Diana's Death: Police Passed New Information

http://news.sky.com/story/1129902/dianas-death-police-passed-new-information

Diana's Death: Police Passed New Information

Scotland Yard is assessing new information on the death of Princess Diana to determine whether it is credible.

New information that alleges Princess Diana was murdered has been passed to Scotland Yard through the Royal Military Police, according to the Metropolitan Police.

The information will be assessed by officers from the Specialist Crime and Operations Command.

The deaths of the Princess of Wales and Dodi al Fayed in Paris in 1997 were investigated and examined during a 90-day inquest led by Lord Justice Scott Baker at the Royal Court of Justice in 2007.

On April 7, 2008, the jury concluded their verdict as "unlawful killing, grossly negligent driving of the following vehicles and of the Mercedes".

The Metropolitan Police added the assessment was not a re-investigation and does not come under Operation Paget - the inquiry led by Lord Stevens into conspiracy theories surrounding Princess Diana and Mr al Fayed's deaths.

After the inquest, the Metropolitan Police said it had spent £8m on services arising from it and the Operation Paget investigation from 2004 to 2006.

Former Met Police commissioner Lord Stevens published his report in December 2006, rejecting claims that Princess Diana and Mr al Fayed had been murdered.

Sky's Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt said: "It's not clear exactly what this information is, but we understand that it points to an allegation that Diana and those in the car with her were murdered.

"Scotland Yard has confirmed that it has received this information in the past few days and has begun what it calls a scoping exercise, to assess the information to assess its credibility.

"These are very early days, the information has just come in, and Scotland Yard is adamant in saying that this is not a reopening of its investigation from 2004 when it spent three years looking into the circumstances of the Princess' death.

"But it is taking the information seriously and it is considering and it is possible that a new investigation may open."

Diana, Mr al Fayed and their driver Henri Paul died after the Mercedes crashed in a Paris tunnel on August 31, 1997.

------------

Probably just some conspiraloon. Or Al-Fayed.

Unless something earth-shattering comes along, I am afraid I will continue to believe she died in an avoidable accident because she wasn't wearing a seat belt.

The numties have got it sussed....

Donna Durrant Could the announcement have anything to do with the McCann case though do we think? Wasn't there a theory that they got so much help in covering up what really happened as they had inside knowledge of a big kind...just so very strange that this comes out right now in the middle of the SY investigation
5 minutes ago · Like

Amelia Coffen Possible. I've seen it mentioned before about Gerry possibly having info on the 'accident' that could have bought him protection & some comment he made about seeing light at the end of the 'tunnel' & Charlieboy publicly sending his support. So knows, Gerry was involved with hearts, perhaps he knew the French doctors who dealt with her heart & they told him something?
2 minutes ago · Like

Donna Durrant That's more or less exactly what I've been thinking Amelia. This is good news though if this is coming out and it is related, not only should it bring justice for Diana but hopefully it'll lead to breakthrough for Madeleine too. All the skeletons out of the closet

=========

Terrifying to think that these people can vote - no wonder the country's in such a mess.

Scotland Yard said it is 'scoping' the information and 'assessing its relevance and credibility'.

It is understood the allegation was made by the former parents-in-law of a former soldier based on information that the ex-soldier talked about in the past, according to a military source.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2396208/Was-Princess-Diana-MURDERED-British-soldier-Metropolitan-Police-assessing-credibility-new-claim.html

Oh for goodness' sake! Third-hand gossip, in other words.

Oh good Lord! It's hard to think of a LESS efficient way of bumping someone off than an a car crash such as that was.

I've always thought she was bumped off, whether intentionally or not I don't know.

perhaps I've watched too much Spooks?

I think it's maybe because people feel she should have had a more glamorous end than dying in an avoidable car crash because she wasn't wearing a seat belt?

It's so mundane, it feels as if it can't possibly be true? If that makes sense.....

bb1 wrote:I think it's maybe because people feel she should have had a more glamorous end than dying in an avoidable car crash because she wasn't wearing a seat belt?

It's so mundane, it feels as if it can't possibly be true? If that makes sense.....

I agree, but hiding in plain sight springs to mind. who knows?

I'm very boring about these things, Rhodes, if it's a choice between c-ck up and conspiracy, I'll pick c-cock up every time.  

I probably watch things like Aircrash Investigation too much, where time after time, tragedies have been caused by Mr A doing something stupid, then Mr making another error, then someone else not paying attention - and the result is disaster.

My own feeling is that Diane's death is somewhat similar, that a whole series of events came together and led to the fatal crash?

There cannot possibly have been anything like certainty that any of them would die. Quite the opposite in fact.

Bad news for the conspiraloons:

Critics have today dismissed claims that the SAS murdered Princess Diana as a 'mystifying stunt' based on 'nonsense' evidence from an 'erratic' sniper in jail for illegally keeping guns at home.

Royal bodyguards and MPs have brushed off accusations that the Princess of Wales' death 16 years ago in Paris was carried out by British special forces who then 'covered it up'.

Scotland Yard has confirmed that officers from its specialist crime and operations command are assessing information handed to it ‘recently’ by the Royal Military Police.

But experts say that the evidence is flimsy and from a 'loose cannon' military man - known as Soldier N.

His extraordinary allegation emerged during the second court martial of Sergeant Danny Nightingale, who was found guilty of illegally possessing a gun and ammunition.

It was outlined in a letter written by Soldier N's mother-in-law, who was a key witness for the prosecution.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2396975/Diana-assassination-claims-mystifying-stunt-loose-cannon-sniper-say-royal-bodyguards-MPs.html

Oh, what a surprise! Someon's got a book coming out!

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/333516/Princess-Diana-s-SAS-murderers-posed-as-paparazzi

Princess Diana's 'SAS murderers posed as paparazzi'
PRINCESS Diana was murdered by SAS soldiers posing as paparazzi, a new book claims.

Share
11
By Marc Walker/Published 20th August 2013

Author Alan Power reckons he has “significant evidence” to prove commando hitmen were recruited by MI6 to stop Di revealing details of her sex life with Prince Charles.

Royal expert Mr Power says the soldiers chased her car on motorbikes and shone a laser into driver Henri Paul’s eyes.

It echoes claims that emerged following the court martial of SAS Sgt Danny Nightingale this month, in which he was found guilty of possessing an illegal firearm.

A letter written by an ex-soldier, which is now being investigated by police, suggests Diana, 36, and her lover Dodi Fayed, 42, were killed in an SAS hit.

Mr Power, whose book is published on August 29, said: “It was murder, 100%. When I heard the evidence from Sgt Nightingale’s trial, I thought: ‘People need to know the truth.’”

=========

'Reveal details of her sex life with Charles'? It couldn't possibly be more lurid than his chat with Camilla that was supposedly overheard by a ham radio person.

Reveal that it was boring, more like, which is why she chased after anyone in trousers....

'Reveal details of her sex life with Charles'? It couldn't possibly be more lurid than his chat with Camilla that was supposedly overheard by a ham radio person.

Reveal that it was boring, more like, which is why she chased after anyone in trousers....

She was there to provide the heir and a spare; she did that and she was then surplus to requirement. LL

I can't imagine Camilla throwing herself down stairs because Charles wasn't paying attention to her. She's more likely to breathe a sigh of relief and go and speak to an 'orse.

My own opinion is that Diane was an accident waiting to happen, LL. She was involved with some very dubious people.

I remember wincing when she turned up at Versace's funeral with Elton John. Yes, it's very sad he was murdered by a gay serial killer, but I thought it was rather tacky of her to try to turn a frock designer's funeral into a semi-royal event.

Diana would have been alright if only she had known how to behave.
She actually threw her first wobbly before they were even married when she refused to go to a public engagement, and then turned up late, after being told to pull herself together. They put it down to her youth, which I suppose was possible at the time. Sadly, she didn't get any better, and went on to behave like the spoiled brat of a robber baron who didn't know how to behave himself either.

Yes, I was shocked. One does expect ones Royal Family to at least keep their emotional problems to themselves. We all have problems but most of us manage to cope, and without the benefit of privilege.
In the end she only shamed herself. And who really cared if she married the son of a retailer? I very much doubt that The Queen did.

It's actually astounding the peculiar behaviour the Royals turn a blind eye to - providing upper lips remain stiff in public.

I don't think having an affair with the captain of the England rugby team, to the fury of his wife, quite qualifies...

Lamplighter wrote:

'Reveal details of her sex life with Charles'? It couldn't possibly be more lurid than his chat with Camilla that was supposedly overheard by a ham radio person.

Reveal that it was boring, more like, which is why she chased after anyone in trousers....

She was there to provide the heir and a spare; she did that and she was then surplus to requirement.  LL

That's a bit unfair, LL. I managed an heir and two spares in a caravan while their father fought for Queen and Country, and was hardly ever actually there. I frequently spent periods of two years at a time tending to the heir and spares on my own with not a lot of money. But that was the name of the game, and I knew it, and I wasn't very much into wailing and moaning about it.

I would think that if the palace were worried about her involvement with Dodi, it had nothing to do with his religion, and everything to do with his rather sleazy lifestyle and rumoured cocaine habit?

bb1 wrote:It's actually astounding the peculiar behaviour the Royals turn a blind eye to - providing upper lips remain stiff in public.

I don't think having an affair with the captain of the England rugby team, to the fury of his wife, quite qualifies...

What else were they supposed to do with this loose canon. Although I suppose they could have put her in The Tower.
Stiff upper lip was the only option.
And just look at her brother. What a mad shit bag he is.

And just look at her brother. What a mad shit bag he is.

Oh yes, whatever happened to him, after all his grandstanding at the funeral?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Spencer,_9th_Earl_Spencer

Ah. He's now on his third wife and his seventh child.

bb1 wrote:I would think that if the palace were worried about her involvement with Dodi, it had nothing to do with his religion, and everything to do with his rather sleazy lifestyle and rumoured cocaine habit?

Why would The Palace have worried about that, or his religion, which he obviously didn't care about?
I suspect that he cared about her. She was just winding up The Royal Family who she thought did not afford her the adulation that she deserved.
Two Sons, bloody well done. I had three, and no one ever fell at my feet. It's an accident of nature.
But do you know, some people still think it is the fault of women who have daughters.

Sorry, an emotive subject for me because I was despised for being female, and deprived of a decent education. I don't know how my mother felt. She died before I could ask her.
I try not to mind about the lack of education, but it bloody well smarts.

bb1 wrote:And just look at her brother. What a mad shit bag he is.

Oh yes, whatever happened to him, after all his grandstanding at the funeral?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Spencer,_9th_Earl_Spencer

Ah. He's now on his third wife and his seventh child.

And all behaving badly. No noblesse oblige there.

Guess who was passing royal phone numbers to the NOTW for them to hack?


Phone-hacking trial: Princess Diana 'gave royal phone book to NoW'

Diana, Princess of Wales, gave a royal phone book to the News of the World in order to "take on" her estranged husband, the Old Bailey has heard.

Former NoW royal editor Clive Goodman told the phone-hacking trial he was sent the 1992 book because she was looking for "an ally" in the press.

She wanted to show the forces "ranged against her" in a "bitter situation" with the Prince of Wales, he said.

Mr Goodman is accused of paying police for royal phone books, which he denies.

The BBC's home affairs correspondent Tom Symonds, at the Old Bailey, said it was "another extraordinary revelation from this extraordinary trial"

More at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26557920

Mad bat. Had she NO thought for her own children?

No real surprises there then.