Diana's tragic death spawned web of conspiracy theories

Agencies
August 31, 2017

London, Aug 31: The fascination with Princess Diana's life extends to her death. Not since the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy has a tragic demise been so minutely analyzed, or spawned so many lurid theories.

A French investigation, a years-long British police inquiry and a coroner's inquest all concluded there was no foul play in the princess' fatal car crash — but that has not silenced speculation that Diana was the victim of an Establishment murder plot.

THE CAR CRASH

The 36-year-old princess left the Ritz Hotel in Paris just after midnight on Aug. 31, 1997, with her boyfriend Dodi Fayed and her bodyguard, Trevor Rees-Jones. Her Mercedes, pursued by paparazzi, crashed into a concrete pillar in the Alma Tunnel at more than 60 mph (100 kph). The princess, Fayed and driver Henri Paul were all killed. Rees-Jones was injured but survived.

THE DIANA CONSPIRACIES

Global shock soon gave way to speculation — about the role of the pursuing paparazzi and, for some, about whether darker forces were at work. Diana was the world's most famous woman at the time, and her public discussion of her unhappy marriage had been a major embarrassment to Britain's royal family since she and Prince Charles had separated in 1992.

Diana had written in a 1995 letter of fears that Charles was "planning an `accident' in my car" — although she had also speculated about dying in a helicopter or airplane crash.

The most vocal conspiracy theorist was Dodi's father, Mohammad Al Fayed, a wealthy businessman who owned the Ritz in Paris and London's Harrods department store. He insisted that Prince Philip, husband of Queen Elizabeth II, had masterminded a conspiracy by British spies to kill Diana and Dodi because he disapproved of their relationship.

Al Fayed claimed Diana was pregnant and planning to marry Dodi, and that the royal family could not countenance the princess marrying a Muslim.

In 2008, Al Fayed told an inquest that the list of alleged conspirators included Philip, Charles, former Prime Minister Tony Blair, Diana's sister Sarah McCorquodale, two former London police chiefs and the CIA.

WHAT THE INVESTIGATIONS FOUND

Several investigations ruled out a criminal conspiracy in Diana's death.

A French court ruled in 1999 that the crash was an accident caused by Paul, who was drunk and driving at twice the legal speed limit.

A three-year British inquiry led by Metropolitan Police chief John Stevens also found that Paul was drunk and driving at a high speed to elude pursuing photographers. Stevens' report said Diana was not pregnant, and had not been planning to marry Dodi.

Stevens concluded in 2006 that Diana's death "was a tragic accident."

In 2007, an inquest opened before a judge and jury at London's Royal Courts of Justice. It heard from 240 witnesses before concluding in April 2008 that Diana had been unlawfully killed through the reckless actions of driver Paul and the paparazzi.

In 2013, British police investigated allegations by an anonymous former soldier that Britain's special forces unit, the SAS, was involved in Diana's death. Police concluded there was "no credible evidence" and declined to reopen the investigation.

AND YET QUESTIONS REMAIN

Enough mysteries remain to ensure that the Diana conspiracy theories will never be completely silenced. There is no surveillance camera footage of the crash, although there were cameras in the tunnel.

Some witnesses reported seeing a bright flash in the tunnel just before the accident, though others did not.

And police have never traced a white Fiat car that was seen in the tunnel and may have collided with Diana's vehicle before the crash.

Pauline Maclaran, co-author of "Royal Fever: The British Monarchy in Consumer Culture," said conspiracy theories about celebrity deaths are not only common but durable.

"Human nature refuses to believe that something as random as a car accident could kill someone as special as Diana," she said. "When you have icons, it's very hard to believe that they can just come to an end in such a futile way."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 22,2020

Washington, Feb 22: US President Donald Trump will raise the issue of religious freedom with Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his visit to India next week, the White House said on Friday, noting that the US has great respect for India's democratic traditions and institutions.

"President Trump will talk about our shared tradition of democracy and religious freedom both in his public remarks and then certainly in private. He will raise these issues, particularly the religious freedom issue, which is extremely important to this administration," a senior official told reporters in a conference call.

The official was responding to a question on whether the president was planning to speak to Modi on the Citizenship (Amendment) Act or the National Register of Citizens.

"We do have this shared commitment to upholding our universal values, the rule of law. We have great respect for India's democratic traditions and institutions, and we will continue to encourage India to uphold those traditions," the official said, requesting anonymity.

"And we are concerned with some of the issues that you have raised," the senior administration official said, in response to the question on CAA and NRC.

"I think the President will talk about these issues in his meetings with Prime Minister Modi and note that the world is looking to India to continue to uphold its democratic traditions, respect for religious minorities," the official said.

"Of course, it's in the Indian constitution -- religious freedom, respect for religious minorities, and equal treatment of all religions. So this is something that is important to the president and I'm sure it will come up," said the official.

Pointing out that India has a strong democratic foundation, the official said India is a country rich in religious, linguistic, and cultural diversity.

"In fact, it's the birthplace of four major world religions," the official noted.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com web desk
June 18,2020

Kathmandu, June 18: Nepal's National Assembly on Thursday unanimously passed the Constitution Amendment Bill to update the country's political and administrative map incorporating three Indian territories. 

The new map also includes land controlled by India. It requires President Bidhya Devi Bhandari's approval.

India, which controls the region - a slice of land including Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani areas in the northwest - has rejected the map, saying it is not based on historical facts or evidence.

India has termed as untenable the "artificial enlargement" of territorial claims by Nepal after its lower house of parliament on Saturday unanimously approved the new political map of the country featuring areas which India maintains belong to it.

The National Assembly, or the upper house of the Nepalese parliament, unanimously passed the constitution amendment bill providing for inclusion of the country's new political map in its national emblem.

The bill was passed with all the 57 members present voting in its favour.

The dispute

The latest border dispute between the countries began last month after India inaugurated Himalayan link road built in a disputed region that lies at a strategic three-way junction with Tibet and China.

The 80km (50-mile) road, inaugurated by Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, cuts through the Lipulekh Himalayan pass, considered one of the shortest and most feasible trade routes between India and China.

The road cuts the travel time and distance from India to Tibet's Mansarovar lake, considered holy by the Hindus.

But Nepal says about 19km of the road passes through its area and fiercely contested the inauguration of the road, viewing the alleged incursion as a stark example of bullying by its much larger neighbour.

Nepal, which was never under colonial rule, has long claimed the areas of Limpiyadhura, Kalapani and Lipulekh under the 1816 Sugauli treaty with the British East India Company, although these areas have remained under the control of Indian troops since India fought a war with China in 1962.

Comments

Angry indian
 - 
Sunday, 21 Jun 2020

acche din after deshbakth become ruling party...now even weakist country started conquring indian..what a shame on so0 called 56 inch chest..we need tiger leader not Pm who always speak in air and lie alot..

 

this is how an hindu nation is build ? Bjps cant rule india for more than 10 year...

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 25,2020

Washington, Jan 25: US President Donald Trump's legal team was preparing his defence on Saturday after the Democratic prosecutors ended their marathon 24-hour argument to oust him from office during the Senate trial.

In the arguments spread over three days ending on Friday, the Democrat prosecutors from the House of Representatives that had impeached Trump last month, mostly rehashed the testimonies from the hearings before their committees during the investigation and statements in their chamber.

Like the Democrats' arguments, the Trump defence's counter-arguments, also with 24 hours allotted for it, will be mind-numbing monologues for the most part and the real drama will be on a tussle between the two parties on calling witnesses.

The Democrats failed in their repeated attempts on the first day of the trial on January 28 to include calling testimonies from witnesses in the rules of procedure, but they will get another chance to press their case when the defence rests.

There is a tense wait speckled with speculations to see if the Democrats can get four Republicans to defect and vote to call witnesses after failing to sway a mass defection to get the two-thirds majority to convict Trump.

Trump is charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress in the trial presided over by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts with the Senators acting as jurors.

As the time allotted for the prosecution wound down on Friday, the leading prosecutor, Adam Schiff, demanded that the Republican-controlled Senate convict and remove Trump from office, because he was an "imminent threat" to the US and the nation could not wait for the election to throw him out.

Schiff, who heads the House Intelligence Committee that investigated Trump, gave them a personal warning: "No matter how close you are to this president, do you think for a moment that if he felt it was in his interest, he wouldn't ask you to be investigated?

Jerry Nadler, the head of the Judicial Committee that framed the charges in the impeachment, called Trump a "dictator".

Instead of a full sitting of eight hours, the defence will present its case for only two to three hours on Saturday in what Trump's lawyer Jay Sekulow called a "trailer (for) coming attractions" in the defence counterarguments.

They will get to use their remaining time next week.

The shorter session starting with fuller presentations next week is partly a concession to media savvy Trump who tweeted that daytime Saturday when his defence was slated is a "death valley" on TV as few viewers would watch a political event at that time.

With Trump certain to be acquitted because the Democrats do not have the two-thirds vote, the impeachment process and the Senate trial are only meant to be an extended media show in their campaign for the November election.

The Democrats want to spiff up the TV spectacle by calling former National Security Adviser John Bolton and Trump's acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney as witnesses.

Trump could exercise his executive privilege to stop them from testifying, in which case they could go to court to compel their appearance at the Senate trial extending its duration by months if not weeks.

The House charged him with obstruction of Congress because he refused to allow some of this staff to testify and release documents requested by the House investigators.

The Republicans, who want a quick end to the trial, can also counter the Democrats' request for witnesses by calling former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, to testify in order to embarrass them and their party.

The Bidens are at the root of the abuse of power charges against Trump.

Trump had asked newly-elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelentsky in a July phone call to investigate the Bidens' dealings in his country as a "favour".

Democrats say that this was inviting foreign intervention in US elections because Joe Biden is the leading Democratic party candidate for the nomination to oppose him.

Moreover, they say that he froze about $400 million in Congressionally-approved military aid for pressure Zelentsky to order the probe and this endangered US national security as Ukraine is at war with Russia.

chiff and the other prosecutors said delaying the aid was an attempt at a quid pro quo.

Zelentsky has said that he did not feel pressured by Trump.

Hunter Biden, who was removed from the Navy allegedly due to drug use and had no energy business experience landed a directorship in a Ukrainian gas company with monthly payments reportedly between $50,000 and $83,000 while his father was overseeing Washington's dealings with Kiev.

The former Vice President has publicly admitted that he got the Ukrainian leaders to fire the prosecutor investigating his son's company.

The Republicans have said that the son's appointment was unethical and the father had the prosecutor removed to protect his son's company.

In their arguments, the Democratic prosecutors said there was nothing wrong in Hunter Biden getting the job and his father had the prosecutor dismissed because he was corrupt.

The defence team is expected to assert that Trump withheld the aid because he wanted to be sure that the new government was not corrupt and the aid was released without a probe.

Anticipating the argument, Schiff said that Trump had allowed the aid to go forward only because it became known and his intent still made him guilty.

In another development impinging on the Trump case, a secret recording said to be of the president ordering the firing of Marie Yovanovitch as US ambassador to Ukraine in 2018 has surfaced.

She was one of the witnesses at the House investigations of the charges against Trump.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.