An analysis of Diana’s death at the hands of incompetent and corrupt French Police and a down to earth take on conspiracy … yes there was a conspiracy but not what everyone thinks! Enjoy.
A friend recently told me that Diana was “taken out” by Secret Services for Charlie because . . .
Yeah, nah! Charlie has gone from this planet now (down methinks) of course and Diana showed up his lack of human relationship skills big-time with her own skills in this area. I think I would call him an idiot, but not such a goose!
I grabbed this book off my shelves to provide contrary information from David Cohen. David published this work some 20 years ago but the facts are the facts, and are not time dependent – they do not change if he got them right in the first place. I think that he did, and I love his analysis, especially of conspiracy theories. In Chapter 14 he wraps up his key findings neatly:
The evidence shows that the French authorities did not carry out a full investigation and wilfully excluded some areas … the two extreme positions have been that either the crash was the result of a conspiracy or that it was an accident. I do not think that either of these theses makes logical or psychological sense in isolation.
The French police did not cover themselves in glory from the start. They did not use the evidence of a number of important witnesses like Erik Petel
… it is impossible that all the forensic evidence had been gathered
It is bizarre that it was Al Fayed’s detectives who found Adanson’s white Fiat Uno
Adanson’s extraordinary ‘suicide’ [with a bullet hole in the head means he was certainly ‘suicided’].
Political pressure … led to the disappearance of a speed camera photograph
Diana took one hour and forty minutes to reach hospital [and a critical xray]
It is not possible to work out whether the catalogue of errors afflicting Henri Paul’s autopsies were mistakes … or something more sinister
The evidence suggests … a whole series of cock-ups
David Cohen
And in regards to the conspiracy side of things, David agrees but cautions that this may have also been an accidental death:
… it is not difficult to show that people were conspiring
It doesn’t make sense to me that this was a conspiracy outworked as per the plan. It wasn’t. But conspiracy there was.
… what I have found out persuades me that there was some sort of conspiracy
In this regard David refers to VX poison , the route they eventually took and a ‘bad’ paparazzi photographer with Secret Service income, who took off in a hurry after the crash! Woah!
According to David’s conclusions, the driver Henry Paul was definitely not drunk. His blood was taken from another body at autopsy. The Paparazzi were not involved and were a scapegoat used from the outset. Henri was distracted with Diana and Dodi laughing in the back seat when they entered the tunnel, plus Andason’s Fiat Uno weaving in front of him aw well as a speed camera going off. He was exceeding the speed limit, but not going crazily fast.
David also dropped few more tips about human nature:
Three passions rule life: Money, drink and cu [arse].’Some hormone-happy bloke has a hard one for a girl who doesn’t care pig for him. Never mind what her heart says, she’ll close her eyes, open her legs for diamonds and furs.’
Guy Berenger
David also mentions Diana’s coming of age since her divorce from Charlie:
It is hard not to marvel at how much Diana had changed … the arms trade is a ruthless business and one in which fortunes are made.
He continues by quoting one of the falsely accused paparazzi Anne Corbet:
A star like Diana couldn’t just die in a car crash. ‘We knew the had to be guilty parties.’
Absolutely! In terms of Petel’s story (that he heard an implosion before the crash), David and his contacts trust him 100%.
I was wary but once I had verified I had no doubts about Petel.
Charles Duzwaski
Petel himself believed that this was no ordinary car crash:
Petel’s experiences have convinced him that the crash was not an accident. He does not see any other explanation for the way in which he was treated.
David’s explanation of why the paparazzi were blamed makes perfect sense to me – the French police would have had to return pictures taken in a highly political environment – and their role in the whole affair, even years later seems cemented in the public mind.
In its final summary, the inquiry accepted that the paparazzi could not have been the cause of the accident because they were so far behind the Mercedes.
The author explains an aspect of the political environment relating to the treatment of road accidents, causing French defensiveness:
The French were wedded to ancient A&E techniques
What I think
I like David Cohen’s take – that indeed there was incompetence as well as a conspiracy. His assessment though that any conspiracy may not have been fully successful also runs true to me. Never ascribe something to conspiracy when incompetence, politics or self-interest is involved.
His analysis using evidence shows that indeed, the French authorities screwed up more than once does not preclude any conspiracy but also that this conspiracy may have been slightly different to that pushed by Dodi’s father.
Methinks that this complexity is yet another chapter in a scene of human intrigue, and that while it may be that the human mind seeks clarity of the good guys and the bad guys, such a binary situation is unrealistic.
The book, DIANA Death of a Goddess, by David Cohen is a great study in conspiracy analysis. I hope you’ve learned something constructive from this all today!
While the Kosovo conflict was underway there were plans to take out a general?
It was planned to take place in a tunnel.
When the Di job came up they allegedly used the tunnel planning.
Di was setting up a group to oppose land mines.
Di had huge international influence.
She may have overstepped her place in the scheme of things.
I only deal in the facts.
That such an important person died as the result of incompetence/accident sounds like a coincidence.
And would be happening more often than we realise. Doubt it.
I do not readily buy in coincidences.
Because of Di’s importance It is easy to buy into the conspiracy theory.
Dead Uno driver?
I would favour conspiracy over incompetence.
All we need to do is prove a conspiracy.
And that ought to be easy for the right person
> Tunnel
A new one on me
> Land mines
Yes
> Overstepping
Perhaps
> Facts
No, you are THE most conspiratorial person I know Brian and you continue to talk about coincidences here.
> Uno driver
David shares the best part of an entire chapter about his death.
My take is that one should never discount incompetence even though there was clearly a conspiracy involved. My post shares this well. Thank you for bothering to comment here.