Diana inquest must decide on conspiracy theories

A jury of 11 people will give the definitive verdict on how Princess Diana and her boyfriend Dodi al-Fayed were killed in a car…

A jury of 11 people will give the definitive verdict on how Princess Diana and her boyfriend Dodi al-Fayed were killed in a car crash in Paris, an inquest was told today.

Lord Justice Scott Baker told the jury that despite "millions of words" being written and spoken about the crash, their view would be "the only view that matters".

The conclusions of inquiries carried out by French and British authorities "are neither here nor there", he added.

It is clear that there are many members of the public who are concerned that something sinister may have caused the collision
Lord Justice baker

The coroner was speaking as he opened the long-awaited inquest into the crash which has led to Dodi's father, the billionaire owner of Harrods, Modammed al-Fayed, alleging that the pair were murdered on the instruction of the British royal family.

READ MORE

Mr al-Fayed was among those present at the High Court in London. Others included the Princess's sister, Lady Sarah McCorquodale; and Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, representing Diana's sons, Princes William and Harry.

Princess Diana (36), her boyfriend Dodi al-Fayed (42), and chauffeur Henri Paul were killed on August 31st , 1997 when their Mercedes car crashed in an underpass as they sped away from the Ritz Hotel in Paris, pursued by paparazzi on motorbikes.

Bodyguard Trevor Rees - then known as Rees-Jones - survived the crash but says he has lost memory of some the events surrounding the tragedy.

In outlining the background to the case, Lord Justice Baker said the jury must consider whether "the precise nature of the impact could ever have been planned in advance or orchestrated in any confidence".

The jury were shown photographs of the wreckage but the Lord Justice Baker noted that none showed the occupants of the car.

French authorities had found the crash happened when the Mercedes the couple were travelling in swerved but failed to avoid contacting a Fiat Uno. Their car, which witnesses said was driving at around twice the 30 mph speed limit, then hit a pillar.

Lord Justice Baker told the jury there was a slip road close to the Champs Elysees that Mr Paul could have taken for Dodi's apartment, which would have avoided the underpass. The reason why he did not take this road was unclear, he said.

He added: "If he had taken the slip road, then any conspiracy to murder in the tunnel would have been certain to fail."

"On the face of it you might think that the circumstances of what happened point to the collision having been a tragic accident, in that nobody intended that Diana or anybody else should die, or be seriously injured and that the cause was driver error."

He said that Mohamed al Fayed did not accept this had been the cause, but thought "Diana and his son were murdered in furtherance of a conspiracy to kill them or cause serious harm".

The coroner told the court Mr al-Fayed had told the president of the Ritz Hotel as early as the night of the crash that he was convinced the couple had been murdered.

"He has not wavered in that conviction since the collision and it remains his primary and over-arching allegation," he said.

"Others subsequently would have suspicions that events surrounding that night raised questions."

"It is clear that there are many members of the public who are concerned that something sinister may have caused the collision in which Diana and two others died."

The Lord Justice also showed the jury an image of the Princess in a leopard print swimming costume, describing it as a famous photograph that some observers suggested showed that Diana was pregnant.

He said the question of whether this was the case would arise later but added that the picture was taken before the couple's relationship is believed to have begun.

He also set out how Diana's relationship with Dodi blossomed over the summer of 1997 and went through the events of the night before the crash.

Outside the court, a spokesman for Mr al Fayed said his client was surprised by the "tone and content" of the coroner's opening statement.

"At an early stage, highly contentious and disputed material was introduced by the coroner when this should be presented to the jury in due course.

"Mr al-Fayed fears that the opening statement could present an appearance of bias whether or not this was intended," the spokesman said.