relationships or suggesting she was ready to marry this person or that person? Surley this must break the hearts of the Princes.

Unless there's a definite conspiracy and people are still free who should and CAN be brought to justice, everyone should just let her rest in peace.

  • 312.
  • At 05:29 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • William Powrie wrote:

She died. Let her rest in peace.

  • 313.
  • At 05:30 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Daily Express wrote:

OF COURSE IT IS!!!!

  • 314.
  • At 05:31 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • H Rogers wrote:

Diana is dead! Very simply she should be left to rest in peace. This inquest has not respected the feelings of Princes WIlliam and Harry, and is a complete waste of time and money. Whilst I admired and respected the work she did in her role as a royal, even a royal deserves some level of privacy. I am not interested in any other details other than the fact that she died a tragic death and is missed by very many people. Leave her memory alone.

  • 315.
  • At 05:31 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Pradeep K wrote:

Why don't we use the money for the cause Diana was associated with when she was alive rather than digging her grave every 2 minutes.
Give it a rest .. will you.

  • 316.
  • At 05:31 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andrew wrote:

So if MI6 tried to kill her why did they choose such an incompetent method. Two main reasons.

Firstly Shortly after on C4 a group of top American stunt drivers tried to replicate the crash. At 80 mph they could not manage the impact and that was with both drivers trying for an afternoon. They had to slow down to 40mph and try many times to gt the impact. To use such an difficult method is ludicrous.

Second. If Diana had been wearing a seat belt she would have survived, Think on it one person in that car wore a seat belt, he was out of hospital in less than a month, the only people who died were not wearing seat belts. If Diana had worn her belt (as required by law - French and British) she would still be alive! The British secret service may not be brilliant but I bet they know how to kill a single female target without relying on her not taking an elementary precaution that has been drummed into people in the UK for decades.

This inquest is a farce to placate a very rich man and a newspaper that prints every half-baked conspiracy theory it can come up with to boost its circulation.

Even if the inquest clears everyone and gives a verdict of accidental death Fayed will never accept it nor will the paper and we will have demands for more and more until the right verdict is reached.

  • 317.
  • At 05:31 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stephen Cooper wrote:

At the heart of this fiasco lies Mr Fayed's obsession with seeking revenge against the British establishment. In my opinion, the root of this obsession lies not with the death of his son but with his failed application for British citizenship.

It is a matter of conjecture as to whether his right to pusue, what I believe to be vexatious claims, represents a strength or weakness of British society and our systems.

  • 318.
  • At 05:31 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • susan seaton wrote:

I think the inquest is a complete waste of both time and money.

  • 319.
  • At 05:32 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Frew wrote:

A waste of money! Bottom line is she got into a car with a drunk driver and didn't belt up!! Al Fayed should pay for it cause only he wanted it!

  • 320.
  • At 05:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nick Young wrote:

Why can't everyone just accept that Princess Diana's death was a tragic and unnecessary accident, caused by a drunk-driver going too fast and his passengers not wearing seatbelts?

Last summer, the Bishop of London said that it's time to move on, and let the poor woman finally rest in peace. He was right then, and he's right now.

This enquiry is a grotesque waste of time, and of taxpayers' money.

Yes it was a criminal waste of money. No it doesn't deserve to be covered as 'News'. Not again, not ever again - PLEASE! The majority of people in this country, (the sane ones,) have no interest in this at all. I'm sick of the media portraying this as a 'story'. Also, could somebody punch that Burrell toady in the face?

  • 322.
  • At 05:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • James Firth wrote:

Total waste of public money just to appease Mohamed al Fayed who will continue his campaign of vilification and conspiracy theories if the result is not to his taste

  • 323.
  • At 05:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • paul morris wrote:

It is outrageous that money can buy an inquest. To add insult to injury the British tax payer then has to foot the bill for running the inquest. I resent every penny. Diana died because she was too forgetful, arrogant or stupid to wear a safety belt. I don't think even MI5 with the help of Prince Philip influenced that decision.
outraged from
Winchester

  • 324.
  • At 05:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Lincoln Rasalingam wrote:

It was not only waste of money and time but most cruel to the two young princes's who do not deserve this unrelenting onslaught. If punishment ought to be dispensed with it should be to none other than Charles and Camilla, the heartless pair!

  • 325.
  • At 05:33 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • James Firth wrote:

Total waste of public money just to appease Mohamed al Fayed who will continue his campaign of vilification and conspiracy theories if the result is not to his taste

  • 326.
  • At 05:34 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • reter singleton wrote:

It is a shmefull circus

  • 327.
  • At 05:34 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Morford wrote:

This whole farce is an excuse for the lawyers to prosper.That's conspiracy!

  • 328.
  • At 05:36 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • paul morris wrote:

It is outrageous that money can buy an inquest. To add insult to injury the British tax payer then has to foot the bill for running the inquest. I resent every penny. Diana died because she was too forgetful, arrogant or stupid to wear a safety belt. I don't think even MI5 with the help of Prince Philip influenced that decision.
outraged from
Winchester

  • 329.
  • At 05:37 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • mark wrote:

Why are we wasting millions of pounds of public money on Mr Fayed's conspiracy theory,when an inquest has already concluded that an employee of his company was drunk at the wheel!

  • 330.
  • At 05:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • erica wrote:

i think that diana was murdered and no matter what the outcome of the inquest is it will not change my mind, and i also think the same if a person thinks that it was an accident whatever the outcome is it will not change their mind, i think that the inquest is a waste of money. please allow her to rest in peace!

  • 331.
  • At 05:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stephen Cooper wrote:

At the heart of this fiasco lies Mr Fayed's obsession with seeking revenge against the British establishment. In my opinion, the root of his obsession lies not with the death of his son but with his failed application for British citizenship.

It is a matter of conjecture as to whether his right to pusue, what I believe to be vexatious claims, represents a strength or weakness of British society and our systems.

If there is a verdict of accidental death or an inconclusive outcome to the inquest will Mr Fayed be liable for costs.

  • 332.
  • At 05:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nick wrote:

Yes. I'm bored to death with it. I'm surprised at Michael Mansfield, whom I greatly respect, for allowing himself to become involved in this charade. Diana was a pampered and privileged young woman who died in a road traffic accident caused by a drunken driver. Tragic of course but no more so than dozens of accidents that happen every week.
For God's sake lets leave it alone!

  • 333.
  • At 05:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Katie wrote:

I have to admit, I was never the hugest fan of Diana, I admit that she did good things, but the publicity thrown on her practically elevates her to sainthood. It's boring and repetitive and unecessary!

In my opinion, it is a complete waste of time, effort and money. All that is happening is that the stories and rumours are getting more and more outlandish, contributing ot the creation of even more conspiracy theories.

She died, and that is tragic, but it
was 10 years ago and we are no closer to knowing if what we have been told is the absolute truth or not and we will never find that out.

There are more important things going on in the world than dwelling on an event that occurred 10 years ago. Most of the stories and rumours are spread by people wishing to discredit the monarchy and they get really boring.

It's time to leave her memory in peace.

A Total waste of time and money unless of course you are some grabbing part of the Legal Profession in this country who will as usual Rake in a NICE FORTUNE. Or of course some old has been waiting to write a newspaper story or the dreaded Book.. Make it No Win No fee then we would see what the Legal Profession is made of.

  • 335.
  • At 05:39 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alex wrote:

I understand that at the time it was tragic and it touched many people, but this has fgone beyond ridiculous now.For goodness sake, just accept it was a tragic accident, that's all.

  • 336.
  • At 05:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Will Rose wrote:

It is very sad that Al Fayed cannot accept his son is dead. He just needs to find someone to blame. As for the inquest its sole purpose is to provide inflated income for the lawyers.

  • 337.
  • At 05:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andrew wrote:

Yes, it is a complete waste of time and money. We know how she died. Whatever the coronor's verdict, it certainly will not be 'Prince Philip did it' It seems the only reason we are having this circus is to placate one man as he tries to prove some wild and wonderful theories. Deport Mr Fayed I say and stop this farce now.
Mind you, this particular waste of public money is probably no worse than the huge number of needless public enquiries that the great British public seem to demand these days.

  • 338.
  • At 05:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jamie Hughes wrote:

This inquest is a stupid waste of money, speaking as a working young adult, I dont care about the minute details of this enquiry, and I certainly object to paying for it. I am tired of every day this nonsense being presented as "news". Why not concentrate on the more important real stories? Like the Economy, Iraq and Pakistan, this whole publicising of this enquiry speaks of catering to the lowest common denominator in news programming these days.

  • 339.
  • At 05:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sam wrote:

What a total waste of time. Can't she just be left alone to rest in piece.

  • 340.
  • At 05:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Dennis Tutty wrote:

What a waste of time and money. What good can it all do except to line the pockets of overpaid lawyers with nothing more productive to do. Who's paying anyway?

  • 341.
  • At 05:40 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Suresh Thalange wrote:

Absolutely, couldn't agree more

  • 342.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Julie Neil wrote:

The whole situation makes me angry. Why should the public pay for this farce? I personally wish that everyone would let Diana rest in peace. Even if there was a conspiracy, who cares? It was 10 years ago! Perhaps we could spend the money on something that matters like hospitals or schools.

  • 343.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Nick wrote:

Yes. I'm bored to death with it. I'm surprised at Michael Mansfield, whom I greatly respect, for allowing himself to become involved in this charade. Diana was a pampered and privileged young woman who died in a road traffic accident caused by a drunken driver. Tragic of course but no more so than dozens of accidents that happen every week.
For God's sake lets leave it alone!

  • 344.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • tom bastin wrote:

Sure it's a waste of time and money! The only ones who are gaining anything from this are the tabloids. The poor girl died in a horrible accident. Why do we have to probe into her sex life-which has nothing to do with her tragic end. She is entitled to the same privacy as anyone else would wish to have were they in the same situatuion. Charles had his flings, and everyone knew about it! Diana's sex life should forever remain what it is: A secret!

Tom Bastin

  • 345.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • James wrote:

Lets send the bill for it to Dodi's Father he’s the one who keep it burning to attack the Royal Family

  • 346.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Harold wrote:

Waste of time, money and efforts.

We have been here before, nothing gained from it apart it seems a chance for the supporters of Diana to put the boot into the mythical protagonists.

Can we please stop wasting our time and money on their fanciful tales and move on.

  • 347.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Julie Neil wrote:

The whole situation makes me angry. Why should the public pay for this farce? I personally wish that everyone would let Diana rest in peace. Even if there was a conspiracy, who cares? It was 10 years ago! Perhaps we could spend the money on something that matters like hospitals or schools.

  • 348.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • trish davis wrote:

If she had worn her seat belt she would probably be alive today.

very very sad at the time but now getting ridiculous.

Do not think she would have wanted all her secrets exposed.

let her rest in peace.

  • 349.
  • At 05:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Helena wrote:

It is a complete and utter waste of money! Perhaps right after she 'went missing' it would have made sense to spend this much ( some may think ) but like 10 years after is ridiculous! Tax money could be spent on so many things with a better purpose such as fixing the pipes which 36% of London's water is wasted when it leaks through. Or for example fixing potholes which are very dangerous. It is unfair that the government is spending OUR money this way-anyway, shouldn't this be considered as using tax-money for personal uses?

  • 350.
  • At 05:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andrew wrote:

Just let Diana rest in peace, if the "British Establishment" were involved in the "accident" in Paris this inquest will never discover the truth of that. So if Al Fayed and the media circus want to try and find out their version of the truth (it could just have been an tragic accident!), it's only fair they should fund the investigation.

  • 351.
  • At 05:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • James wrote:

Lets send the bill for it to Dodi's Father he’s the one who keep it burning to attack the Royal Family

  • 352.
  • At 05:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Linnitt wrote:

If there was a conspiricy, and if Diana were terrified about dying in a car crash, then surely she would have been wearing a seat belt. The only belted passenger in the car survived, and he was sat in the front.

Ian Hislop had it reight. A car crashed, the unprotected passengers died, end of story.

  • 353.
  • At 05:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andrew wrote:

Just let Diana rest in peace, if the "British Establishment" were involved in the "accident" in Paris this inquest will never discover the truth of that. So if Al Fayed and the media circus want to try and find out their version of the truth (it could just have been an tragic accident!), it's only fair they should fund the investigation.

  • 354.
  • At 05:42 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Phil wrote:

Why can't they just let her rest in peace. Is it a waste of money - of course, and time, and resources, and effort - the conclusions will be as before unles Mr AlFyad can find a way to get the result he wants, which probaly isn't the truth. Let it rest and let Dodi and Diana rest in peace also.

  • 355.
  • At 05:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Patsy West wrote:

Yes, of course it is a shameful waste of money, but this is the British legal system and justice must been seen to be done. The only good thing that has come out of it is that Paul "the Rock" Burrell has been shown to be the person he really is, just a dutiful servant and no more! Secrets? There are none! it was just a tragic accident - she should have worn her seat belt like the rest of us.

  • 356.
  • At 05:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Suresh Thalange wrote:

Absolutely, couldn't agree more

  • 357.
  • At 05:44 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Steve R, wrote:

Complete waste of Money, whoever asked of the inquest in the first place should cover the cost's. Lets all move on.

  • 358.
  • At 05:44 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Katie wrote:

I have to admit, I was never the hugest fan of Diana, I admit that she did good things, but the publicity thrown on her practically elevates her to sainthood. It's boring and repetitive and unecessary!

In my opinion, it is a complete waste of time, effort and money. All that is happening is that the stories and rumours are getting more and more outlandish, contributing ot the creation of even more conspiracy theories.

She died, and that is tragic, but it
was 10 years ago and we are no closer to knowing if what we have been told is the absolute truth or not and we will never find that out.

There are more important things going on in the world than dwelling on an event that occurred 10 years ago. Most of the stories and rumours are spread by people wishing to discredit the monarchy and they get really boring.

It's time to leave her memory in peace.

  • 359.
  • At 05:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jeannie wrote:

I wish the media and everyone would shut up about this woman and concentrate on what is really happening in the world. This is not news and of no interest.

  • 360.
  • At 05:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • MalcolmX wrote:

If it means we don't have to listen/read/watch anymore of this story after the Inquest then so be it.

If one watches the video inside the Ritz when Henri Paul has returned after a few hours off, I think he gives himself away as to how much he has drunk by some slight uncontrolled swaying which happens for a few moments. He then pulls himself together as if he remembers why he's back in the hotal and then acts accordingly. Clunk click every trip and don't drink and drive are the morals of this story.

  • 361.
  • At 05:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Tim wrote:

Give Diana her due, she did manage to drag the Royal family kicking and screaming into the real world.

Mind you have to laugh about the whole affair, about the supposed engagement, then the butler saying only a month before her death she had broken up with the heart specialist. It provide great entertainment on dull afternoons in the office. The script writers for Eastenders should study the whole affair.

Waste of money. Hey, we have pay tax for the rest of the Royal Family irrespective of their personal wealth. And somebody is bound to bang on about what they do for our country. I rather have the money in my wages so I can afford decent holidays for my children.

  • 362.
  • At 05:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Pete Brown wrote:

What a complete waste of time and money! The whole thing has become one more awful "reality show" with about as much credibility. There are people dying in Africa every day from famine and sickness due to poverty while we pour millions into lawyer's pockets.

  • 363.
  • At 05:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Maureen Grix wrote:

10 years on. Who cares anymore, she wasn't murdered, there was no conspiracy sadly accidents happen. If she had been miss nobody, nobody would give a damm. Let her rest in peace and give her sons a chance at life. leave her alone she is dead get over it.
I would just like to see Harry and William live a life without Diane's picture in the papers/on TV. Too many people have made a living out of her, on the top of the list is that odious little man Paul Burrel.

  • 364.
  • At 05:45 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Ian Hall wrote:


Diana could have gone home to see her children after her holiday but decided to stay an extra night in Paris. She ended up a passenger in a drink driver car. End of story.
Why are we having to pay out ever more money to rake over this rubbish.
Please stop reporting it as NEWS!

  • 365.
  • At 05:46 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Paul Linnitt wrote:

If there was a conspiricy, and if Diana were terrified about dying in a car crash, then surely she would have been wearing a seat belt. The only belted passenger in the car survived, and he was sat in the front.

Ian Hislop had it right. A car crashed, the unprotected passengers died, end of story.

  • 366.
  • At 05:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • PC.Mac Nab wrote:

Thinks....
HOW come it was a doctor who was first on the scene of the crash????
If you have seen the photos of Diana in the crash car..whats this "doctor" doing??? leaning over her....was he making sure???? they very soon removed all these photos from puplic view...Have you seen them???I have...

  • 367.
  • At 05:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andy wrote:

Well I think the storys are wrong regarding the driver being drunk. Come on people would any person in their right mind get into a car with a drunk driver. Highly unlikely & its a shame so many newspapers report this.

  • 368.
  • At 05:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Val wrote:

Am I the only one thinking.."Conspire to kill by conjuring up a road accident? How daft is that? No guarantees of death here at all unless one is going to bring Parisian doctors into the picture!" For crying out loud let the poor woman and her family be at peace. No-one is ever going to know the truth about Diana's life so let's stop hearing all the sordid details. Nothing will bring her back - why throw mud at someone who is not here to defend themselves and what, might I ask, does her mother calling her a 'whore' have to do with her death??? Get real!

  • 369.
  • At 05:47 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Pat Mitchell wrote:

For the sake of her children, just let it drop. After 10 years it is rare to read a newspaper without at least one picture of Diana in it. The whole circus is about cheap and easy column inches for the press and news time for the media. Nothing will bring them back, or convine me that Prince Philip was in any way involved. If Diana thought she was going to die in a car crash, then why no seat belt?

  • 370.
  • At 05:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Dawn wrote:

It's an outrageous waste of public money. The accident happened because Mohammed Fayed's driver was drunk; Mr Fayed can't find it in himself to accept that it's ultimately his responsibility. He's put forward his ridiculous conspiracy theories because of sour grapes - i.e. being told that he will never be given a British passport because he's of "undesirable character".

Paul Burrell certainly took Diana's documents unlawfully - no member of the royal family would entrust their documents to a servant. If his reason for taking them was to protect her privacy, why did he then publish a book? He has an inflated idea as to his position too.

As for Diana herself, I don't understand why she's so worshipped. She was a spoilt, manipulative clothes horse who spent her time swanning round the world on shopping trips and posh holidays, occasionally cuddling kids with HIV to make her look compassionate. She was clearly out of touch with reality (don't all the key people seem to be in this saga?!). And should have been wearing her seat belt.

The French police AND the Met have already carried out thorough investigations, so why go into all this lurid detail?

  • 371.
  • At 05:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sack the Juggler wrote:

I liked Diana, she wasn't perfect, but then again who is? However this inquest is costing more and is turning into a far more hideous memorial than the offical one - the verruca footpath in hyde park...

  • 372.
  • At 05:48 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alex wrote:

It's completely unnecessary. All this is doing is allowing the already needlessly tight grip the tabloids have on the public mind to be exacerbated. It's simply an investigation into the death of a woman and two men in a car accident (yes, you read that right, it was an accident) that really should take about an hour. Popular she may have been, but that doesn't mean we need to know every minute detail of the years leading up to her death. Her affairs were hers alone then, and should still be now.

  • 373.
  • At 05:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rod Wright wrote:

It seems to me the whole exercise has been put on to satisfy the tabloids and their prurient interest in the death of someone they had hounded for many years.

The woman was killed in a road accident, mainly because she was not wearing a seatbelt. What conspiracy could be involved?

The newspapers are enjoying the event, but I think most people , including 90% of those who have written here, have very little interest.

  • 374.
  • At 05:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Pamela Heyfron wrote:

a huge waste of money, time and effort. What a sad life Diana had - I will remember her as Second Hand Rose - much of what she had was used before - even her 'funeral song' had been written for someone else originally.
Let's leave her memory in peace and leave history to unpick her life and death.

  • 375.
  • At 05:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • g v m wrote:

where is my baby at............????

  • 376.
  • At 05:50 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • JAMIECBAKER wrote:

YES after all this time all this does is sell more papers and provide some more 'news' at slow news time - can we please move on?

  • 377.
  • At 05:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Farmer wrote:

A complete waste of time and money. When the decision is made public that it was just an unfortunate accident, I hope Fayed will be made to reimburse the ridiculous sums that have been squandered on this circus.

  • 378.
  • At 05:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Huw wrote:

Its been nothing more than an excuse for people to voice their opinions and views about her and tell the world how close they were with her. She was in a car crash and she died. That fact hasnt changed in 10 years and it wont now. Its unfortunate but a lot worse happens to a lot more people everyday.

  • 379.
  • At 05:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Roy Parsons wrote:

I have thoroughly enjoyed the whole case as have the majority of the public.The details have been fascinating and made some very good reading in the press.

  • 380.
  • At 05:51 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • erul wrote:

No its not a waste of money. A majority of the posts on here say that it is, which really worrys me. Its seems most people have fell for the establishments propaganda, which is fed through the BBC and Sky news. Why has it taken 10years for thi inquest - because the establishment know that feelings were running very high among the public on this issue, they wanted this to die down so they could quietly have the inquest with no questions asked. Al Fayed put a stop to all that. We will never get to the truth because fear will shut the witnesses up.

  • 381.
  • At 05:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Aaron MW Johnson wrote:

I can't begin to formulate thoughts about how angry this makes me feel....I am sick to death of this story as well as other stuff which is credited as being "in the public interest" pervading every available tv channel, newspaper headline and magazine cover. Peoples hunger for details of this case as well as other examples of celebrity "culture", frankly, makes me sick.

  • 382.
  • At 05:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Farmer wrote:

A complete waste of time and money. When the decision is made public that it was just an unfortunate accident, I hope Fayed will be made to reimburse the ridiculous sums that have been squandered on this circus.

  • 383.
  • At 05:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Eileen Murphy wrote:

Is there anyone in the whole country who does NOT believe this inquest was totally pointless and a scandalous waste of money?

Whose idea was it anyway? Why was not the French investigation sufficient? What is the rationale for an inquest of this nature 10 years after the event?

Eileen
Preston

  • 384.
  • At 05:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rob Partis wrote:

She was just a person who died - I dont know a single person in my age group (mid thirties) who is remotely interested in the outcome of this. Presumably the only people who are bothered are the same ones watching xfactor and any program with the word celebrity in it.

  • 385.
  • At 05:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jez wrote:

This story is getting as annoying as hearing about Northern Rock. Get over it, she died in an accident that will never be proved that the royal family were involved. Paul Burrell still tries to make more money out of it by lying and all of our tax is being spent on paying high flying judges that are going to come to a decision that we could have come up with in minutes. Stop wasting everyones time and let her rest.

  • 386.
  • At 05:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Katerina Sarelli wrote:

Since it's Mr Al Fayed senior who has insisted on this inquest, I think he should pay for it!! I'm sure he can afford it.

Let the girl rest in peace - whether we liked her or not, this whole situation with all her personal affairs available for public consumption is so disrespectful to a dead person's memory, regardless of who they were. It has become a soap opera and Mr Al Fayed should just bite the bullet and shut up. He's not the first person to have lost a child in strange circumstances. What about the parents who lost their sons and daughters at the Deep Cut Army Barracks!!!!

Enough is enough

  • 387.
  • At 05:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • erul wrote:

No its not a waste of money. A majority of the posts on here say that it is, which really worrys me. Its seems most people have fell for the establishments propaganda, which is fed through the BBC and Sky news. Why has it taken 10years for thi inquest - because the establishment know that feelings were running very high among the public on this issue, they wanted this to die down so they could quietly have the inquest with no questions asked. Al Fayed put a stop to all that. We will never get to the truth because fear will shut the witnesses up.

  • 388.
  • At 05:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rhys Howell wrote:

Yes its a complete waste of money. Accidents happen. Why are we spending so much on this one tragic traffic accident when thousands more get overlooked every year?

  • 389.
  • At 05:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sarah Johnstone wrote:

Yes. What a disgusting waste of taxpayers' money. As if the truth would ever be told. And how awful for her sons. A complete travesty.

  • 390.
  • At 05:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Richard wrote:

Just how much of the taxpayers money has it taken (so far.....) to reveal she liked 'hairy backs'

  • 391.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Hamish Tennant wrote:

A complete and utter waste of time and money. The only people to get any mileage from it are the Express and the Mail. Without the inquest, they would have probably sunk without trace.

The result of this debacle, will it bring two boys their mother back? No, what it will do is dredge things up that should have been kept from them.

Not only that, but the flurry of books that will be published as a resultis frightening to contemplate.

  • 392.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Katie wrote:

I have to admit, I was never the hugest fan of Diana, I admit that she did good things, but the publicity thrown on her practically elevates her to sainthood. It's boring and repetitive and unecessary!

In my opinion, it is a complete waste of time, effort and money. All that is happening is that the stories and rumours are getting more and more outlandish, contributing ot the creation of even more conspiracy theories.

She died, and that is tragic, but it
was 10 years ago and we are no closer to knowing if what we have been told is the absolute truth or not and we will never find that out.

There are more important things going on in the world than dwelling on an event that occurred 10 years ago. Most of the stories and rumours are spread by people wishing to discredit the monarchy and they get really boring.

It's time to leave her memory in peace.

  • 393.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Monique wrote:

Of course its a waste of time and money!!! there is no other way to put it . But shes gone and people should just accept it! No one will uncover anything even if there was something dodgy going on. And how reliable are these sources this happened ages ago!!!!!!!!

  • 394.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ave wrote:

A waste of energy, time and money ever since the start initiated by a deeply paranoid man who still after 10 years accept the fact that his son is dead.

Slander and hear-say are the main ingredients in this mess up of a stew.

  • 395.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • jonathan falmer wrote:

The inquest is not a waste. The time and the money thereby spent is. The Priness's death was not ordinary in its manner or timing. It is pregnant with conspiracy, espcecially to a grieving father who sees plots around every corner. The waste is the leeway that the coroner is giving to quacks, spin doctors and old retainers on the make.It could be a lot shorter. The only people to gain for its length are the lawyers. If they had a fee clawback for the extra days spent, the whole thing would be over in a week. The inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic was less two weeks.

  • 396.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Carole wrote:

It is a complete waste of time and money and will throw up nothing new regarding her death, just a lot of salacious gossip, hearsay and things siad to friends in confidence which reveal nothing. This was always going to be the case. I would like to know WHO decided to let this fiasco go ahead - no case involving an 'ordinary' person would be allowed to proceed to court on such flimsy and pathetic evidence.
This isn't justice, it's a media circus.

  • 397.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Stavros wrote:

Yes, a complete waste. Will Mohammed Al-Fayed finally be silenced by the very obvious non-conspiracy outcome at the end of it all anyway? No, of course he won't. And for goodness sake, she really wasn't all that important anyway. An utter waste of taxpayers' money. Al-Fayed should be made to pay for the whole thing.

  • 398.
  • At 05:55 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • john wrote:

It is all very, very sad

  • 399.
  • At 05:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Phil wrote:

Clearly, there is no legal reason for this waste of money, just as there would be no point in a court investigating the deaths of Elvis or JFK. However, given the current 15 seconds of fame culture (we're way past 15 minutes), the authorities are happy to pander to the wants (not needs) of the press and television. This is fully in line with police investigations of footballers that 'upset' fans by making gestures at them or the ridiculous suggestion that the police should investigate Peter Hain, despite the fact that he has owned up. What do they expect to gain? Note also, the police officer that gave us a full description of the clothes worn by Mrs Darwin on her flight from Panama, fully reported on national television. Newsnight is one of the few programmes that still report the 'News' (ie something that is new and important enough to matter)

  • 400.
  • At 05:56 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • David Holland wrote:

Yawn .... zzzzzzzz

  • 401.
  • At 05:57 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Adam Hartley wrote:

Yes it is a total waste of public money. After ten years, whatever side of the the republican/monarchist fence you sit on surely everyone can agree that whatever mud is dragged up now is of little to zero consequence other than to fuel the front pages of the tabloids. Can we please let Diana, Dodi and the rest of this gorram saga rest in peace.

  • 402.
  • At 05:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • George Foster wrote:

Whatever the outcome of this inquest the way it has been conducted increases the likelihood of an appeal or judicial review thereby increasing still further the enormous costs. Meanwhile the relations of servicemen killed on active service are denied inquests because of scarce inquest resources.

  • 403.
  • At 05:58 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • LG wrote:

Gravy train for the lawyers and hangers-on. Serves no other purpose except, by the nature of the case, give a platform for Fayed.

  • 404.
  • At 05:59 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Mike wrote:

It has been concluded that it was an accident. What is there to have an inquest about?

NOTHING

It is farcial that it is allowed to take place.

  • 405.
  • At 06:01 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Peter ellis wrote:

Life is too short. Give this a miss because it's going to prove in the end, a complete waste of time and money. There will be no definitive answer and one will still believe, that which one chooses to believe.

  • 406.
  • At 06:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Richard wrote:

Clunk...click....every trip !

  • 407.
  • At 06:03 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rory wrote:

Considering I believe the whole Royal Family are a waste of time and money, of course a rehash of an old story is of little worth, but it is no surprise that the press remain fixated by teh image and intrigue of the Diana saga.

Diana was a world class celebrity, who through her philandering ways gave us all a great deal of laughs. For that reason alone it was a pity to lose her.

She almost single handedly built paparrazzi companies like Big and Splash, and helped establish the celebrity culture we have today.

  • 408.
  • At 06:06 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Margaret wrote:

Yes - not just a waste of time and money, but also injurious to the Head of State and her family.


Mr Fayed's lawyer seems to playing word games, feeding witnesses a line -for example the following extract between Michael Mansfield and Burrell about Diana's so called 'thank you' note to Dodi Fayed.

MM ...it's clearly a significant letter, isn't it?

B It's a very short letter.

MM Yes.Sometimes the briefest of notes imply the greatest of emotion, don't they?

B Perhaps

MM Perhaps the less said, the more implied. Do you follow?

B I do.

MM But what has a meaning is providing him...with something as important as the cufflinks that belonged to her father?

And so it goes on.


Elsewhere there are loose threads- the conflicting accounts of French witnesses about whether or not there was a ring ( one man asking the Director of the Ritz why he lied), the conflicting accounts of Mr Al Fayed's press officer about whether or not Diana was pregnant, whether or not she and Dodi were engaged.

Haven't we heard enough?

  • 409.
  • At 06:08 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Julian wrote:

Its total madness. Nothing will ever placate the paranoid and dillusional conspiracy theorists. for Petes sake, these people still believe the moon landings were faked and Elvis is working in a chip shop!

If anyone wanted to kill her, which the didn't, then they could
a) arrange a simple mechanical failure on one of the many helicopters she used in the UK, ensuring guaranteed fatalaties, no witnesses and as the UK military would investigate, a nice easy cover up,
or
b) A poison that causes a 'natural' death in the private confines of a royal palace where doctors and investigations can be controlled
or
c) arrange a very complicated car accident (that has proved very difficult to replicate) involving one of the safest cars built at the time, in front of dozens of witnesses, in a foreign country where we have limited influence, in which the intended victim suffers only internal injuries.

Also, what relevance have the private 'revelations' got. Does it matter who she loved or intended to marry or whether she got on with her mother? Are they implying her Mother could have done it?
Its all a very silly waste of our money. I vote the Daily Express and Fayed split the costs.

  • 410.
  • At 06:11 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • anthony wrote:

total waste of time and money.
When a madman with money makes enough noise he gets what he wants and the rest of us have to foot the bill!

  • 411.
  • At 06:13 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • ines wrote:

The money is not a major issue in this case... I believe if we will all be assured that Diana died in a very tragic accident and was not a victim of a dark and insidious conspiracy... all of us will be ready to pay all the money of the world...

But I'm affraid we may never know.. may be some people know ...but will be in their very best interest that the truth will see light... probably not...

In this case let the Princess memory rest in peace... and let of us move on... What else is left ????

  • 412.
  • At 06:14 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Richard wrote:

Why is this a waste of money? It will be the basis to keep the "Diana Industry" of press, trash TV, hangers-on, peoples princess worshipers, etc. going for years. The great british public love for celebrities will keep the industry in money from books, articles, TV appearences....you name it based on the information recycled here. The only idiots are those of us who think this glorified score settling between this bunch of sycophantic blood suckers and fame chasers will end the matter!

  • 413.
  • At 06:15 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Lizz wrote:

Surely there is a new phrase in the making with all this fiasco? An "Al Fayed" - keep going back until you get the answer you want.

In short, a tragic accident took away the lives of Dodi and Diana and many people have trouble accepting that fact, letting it go and moving on. Dodi and Diana will never be forgotten for many, many reasons; their deaths were difficult to comprehend, but it happened and people need not forget, but at least move on.

  • 414.
  • At 06:16 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Michael Gaum wrote:

Clearly a waste of public money. Send Al-Fayed the bill. Bling-blingism gone mad. What is Michael Mansfield doing getting involved in this sordid case? To marginally redeem himself, he should at least donate his total, presumably enormous, fees to charity.


  • 415.
  • At 06:19 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Phil Clifford wrote:

It's true that this inquest is costing a great deal of money and that it appears to have developed a life of its own beyond simply ascertaining how Diana died.

It will, of course, be inconclusive and certainly not result in any members of the windsor family being found guilty of anything.

If the initial secrecy, evidence tampering at the scene and beyond, lack of appropriate access to the body, the passing of the body into the 'care' of the royal coroner, etc, had been challenged properly from the start, there would have been no need at this stage to have the inquest. Some hope.

Whether the windsor family or their covert 'agents' were responsible for this unfortunate death I am unable to judge.

However, in a state defined as a constitutional monarchy rather than a democracy, where the judiciary, the police and almost all other public servants swear an oath of allegiance to the crown then the windsors will remain where they have always been - beyond the laws that the rest of us abide by.

  • 416.
  • At 06:22 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Sally wrote:

It doesn't matter how Diana died. She's gone. There's no need digging up the past and dragging her name through the papers. If everyone loves her so much, then why bring disgrace to her name? I think everyone should just let it be. The money could be spent on more worthwhile things such as charity. That's what Diana would have wanted.

To be quite frank, if she was wearing a seatbelt, she probably still would be alive today. I also blame the paparazzi. They are equivalent to stalkers.

  • 417.
  • At 06:25 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Adam Rich wrote:

MI6? Duke of Edinburgh? Humbug!

Despite any sensible conclusion the inquest may draw there are a lot of fools who still won't be happy and that includes those at Daily Express who have missed no opportunity to perpetuate this nonsense. Public interest or self interest?

I can hear the cries of whitewash already.

  • 418.
  • At 06:30 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Keith Douglas wrote:

As with President John F Kennedy Dianna was assasinated. The "circus" is designed to make us "weary" helped along by the media. Once freed from Royal Family control she was declared as: "a loose cannon" in Parliament and she was indeed that. Her campaign to end the manufacture of "land mines" which earns millions of dollars and pounds for the US and British "military/industrial complexes" alarmed these massive profit makers. Add the British Establishment's racist fears of Diana bearing a part Asian child and the increasing likelihood of her becoming more and more enightened leading to her "championing" left wing policies and you have three powerful motives for those in real power - the "invisible governments" of the Western world to make sure she was "taken out" and that is exactly what happened.

  • 419.
  • At 06:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • nick ruddock wrote:

Nice one Tom,(59); a big mess?

I thought as I grew up, that those in positions of power/influence, had by virtue being chosen: integrity, ability, intellect, judgement, balance, memory, honesty and finesse.

Perhaps as some have said over the years; we threw the baby out with the bath water. In 'our' eagerness to correct the stuffiness of the Society, 35 to 45 years ago, to modernise, the ridiculous hypocrisy, the patronising manner in which the influential, possibly powerful, spoke down to the, spoke about the ordinary man; the result has been respect, in its many manifest forms, got thrown out with deference. And likely integrity, accuracy, modesty, forthrightness, and clarity.

We seem to have appropriately gained greater womens' rights but the package seems twinned with political correctness as the Victorians similarly but incorrectly covered shapely table/piano legs to proclaim modesty. A great deal seems to be inside out, upside down and back-to-front.

Certainly this Government has got to be put out. One can see it on their faces. They are out of tune with even themselves and out of their depth. They have lost their rudder. A Foreign Secretary who inspires us with nought - and who has failed to claim his youth due to over-vaulting ambition, beyond the range of wisdom. There are none so blind as those who will not see! But the Prime Minister is half-blind, beg pardon, half-ocularly challenged, and worse, timid. As no one in recent years he truly appears out of date - perhaps Edwardian. [Actually a period I hope I should have liked - but it is too late.]

A waste: - surely money could have been spent on more useful tasks. But it was unavoidable since the Tabloid hegemony must be served; its voracious appetite devours subtlety, joy, fellowship, and we are all its victims.

  • 420.
  • At 06:38 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Johnny E. Anderson wrote:


What is the necessity or purpose to this constant and consistent delving into the past. It ia apparent that too many people have too little to do but to see what can be brought up and for what will it reaslly change anything?? The woman is dead get on with your life and leave it alone.

  • 421.
  • At 06:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Rachel wrote:

i think that this whole diana thing has gotten way out of hand. its time to let her rest in peace. she has been gone for many years now and dragging it up everytime people need something to talk about is unjust. it is not fair on her sons to keep dragging up this usless information. it is not going to bring her back to life or change anything in todays life!

the amount they are spending on this could go to a better cause. it is jsut unessasary spending

  • 422.
  • At 07:13 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Siobhan Strathearn wrote:

I was only young when the incident happened (being only 14 now) but even I can say whatever happened to rest in peace?
This whole situation will be putting stress on William, Harry & the whole family.
What has happened has happened. I think we should now leave the whole situation and all involved alone.

  • 423.
  • At 07:20 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jon Armstrong wrote:

Yes! If (and hopefully) when the vedict is that her death was accidental, no doubt Al Fayed will simply claim that it is all part of another cover up.

Its reassuring to note that the vast majority of the comments I've seen here agree that it is all an enormous waste of time and money. I never cease to be astinished by the halfwits that I encounter who believe that her death was suspicious. Diana and Dodi died bacuse they were being driven too fast by a drunk driver and they weren't wearing their seatbelts. Anything else is paranoid nonsence.

Quite aside from anything else, does anyone really think that the Duke of Edinburgh or MI5 are that stupid? If they got caught, it would be the end for the Royal Family. What's more, engineering a car accident is a very inefficient and imprecise way to murder soneone - all Diana neded to do to survive it was wear her seatbelt. Her bodyguard wore one and survived.

Let's hope the jury does not deliover a perverse verdict.

  • 424.
  • At 07:21 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Colin Forrester wrote:

We maintain part-remembered, ill-informed memories of a fairy-tale gone wrong and succeed only in convincing ourselves that this was Diana as she was, or perhaps, more correctly as she would wish us to see her.

It seems a moot point to stress Diana was curiously both puppet and puppet-master - being both player and played by the media. It seems perverse that the people "who hounded her to her death" are the same people keeping the saintly memories alive. I wonder if perhaps they have an agenda.

Diana strove to maintain her independence as a modern woman. She married. She divorced. She was fantastically good looking and would plainly have had a range of friends and potential lovers. BUT, she was just a woman.

Both time and money are being wasted. A conspiracy theory requires no evidence, nor does it credit it. This insidious theorising relies only upon the belief of those who seek it out. Is the media more to blame for keeping Diana's memory fresh instead of searching for the "next" Diana? A continually "refreshed" memory is certainly cheaper, and it can't sue!

I pray that this inquest ends this tawdry news piece. Dodi and Diana should rest in peace, in the solemn dignity that only death brings.

  • 425.
  • At 07:29 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • len wrote:

The inquest is a total waste of money, the only outcome being that it will make some rich people (the baristors) even richer. Ten years on it is time to let Diana rest in peace.


  • 426.
  • At 07:52 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Andy Waters - Newcastle wrote:

As they would say on Mastermind, they've started so they'll finish. However, if the verdict is accidental death, as is likely, I trust that will finally be an end of the matter and that no further time and money will be wasted on this.

My suspicion is that some of those who lost close relatives in the accident won't let it drop unless and until they get the answer they want, which isn't how the system works I'm afraid. Therefore, I trust that no further airtime or print space will be afforded to those people and their fantasies, no matter how genuinely they may hold their opinions.

  • 427.
  • At 08:03 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Malcolm Donald wrote:

Absolutely yes. If you have followed the all of Hearing transcripts and you are not part of the establishment you will then understand why.

  • 428.
  • At 08:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Francine wrote:

A dishonourable waste of money that will only harm blameless people. Leave it alone.

  • 429.
  • At 08:10 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Philip Glynn wrote:

Eveyone has said the same thing, what money caN BUY, I blame the media for using the subject so extensivelyy

  • 430.
  • At 08:17 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Piero Agostinelli wrote:

The accident and death of Diana was so timely that produced the suspect of an organized murder.Obviously the behaviour of this Royal Princess reached a point of shame for the Royal Family. The variuous enquiries over the happening are inceted by the money of a muslim reach father who understandably suffered for the great loss of a son and the dream of
grandeur for his shop and hotel business.

  • 431.
  • At 08:25 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Annie wrote:

Well it's obviously got us all going hasn't it?it's a long time since I had to scroll past 400 to make a comment..yes waste of both.

  • 432.
  • At 08:53 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Veronika Wellings wrote:

I find it very interesting the large
number of responses this issue has
generated. Al Fayed should never have
been allowed to have his way. As we
all know he can afford any number of
inquests, and he will continue to the
bitter end. Someone should put a stop
to this farce and to the waste of
public money. I have never been
particularly interested

in the woman dead or alive.

  • 433.
  • At 09:02 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Mark from Derbyshire wrote:

Media circus!!!!! So what do Newsnight do but join the parade in the name of 'debating it'. They clearly didn't want to be left out of this solacious story and are looking to take the moral highground. I'd rather debate Ms. Kaplinsky's pay cheque at Five - that's how desperate I am now to move onto another story...even if it's less deserving. Maybe I'll just go and watch some paint dry instead.

  • 434.
  • At 09:06 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Veronika Wellings wrote:

I find it very interesting the large
number of responses this issue has
generated. Al Fayed should never have
been allowed to have his way. As we
all know he can afford any number of
inquests, and he will continue to the
bitter end. Someone should put a stop
to this farce and to the waste of
public money. There are wars and other disasters when many people get
hurt. But all we get day after day
from our media are the stories about
Diana, her death, etc. I have never
been particulary interested in her
alive or dead, and now find it just
very boring. Who really cares what
happened over 10 years ago to a
spoilt rich woman?

  • 435.
  • At 09:29 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • honestpriscilla123 wrote:

My questions:-
1. Why has it taken 10 years to hold the Inquest?
2. Why was Diana's body embalmed before establishing whether or not she was pregnant?
3. Are we going to hear evidence from the Bodyguard Welshman who was the only survivor of the accident?
4. Considering what happened to Diana,if you had vital condeming evidence would you have the guts to "spill the beans" to the world?

  • 436.
  • At 09:46 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alleyne Salter wrote:

The inquest is necessary because of the conspiracy theories and, yes, a lot of information is flippant but is relevant because it reveals the state of mind of Princess Diana and others at the time of her death. It is time to put the conspiracy theories to bed, to allow Dodi's father to grieve and to let the Royal Family get on with their lives. Thee has been too much speculation and gossip, let's clear the air so that we can all move on.

  • 437.
  • At 09:54 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Dave, Sydney wrote:

I was sick of hearing about her before she died.

It keeps the Daily Mail in print though eh?

  • 438.
  • At 09:59 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Alleyne Salter wrote:

The inquest is necessary because of the conspiracy theories and, yes, a lot of information is flippant but is relevant because it reveals the state of mind of Princess Diana and others at the time of her death. It is time to put the conspiracy theories to bed, to allow Dodi's father to grieve and to let the Royal Family get on with their lives. There has been too much speculation and gossip, let's clear the air so that we can all move on.

  • 439.
  • At 10:00 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Dave, Sydney wrote:

I was sick of hearing about her before she died.

It keeps the Daily Mail in print though eh?

  • 440.
  • At 10:14 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Shane Ryan wrote:

This inquest would have to be one of the most pointless exercises I can remember. How do you justify spending all this time and money on achieving what all know will be nothing. She died in a car crash and it's over. Fayed should honour his son by remaining dignified and silent. This is one of those topics in the newspapers that I can't be bothered reading and I just turn the page to prevent the onset of boredom and disgust.

  • 441.
  • At 11:14 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Jenny wrote:

Very few events that involves fees for the upper levels of the English legal profession are worth the money, but sometimes the cost is necessary. This is such a case. Behind all this apparently worthless sensation and detail is a historic recording in the legal archives of how the core of the English aristocracy, at the end of the 20th century, fought, and the heir to the throne achieved his aims. In an historical context this is priceless material being composed by some of the best legal brains of our day.

Perhaps the actual finding will be as simplistic and mundane as most people here suggest, but the range of the interrogations suggests more might be said.

To me it is clear that whilst the Princess of Wales, Lady Diana Spencer, "The People's Princess" died in an avoidable car crash of injuries that would have been survivable if she had been wearing a seat belt, it matters far more how she came to be there, in that car, in that condition. It is not where one expects a woman of that standing to die.

How did it come about that a very young daughter of a very high family, after a "royal romance" and media blitz wedding of immense value to the royal "family business", and the government of the day, was used as a stud mare by the heir to the throne whilst he was completely committed to another woman, then cast off, denigrated, made paranoid, stripped of official protection and left adrift in the pitiless persecution of the greedy media? I'm fairly sure the crash itself was an accident, but the way that she ended up too scared to use official protection officers, her butler her best support with her mother alienated and her brother in exile, giving dossiers on findings from her pioneering anti-mine charity work to friends to hide under their beds, finally, on that fateful night, literally in the hands of a playboy high on the excitement of the paparazzi pressure, was the culmination of, well, maybe not a plan, but certainly a relentless intent. If not by her ex-husband then by "friends" of his (including our security services instead of doing more useful work, or was it people making it appear to be the security services?) he did little or nothing to rein in.

If we are prepared to accept (future) head(s) of state who have been involved in, or even bred as a result of such behaviour, and dismiss it as just so much scandal, so much nonsense, then we too are trash. It is not reasonable to expect that such actions, such lack of scruples, such bullying, is restricted to one object, one inconvenience. If Diana Spencer was disposable, what of us "little people"? Behaviour we might have thought had been left behind in the 17th century was alive and working ten years ago. This inquest documents it.

Below the froth we - and the inquest - should be asking if a bunch of immoral Hooray Henries simply ran riot at the highest level, and could do so again, or if the intended next King of England, a man of strong views, had use of official departments with special powers for use in whatever private vendetta he wished, and if his son might have the same access, and perhaps proclivities.

  • 442.
  • At 11:34 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Phil Carlisle wrote:

Anyone who has spent any time in the Royal Courts cannot fail to be outraged by the huge waste of time a vast majority of cases are and how much the legal system of this country is a self-serving mess.

This inquest and the subsequent freakshow that it has become is a by product of our inability to reform the legal system.

Frankly, unless the legal system is reformed by the political class (which given most of them are from a legal background is unlikely) we are going to get this kind of outrage fairly regularly.

And then we see the exact same legal system fail to protect the general public (and sadly a father of three) from the breakdown of society that the present legal system has casused.

It needs people to realise that politics and the legal system are largely to blame for the ills of this nation. Politics is to blame for its lack of will to serve the majority of people and the legal system for perpetuating a gradual decline of society (the compensation culture, the ASBO culture etc).

Bah.

  • 443.
  • At 11:43 PM on 16 Jan 2008,
  • Lynda Harris wrote:

I have just caught the last 5 minutes of 'newsnight' tonight wednesday 16th January 2008, but listening to Max Hastings few comments in that 5 minutes spured me to add that I totally agree that although the inquest into Diana's death is necessary to reach a hopeful satisfactory conclusion, I totally disagree that we, the public, have to know the intimate details of the princess on the news. This is totally private. The inquest is about a father who thinks his son and the princess were 'killed' by a deliberate accident. Surely, we must have the confidence in the judicial system and those that watch over them, to know that this will be thoroughly investigated and judged at the highest level. More and more, I am becomming ashamed to be British. I think it is totally disrespectful and not what Britain is about, to report on the news and in the daily papers, this very personal details on the princess, which is not relevant to the point of the inquest. If I was the Queen or Princes William and Harry, I would be very sad that this is what `Great'(?) Britain had become. Let the victims rest in peace and if a wrong doing has been done, let it be brought to justice in private with the appropriate people.

I think the court case is a complete waste of money.If this was murder by the Crown there is absolutely no chance of the real truth being told.If Diana can be murdered,then any member of the court,be they giving evidence or residing,can also be approached,in silence.People have formed opinions over the last 10 years,and the change of evidence cannot I,m afraid be convincing enough. Ten years is long enough for any explanation to be conjured up.My sympathy lies with the princes,if they have any doubt whatsoever they cannot let it be known until their peers are no longer with us,maybe one day 60years time they will speak up, who knows, unfortunately I will not be around to find out.

  • 445.
  • At 01:37 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Addy wrote:

Why not let her rest in peace, there are so many problems this money could be better spent on. Mr.F should be spending his money on the inquest, this seems to me (in the USA)his way of "sticking in to England"

Just a very bad car crash !

  • 446.
  • At 02:16 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • gloriahelenamallorca kremer wrote:

Princess Diana has become a legend in itself,people loose the truth of pragmatism for the horizon between
what is unreal and fanatism.It has been 10 years where her Life was news and the happiness of the globe was to see a new face Diana a new real face between the people and the Kingdom..without realizing that they are too human beings with graces and defects with principals, and also
the eternal question of morality in
this situation the question of her Divorce,of falling in love with another human being that was not British ,that was of arab origins
a new man a new figure a new masculinity figure that was not Prince Charles,it is true that she had many love affaires her youth her
immaturity ,her lack of protocol and her divorce parents added to the liason so public and painful for the three of them .. of Prince Charles with his former mistress ,and therefater many years after even after her suffering and death he marries that same mistress to the open eye of the public and to the eyes of God,something they should have been allowed many years before when they were young.It was too late for Camilla to marry Prince Charles
so late in Life and live as she did
and princess Diana...many wish she was still alive....she was not prudent,she was spiritual intelligent
dashy..young,tempestous,her two chidren reflect the Love of Diana
one for Prince Charles and the other
littel one as a symbol of guardianship to protect her it is still very sad to know she died..
of course anyone that has the wealth,the gift of being brave
to confront the Royals and to find out the ultimate moments and all circunstances surrounding the
death of his son..should rightfully do so before the Law and God...
It was a night of immaturity a terrible night in France involving
drinking/driving in that mercedez benz without seat belts BOTH OF
THEM..THE CHANGE OF DRIVERS MOMENTS
BEFORE ...THAT HAD BEEN DRINKING TOO
THE SMALL WHITE CAR THAT ITS A
TOTAL MYSTERY ..THAT DISSAPEAR AND LATER WAS FOUND,,AND EVEN IF THAT car HAD NOT CROSS THAT TERRIBLE NIGHT
THE IMMATURIY OF BOTH ..ALFAYED/
AND DIANA /NO SEATBELTS AND THE
DRIVER DRUNK..IT LET ALL TO THEIR DEATH.I I wish AS AN AUDIENCE THAT THAT NIGHT THEY WOULD HAVE NOT MOVED FROM THE HOTEL THAT THEY WOULD HAVE CHECK THE DRIVER...ALSO THE ESCORT
OF THE ROYALS FOR DIANA WAS NOT THERE
BUT EVEN THEN THEY BOTH SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE MATURE ..AND WAIT UNTIL SUNLIGHT AND CHECK ON THEIR DRIVERS.
IF THE ROYALS SEND OR SCHEME AN
ACCIDENT ITS BEYOND THE FACT THAT
BOTH of THEM WERE WITHOUT THE SEATBELT AND THE FACT THAT THE
DRIVER WAS GOING AT A HIGH VELOCITY
SO HIGH ALLMOST 85 I BELIEVE.
DEATH DOES NOT KNOW IF YOU ARE A ROYAL OR NOT IF YOU ARE A MILLIONAIRE OR NOT..I HAD WISH THAT DAY SHE WOULD
HAVE STAYED WITH HER CHILDREN BUT
SHE WAS A YOUNG WOMAN IN HER 30 S
FULLOF LIFE AND WITH ALLTHE RIGHT TO RE LIVE HER LIFE AS MRS ONASSIS
OR ANYONE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA
IT IS STILL A SAD STORY WE HOPE ONE DAY SHE CAN LIVE AGAIN THROUGH HER
OLDESTT SON WHO IS SO MUCH LIKE HER UNTIL THEN WE WILL ALL CONTINUED MOURNING UNTIL THE DAY HER FIRST SON MARRIES AND HAVE A DAUGHTER AND SHE IS NAMED DIANA LIKE HER MOTHER..
AND HOPEFULLY THE STORY OF PRINCE CHARLES WOULD NEVER REPEAT AGAIN.
HOW CAN ONE STOP DESTINY?SHE
WOULD BE 46 I BELIEVE NOW ...WE REMEMBER HER YOUNG..FOR HER GOODNESS
FOR HER FUN ..FOR TRYING TO BE AGOOD MOTHER..SHE WILLLIVE IN EVERYONE HEART..AND ONLY GOD CAN KNOW WHERE
ALFAYED IS AND WHERE DIANS IS IN
ETERNITY THEY DIED TOGETHER AS A SYMBOLOF THIER LOVE PERHAPS ALFAYED TOOK HER TO EGYPT LIKE A QUEEN..
IN THE TRIP OF BEYOND AFTER DEATH.
ADN HER FUNERAL REFLECTS THAT
WHICH IT SHOULD HAVE HAPPEN TO REMAIN WITH HER CHILDREN AND NEXT
TO HER FAMILY THAT SHE LOVED NOT THE ROYALS....IN EITHER WAY GOD WAS
VERY MERCIFULL FOR THEM ALL INCLUDING
CAMILLA PARKER BOWLES..MY BLESSINGS TO ALL OF THEM

  • 447.
  • At 02:54 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Fran Walts wrote:

Yes,a lot of us in the United States believe there are some missing elements that reek of a cover up. I for one would like to see an impartial investigation into the matter since there are many unanswered questions and missing things like the car in question. Too many doubts in my mind,especially since Diana predicted her own death in such a fashion.

  • 448.
  • At 03:26 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Brian brown wrote:

Yes, stop all this about Princess Diana .I am an American and wish things of this nature would just be let go so as the families can move on,dwelling on it solves nothing .Those poor boys they were so young when this happened can't they just be left to remember what wonderful MOM she was to them and the hell with the rest

  • 449.
  • At 04:28 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Jeanie Jenks wrote:

Yes. Mr. Mansfield is running amok & making suggestions about actions of various & sundry witnesses that are inflammatory, damaging & border on defamation of character. Minutes, nay hours are spent on "bunny trails" that appear to have no relevance to the key issues & appear to be dwelt upon to bring discredit to the official or aide or institution being discussed. The past stories as reported in the tabloids are pablum compared to the information being dredged up in this inquiry. How is this inquiry in the public interest since it is being paid for by the public?

  • 450.
  • At 05:06 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Tony McGuire wrote:

Yes indeed it is a waste of money. Amazingly it is being driven by one person who is unable to suppress his guilt.

  • 451.
  • At 05:09 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Nan Luke wrote:

It is an absolute waste of time. I can't believe how many people there are who are still interested in this tawdry affair. She was a beautiful and very manipulative young woman with serious mental health issues.

For God's sake, just let her rest in peace and give her sons some peace.

In addition my previous message I would like to add the fact that among the items that the court tried to take from Paul Burrell were letters from Mother Teresa to Diana. These are the items that Mr Scott Baker really needs to focus on because both ladies along with Jill Dando knew something that is so sensitive that it would be reason to silence them all. Diana's 'What a secret Paul, the tide is turning' note to Paul Burrell is directly connected to that sensitive knowledge, and Paul Burrell knows it.

  • 453.
  • At 07:47 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Dr Rory Ridley-Duff wrote:

Dear Newsnight (and blog readers),

I have never previously participated in any public debate about the Diana inquest. I was, however, interested to read the transcript of yesterday's proceeding (these are posted on-line daily) after Paul Burrell returned from Cheshire. As a person who teaches researchers about the research process, perhaps the insights below will be of interest.

I am glad that the BBC tackled the issue of the Diana inquest in a responsible way, and that Jeremy Paxman challenged Max Hastings on his views. I do, however, think that the reporter who introduced the topic was highly selective and biased in the issues brought to light today. On getting home from work yesterday, I read the transcript of the day's proceedings. Far from the inquest being a circus, today was a pivotal day at the inquest as the following things came to light:

a) That it has been established beyond doubt that everyone associated with Diana (including Paul Burrell and the Queen) felt the relationship between Dodi Fayed and Diana was a long-term serious relationship.

b) That Diana gave her most treasured inheritance from her father to Dodi as a gift (indicating that she loved him as much as her father).

c) That Paul Burrell responded to this by informing an MI6 agent that 'something needed to be done about Dodi Fayed', and solicited help. He did this, allegedly, in ignorance about the other person's connection to MI6.

d) That Diana was given a ring by Dodi Fayed on the day of her death (in addition to a ring given slightly earlier) and that this ring would be interpretted as an engagement ring by the media and/or Establishment.

e) That Diana's phone calls and movement were being constantly monitored.

f) That Diana did call a friend to tell them she had received a ring (and therefore, whoever was monitoring her calls would have been informed on a likely engagement).

g) That Paul Burrell and Diana *did* (despite his initial denials) discuss the media speculation surrounding a potential marriage.

h) That Diana and Dodi were planning to live together in Malibu.

i) That many interests, including Tory MPs, defence industry organisations, The Queen and the Establishment, Paul Burrell himself, Diana's mother were all reaching breaking point regarding Diana's relationships and anti-mine campaigning.

Why did the reporter on Newsnight not focus on these substantive issues that came to light today, instead of the title-tattle (i.e. the 'whore' comment) that was reported in the introduction to the news item?

Dr Rory Ridley-Duff
Sheffield
Yorkshire

The inquest into Diana’s death is justified and the current controversy about papers in the possession of Paul Burrell is coming very close to the place at which the real answer lies.
Most people do not consider the fact that Diana’s very close and trusted friend Mother Teresa died within five days of Diana’s death. This is a fact that is not widely publicized. Paul Burrell has the letters that were sent by Mother Teresa to Diana shortly before they died, they are the documents that Mr Scott Baker needs to have the court look at.
There is something the world doesn’t know that Diana and Teresa did both know. If the happening of the inquest helps that truth come out it will be worth every penny spent toward that end. Jill Dando knew the truth.

  • 455.
  • At 08:05 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Rory Ridley-Duff wrote:

I have posted twice to this blog speaking in favour of the inquest and the information that came out yesterday (the second post was a modified repeat of the first after it failed to appear). I have to wonder if the comments are being censored and that this blog is an example of blatant bias by selecting only comments supported by the blog author. If my previous comments are not posted, they will appear in my own blog at MySpace to ensure that the BBC cannot censor balanced, responsible public debate.

Rory Ridley-Duff
Sheffield
Yorkshire

  • 456.
  • At 08:48 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Copping wrote:

That there are 453 comments on this topic says it all! Please get on with life dear friends and stop living in other peoples lives.

  • 457.
  • At 08:57 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • erul wrote:

I cannot believe most of the comments on here. How do these people on here who are saying" its just an accident" know this for sure, because i bet they have not studied the evidence in full, they are just relying on the investigations carried out by the british and French police which are full of discrepencies. People put to much trust in there goverments. The best thing is to look at the evidence in full yourself and ignore the propaganda fed through your tv. Why dont Newsnight ask the real question "do you think diana was murdered". Of course they wont do that as they know they wont get the answer they would wanted. Instead they have been following the line of "waste of money to try and turn the public against AL Fayed.

  • 458.
  • At 08:58 AM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • david chakanyuka wrote:

i think people running the case are not serious and its a shame that britain has failed to solve this case on its own nevertheless nothing will ever come out if the secret service of britain is involved in the murder and if someone who is more powerful is involved. thats a fact

  • 459.
  • At 12:26 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Dilip K Khashnobish wrote:

I think the whole exercise is absolutely futile.

  • 460.
  • At 12:47 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Richard Combes wrote:

Of course its a total waste and is being prolonged by one man with more money than sense. Perhaps we outraged taxpayers should be encouraging the customers of his various businesses to cut off his lifeblood ie their custom. I shall certainly never give him business.

  • 461.
  • At 02:51 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Geoff J wrote:

I'm sure that I'm saying nothing new here, but taxpayers - remember that your hard earned money is going to an inquest that is essentially acting as a forum for the tin foil hat wearing conspiracy wingnuts to have their say - I read an earlier post here that suggested doing this might shut them up, but honestly - when has anyone ever seen a conspiracy nut stop talking because they were given an explanation? It's just another part of the psychosis (sorry, I mean conspiracy...)
The poor woman is dead folks - none of this stupidity will bring her back, so remember her for her good deeds, and move on with your lives...

  • 462.
  • At 05:20 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Peter Gee wrote:

Why can't people focus on the simple facts of the death of Diana. No one including Fayed has disputed the fact that the driver - Fayed's employee - was going at double the speed. Additionally he did not ensure the safety of his passengers by requiring them to wear their seat belts. If he had been driving legally, even if there had been an accident, it is highly likely that the occupants would have survived. The driver was responsible and that should be the end of it.

Fayed simply can't admit that his employee - who he personally selected for this journey - was the sole cause of the accident. This is why he is carrying on with this obscene fiasco. People who object to him should boycott Harrods.

  • 463.
  • At 05:46 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • John wrote:

This inquest is a disgraceful waste of money. Yes, an inquest is required by law, but would much of this "evidence" be entertained if the victim had been Jane Doe from the local council estate? I think not. Whether or not Diana was having an affair, pregnant, on the pill, etc. has no relevance whatsoever as to the cause of her death: a tragic road accident which would probably have been avoided had the driver not been drinking and she and the two other deceased had been wearing their seatbelts as required under French law. Whatever the outcome of the inquest - a verdict of accident seems most likely - those who allege a conspiracy will simply say that the jury and all others involved with the inquest are a part of the conspiracy. That's the beauty of a conspiracy theory, you can always claim any result with which you disagree is a part of that conspiracy. Please let the victims and their families rest in peace.

  • 464.
  • At 05:56 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • Barbara Moore wrote:

It is a total and absolute waste of time and money. Whatever the outcome, our tawdry tabloid press will continue to carry on their stupid conspiracy stories. Why hasn't someone stated the obvious - if Diana and Dodi had put their seat belts on they would be alive today! The bodyguard who was sat in the front only survived because he was wearing his seatbelt! Let's pray we have a sane judge who will state categorically it was quite simply a tragic accident caused by an incompetent driver. Dodi! It was YOUR employee who caused their deaths - a properly trained driver would not have driven so fast.

  • 465.
  • At 10:05 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • John N Smith wrote:

What would be a waste of time of money is if the coroner persists in not allowing members of the royal family, and senior officers of MI6 known to have been in Paris, to be called as witnesses.

James Hewitt claimed he was threatened by a member of the royal family, in terms stating that continuing his relationship with Diana might be injurious to his health.

A witness has told the court that the queen ordered an investigation into bugging.

Paul Burrell gave evidence that a member of the royal family warned Diana that 'they' are listening to everything.

This inquest has started. It had to start. It must consider all available relevant evidence. It will be a travesty and a waste of time if members of the royal family and officers of MI6 (whose names are already in the public domain) are not forced to appear in the witness box. That would be to put them above the law.

Is there any corroboration for what these witnesses have stated? Well there might be; there might not be. In any ordinary court case, the individuals mentioned would be called as witnesses. Call them in this case too.

JN

  • 466.
  • At 11:54 PM on 17 Jan 2008,
  • keith wrote:

I'm surprised the conspiracy theorists haven't tried to blame the CIA. Its all so boring and ludicrous and we need the money to throw away on the London Olympics

  • 467.
  • At 12:53 AM on 18 Jan 2008,
  • John N Smith wrote:

Further to my contribution above, I would add that it is for the jury to decide. That means not the media; not people who read or watch the media; not people who hold this or that view about how the State might save money; not Lord Stevens; and not the coroner.

The coroner's role is to ensure the jury get the relevant evidence, so they can make their minds up about it.

Recently we had the spectacle of Paul Burrell writing down the name of the member of the royal family who warned Diana she was bugged, and handing it to the coroner on a slip of paper. The jury weren't told the name. Nor were the interested parties, so they could test the evidence in front of the jury, just as they have done with all of the other witnesses.

What is so special about that family, that such a ridiculous charade should be allowed to pass?

If it was a member of any other family, the coroner or judge would have told the witness to stop taking the mickey. He would have said, "No, matey, when you're asked a question, you reply so the jury can hear you. Otherwise you'll go down to the cells for contempt."

If it goes on like this, I don't see how the jury can reasonably return an "accidental death" verdict. Bear in mind that this is not a trial; so there is NO assumption that "accidental death", or any other verdict, is the right one.

The jury have to be SURE that the cause of death was accidental death, unlawful killing, or whatever. If they aren't sure, there is only one course open to them: an open verdict.

(Of course, if the jurors don't agree, there can be a "hung" jury in the same way as there can in trials).

If there is an open verdict, surely Gordon Brown must announce within an hour or two that there will be a full public inquiry?

What other course could there be, if so much money is spent, and yet the jury still doesn't get enough evidence to be able to decide? Something will have gone seriously wrong. The only way to fix it is to ensure that enough evidence does come out, without prejudice to what view it might support.

Fundamentally that means withdrawing the sort of protection that the royal family and MI6 are relying upon.

Why do they need such protection anyway? Does it look suspicious? You bet it does!

As Lord Denning once said, "Be you ever so high, the law is above you".

JN

  • 468.
  • At 06:48 AM on 18 Jan 2008,
  • Christine SA wrote:

It is so sad to see her name tarnished by all the inferrals that have NOTHING to do with the crash.

Rest assured if Royalty, state agents, MI6,or any other organisation had anything to do with, millions more can be spent over years and years, and THE TRUTH WILL NOT COME OUT, they have their protection/immunity and no way would any one of them confess to being involved

Al Fayed has to come to grips with this and the fact that Dodi or Diana dont need their name clearing, he cant bring them back however much money he spends.
let him donate his millions to Diana's trusts
It could be guilt that his appointed driver was to possibly to blame

Spare the Prince's more anguish please, let them remeber their Mom, not what the tabloids portray of her
let her rest, its the least she deserves

  • 469.
  • At 09:03 AM on 18 Jan 2008,
  • Scott wrote:

The inquest should focus only on the immediate circumstances of the accident, ie. was the car going too fast, were they wearing seatbelts, etc etc.

What relevance are all the details being dragged up about 'powers within the UK', was she engaged?, and all the other headlines that are appearing have to do with what could be something as a simple car crash where 3 people lost their lives?

Surely you cannot hold an impartial inquest into someones death with all this hearsay and oppinions of what happend a decade ago?

  • 470.
  • At 09:21 AM on 18 Jan 2008,
  • michelle wrote:

Oh how sad all this is. The poor, poor Princes ! Has anyone really given a thought as to how they are feeling ?

Such a waste of time and money, an embittered father tryng to stay in the limelight - how on earth does he think he will get a UK passport now I wonder ? Let him pay the costs, when it emerges that it was an accident after all and not the work of some "dark forces", why should taxpayers funds his ridiculous fantasy ? Yes, he has lost his eldest son, that can't be denied, but Al Fayed Senior hired the driver.........

  • 471.
  • At 12:32 PM on 18 Jan 2008,
  • Mac-Edwin Ifeanyi Obi wrote:

I don`t think the inquest is a waste of public funds.It`s just a cost the British tax payer must bear so that there is JUSTICE and FAIRNESS in the system.Therefore let there be as many inquests as can convince the chief complainant(Dodi`s father) that justice has been done.

  • 472.
  • At 12:57 PM on 18 Jan 2008,
  • Mac-Edwin Ifeanyi Obi wrote:

I don`t think the inquest is a waste of public funds.It`s just a cost the British tax payer must bear so that there is JUSTICE and FAIRNESS in the system.Therefore let there be as many inquests as can convince the chief complainant(Dodi`s father) that justice has been done.

  • 473.
  • At 02:20 PM on 18 Jan 2008,
  • jan wrote:

Why are so many of yesterday's blogs missing? I sent one during the early afternoon, (not offensive and making some valid points) and it hasn't appeared. Have noticed that postings yesterday seem to have been very erractic and I'm sure they can't really have been as there is so much obvious interest in this debate. As mine was omitted, is it just one of many that won't now appear?

  • 474.
  • At 05:10 AM on 19 Jan 2008,
  • S.Vijayakumar wrote:

The inquest is a collosal waste of time and money.
Diana was loved and respected by one and all across the world.
Let us cherish all the good work she has done and forget her personal life.

  • 475.
  • At 04:50 PM on 19 Jan 2008,
  • Ian Wright wrote:

This inquest, seems more like a witchhunt for the likes of Mr Al-Fahed. I do not see what letters the Princess received from other Royals, has to do with the actual crash. I must be somewhat naive, but I always thought an inquest was about how someone died. We have heard all about the accident, and nothing new has come out which conflicts with the French authorities findings. All we are hearing is the private life of someone people adored, being dragged out in the press/media. Personally I have heard enough about this woman, and think the likes of Al-fahed should pack up and go back to his corner shop.

  • 476.
  • At 09:24 AM on 25 Jan 2008,
  • FILIMONE wrote:

HI
Personaly I was really shocked and frighted when I read about Diana death but I think that the waste happed already nothing We can do now if we should do something to make her live again it should be better but now whatever we are doing is in vain....

  • 477.
  • At 04:16 AM on 01 Feb 2008,
  • Lawrence Taylor wrote:

I totally agree with everyone about the total waste of money.Fayed took umbridge when the D of E withdrew his patronage from Harrods.
However there is one question that I have never seen asked and Trevor Rhees(Jones) could maybe have answered it.
Why were Diana and Dodi not wearing seat belts?I may be wrong but I believe that the
law in France at the time required seat belts for rear seat passengers.Considering that Mr Rhees survived the accident sitting in the front passenger seat,Diana and Dodi would have had a much a much better chance had they too been wearing seat belts.I think that blows the conspiracy theory out of the water!

  • 478.
  • At 03:58 PM on 05 Feb 2008,
  • barbara wrote:

I have to consider the people who were with her that night...her boyfriend, Mohamed Al Fayed's son, Henri Paul, Al Fayed' employee, Rees-Jones, Fayed's security guy...of course Al-Fayed wants to prove the Royal family did it...think of the enormous law suit they can bring against him!If this happened to some rich guy in the states, the law suits would already have been played out, and money would have changed hands! Al Fayed is going to finish up costing the British tax-payers more than we pay our President...the Royals are cheaper1

  • 479.
  • At 10:13 AM on 06 Feb 2008,
  • Darius wrote:

Of course the inquest is needed, its obvious to anyone who puts aside time to research the details, that things dont add up.

You will all be very surprised when then jury gives their verdict...

Let's notice what's MISSING. You know, in show trials and sham trials, there is a lot of staging and very little content.

The ambulance drivers who showed up on the scene have not told their story; the telephone operator at Buckingham Palace has not told her story (when they found out); the captain of the ambulance company has not witnessed to his orders, nor has he related what he was told by the Palace or how soon after they were called and for how long he was On Hold.

So, we know very little about how this death was "handled."

Now, maybe there's a reason for that; however, it leaves the nagging suspicion that this is only a stage show trial and that the prosecutor has no intention of digging all the way down to the truth.

EEWC

************************

THE FACT that BBC is stonewalling and won't let this get posted MEANS BBC KNOWS it's a staged sham show trial.

That's all I wanted to know :: whether YOU knew that the drama we pretend is true is just that staged for effect.

BBC KNOWS! Ha! Ha!

See why people despise mainstream media? BBC knows this is a sham trial; and by placing my first comment into an infinite loop, what you are telling me is, you know what I am saying is true.

How filthy of you. No, there is no server error. No, there is no server error.

  • 481.
  • At 08:02 PM on 04 Mar 2008,
  • Emily EW Cragg wrote:

COMMENT:

Let's notice what's MISSING from this inquest. You know, in show trials and sham trials, there is a lot of staging and very little content.

The ambulance drivers who showed up on the scene have not told their story; the telephone operator at Buckingham Palace has not told her story (exactly when they found out); the captain of the ambulance company has not witnessed to his orders, nor the delay time between asking for orders and obtaining them.

Now, maybe there's a reason for all these omissions; however, it leaves the nagging suspicion that this is only a stage show trial and that the prosecutor has no intention of digging all the way down to the truth.

EEWC

  • 482.
  • At 04:25 PM on 18 Mar 2008,
  • Perry Gee wrote:

All the conspiracy theorists fail to address the single most crucial point. If the driver had stuck the the speed limit, Diana would have survived, it's as simple as that. He had no reason, excuse or authority to go at double the limit. He was also negligent because he had been drinking and did not ensure the safety of his passengers. NO ONE could have foreseen his behaviour - except of course his employers, who knew of his reckless attitude behind the wheel - which is precisely the reason for all the smokescreens they are trying to throw up.

  • 483.
  • At 01:01 AM on 26 Mar 2008,
  • Donna Sparks wrote:

In America we have a saying...the best defense is a good offense. The driver of the car, Mr. Henri, was employed by Mr. Fayed. The only way Mr. Fayed can take the blame off himself, is to divert the issues to a non-existant conspiracy theory. Otherwise, he would be remembered as the man who employed the killer of Pss. Diana. I understand Mr. Fayed's sorrow regarding his lost son, and he surely would have a hard time accepting responsibility for his death. But the bottom line is...his employee was driving the car at a high rate of speed unnecessarily, whether drunk or not, careless. Pss Diana was in Fayed's care and he blew it.

  • 484.
  • At 12:29 AM on 08 Apr 2008,
  • John Wilson wrote:

Newsnight does not seem to be interested in this issue any longer, but seems to be obsessed with the London Mayoral contest, which frankly is not of any great interest to the almost 90% of British people who do not live in London.

Not only that only 3 of the 10 official candidates are appearing on the program, which would seem to be undemocratic to say the least.

In tonight's post-inquest interview however, the normally fair-minded JP seemed almost vengeful in talking to Mohammed Al Fayed's lady representative, more or less accusing MAF of being insane and deluded, and seemed to make an unncessarily big issue out of the few million pounds spent on this genuine public interest inquest/trial, when government has wasted hundreds of millions of tax payer's money on such needless and wasteful projects as the Millennium Dome to say nothing of the multi-billion pound war budgets, and the London Olympics which are of dubious value to the UK as a whole, and are also likely to enhance the risk of terrorist activity in London as we are now seeing with all the problems that Beijing is having with political dissenters.

I find it very strange that Newsnight puts the Princess Diana issue right onto the backburner, on the very day the verdict is announced, and appears to be encouraging no reaction from forum members at this point in time.

No ordinary member of the public has the ability to decide upon the fairness and legitimacy of this inquest (for lack of first hand or reliable second hand knowledge), but it appears to be just one of any number of similar "official inquries" which take a long time to carry out, and almost always end up discrediting anybody who makes a claim that runs counter to official government opinion and policy.

I mean, perhps we should have an inquiry into the Iraq war, to be chaired of course by Tony Blair?

The simple truth is that any inquest is only as good as the evidence presented, and there is still serious doubt in the minds of many, myself included, whether all the evidence has been presented that should have been and that the evidence that was presented was correct.

Tonight we have seen on all news channels an endless almost hypnotic sequence of reports showing photographs and a script telling us "how it happened", and it all looks too good to be true, and is rather reminiscent of the reporting of 9/11 in its authoritative reporting and constant repetition.

Witnesses who said they saw a flashing light in the tunnel were judged as being unreliable, and this seems to be an arbitrary and unexplained decision, and the owner of the white vehicle in the tunnel alleged to have clipped the Mercedes was never found, which seems to be an unacceptable and unaccountable failure in the French police investigations.

The outcome is that Mohammed AL F is being portrayed as a near lunatic who cannot accept the death of his son, but to carry on such a campaign incessantly year upon year seems to defy any concept of normal fatherly grief, if he does not have at least some strong suspicions or evidence to back up his views.

Equally conspiracy theorists are being condemned in all this media assassination of Mr Al Fayed (i.e. JPs panning and dismissal of the 60 or more books), as if no conspiracy or cover up had ever happened before in world history, including the dodgy dossier on Iraq's WMDs, Watergate and presumably President Kennedy's assassination also.

How can any of us know including JP that the pathology reports and blood samples on Princess Diana and Henri Paul were correct, that samples and reports were not deliberately mixed up or deliberately substituted, how can we know that certain individuals were not pressured into making certain statements or suppressed by threats from making others?

I feel the inquest was an insult to the intelligence of the British public, and the witness who was really needed in the box was Henri Paul to tell us how much he really drank that night.

Then there is the other bodyguard in the car, who says he "can't remember anything."

None of this gets a mention on the Newsnight report.

Then we have to look at the consquences if it were proven or strongly suspected by the British public that Princess Diana was murdered by the security forces, regardless of any wishes or otherwise of Prince Philip.

The consequnece would be a deep distrust of the British government and security forces at every level and public demands for a complete overhaul and transparency in them which clearly does not exist at present.

When government MPs fight like the devil even to suppress details of their own legitimate expense claims, how can we possibly trust government to be honest on such huge matters of state and public trust, as the details surrounding Princess Diana's death?

That 30something percent of those polled by Newsnight thought there was something suspicious about Princess Diana's death, shows a deep distrust of "official reporting" by around a third of the population, and that cannot be the sign of a good relationship between any government and its people.

That Mohammed Al Fayed may have been suffering from some delusions in this matter, does not mean he was deluded in all his views upon it.

His claim that Princess Diana said she was pregnant apparently could not be later tested due to her embalmeing, and Dodi Al Fayed was not embalmed. More suspicion.

All we got was one of Diana's alleged friends, who belived that she would be the first to know if such were true. What kind of evidnece was that?

This whole affair which has also besmirched the fairly harmless if somewhat money hungry Paul Burrell (who let us remember was virtually tortured for months on end by a previous trial threatening him with imprisonment until the Queen at the last minute spoke up to save him) seems to have been an effort to discredit and shut up Mohammed Al Fayed, and it is the vehemence of repoters like JP himself in discrediting him which leaves an unpleasant feeling that almost smacks of racism, and still FEELS like a whitewash to those who no longer feel they can take all official news reporting and government statements on trust as gospel, which apparently now is at least 33% of the adult population.

  • 485.
  • At 07:44 PM on 14 Apr 2008,
  • Peri Gee wrote:

Mr Wilson seems to casually ignore the basic question, now fully understood by sensible people and not those who believe in the most lurid fantasies, and that is that Diana was killed as a result of the actions of a drunk, speeding driver. Unfortunately, he like Fayed, fails to address this central issue. It was noticeable that even Fayed's own counsel did not pursue the bizarre theory that the Duke of Edinburgh, Tony Blair, MI6 and countless others were "responsible" for the deaths. The jury quite rightly heard all the evidence and reached the only possible conclusion. For once, Fayed should shut up and accept that his baseless theories are simply an evil attempt to deflect attention away from his role in the accident.

This post is closed to new comments.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites