New info about Princess Diana death

[Stephen]

It was a tragic incident cause in part by the paparazi and a driver that had a few drinks.

It really is/was as simple as that!

Originally Posted by Stephen

It was a tragic incident cause in part by the paparazi and a driver that had a few drinks.

It really is/was as simple as that!

So here we must have an eye witness statement because only someone who witnessed the event themselves know for definite what happened.

You can have faith you know what happened but that is all

[Russ]

What I don't understand is if people are willing to accept the suggestion she was murdered then why would "they" have used a car crash which, as Derek said (and will have a good knowledge of) people can survive, her bodyguard being an example. High profile assassinations have occurred in the past by other methods, why not those? Why not while she was out of the country on one of her many charity missions?

I just doesn't make sense to me and there's far too much scope for it to go wrong. The secret services, SAS etc are clinical about this sort of thing. It just seems too haphazard for them or any other government "hit squad".

---------- Post added at 13:26 ---------- Previous post was at 13:25 ----------

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

So here we must have an eye witness statement because only someone who witnessed the event themselves know for definite what happened.

I'm not a witness but as my clip from earlier showed I've been down that tunnel and seen for myself how bad the driving is especially from bikers. IMO that falls in line with the accounts of the paps on bikes driving dangerously. Add a drunk driver to the mix and again, it just makes sense.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

So here we must have an eye witness statement because only someone who witnessed the event themselves know for definite what happened.

You can have faith you know what happened but that is all

Well then the same applies to all the other 'theories' people have come up with. How could any of them been possible or happened if no one was there to witness it. All the evidence from the night leads to the accident being the only plausible outcome.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Russ

What I don't understand is if people are willing to accept the suggestion she was murdered then why would "they" have used a car crash

I just doesn't make sense to me and there's far too much scope for it to go wrong. The secret services, SAS etc are clinical about this sort of thing. It just seems too haphazard for them or any other government "hit squad".

*IF* they wanted to kill someone via car crash then I'm pretty sure there would be more suitable places to do this, accident on country road springs to mind, which would give far more scope for anyone not immediately killed to die from their injuries prior to medical attention, rather than in the middle of a city with all the associated potential witnesses and speedy medical attention.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Well then the same applies to all the other 'theories' people have come up with. How could any of them been possible or happened if no one was there to witness it. All the evidence from the night leads to the accident being the only plausible outcome.

ok for an event to happen does not need someone there to see it for a start. If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around does it make a sound ?

If the only persons savvy to the plan were those involved and none of them ever spoke about it does that mean it could not happen?

For this thread to exist a story has been in the papers and the case I believe is opened? then there obviously is another plausible cause

[Nidge41]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

http://news.sky.com/story/1129902/di...ew-information

The truth will finally come out.

It makes the News Papers money on a dull non news weekend.

I thought she survived the car crash and died later (of her injuries) at the hospital ?

[Derek]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

For this thread to exist a story has been in the papers and the case I believe is opened?

Nope. The Police have been approached with evidence from a second hand source and quite possibly a source with an axe to grind against the alleged perpetrator.

They haven't reopened the case but with such a high profile incident are looking into the claims to see if there is any merit to it whatsoever. If they just filed it in the bin certain sections would start screaming COVERUP!!!!

I'd imagine the end result will be the claims have the same merit as the ones made by the 'SAS member who was first through the balcony' in every pub up and down the land.

---------- Post added at 14:00 ---------- Previous post was at 13:57 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul M

I thought she survived the car crash and died later (of her injuries) at the hospital ?

AFAIK she was alive but the injuries were pretty much non survivable unless she happened to right beside a major surgery unit when the incident occurred.

[peanut]

Originally Posted by Hugh

People aren't believing it because it's official and they are gullible - they believe it because they have followed through a chain of events, read about the investigations into them, and agreed with the official verdict.

Actually people tend to believe what they want to believe regardless of the facts. I just find most people are just happy to go along with the official line regardlessly. At least those that believe in 'conspiracies' tend to know more of the facts to be able to scrutinize them (to whatever suits etc etc).

Originally Posted by Derek

Nope. The Police have been approached with evidence from a second hand source and quite possibly a source with an axe to grind against the alleged perpetrator.

They haven't reopened the case but with such a high profile incident are looking into the claims to see if there is any merit to it whatsoever. If they just filed it in the bin certain sections would start screaming COVERUP!!!!

I'd imagine the end result will be the claims have the same merit as the ones made by the 'SAS member who was first through the balcony' in every pub up and down the land.

---------- Post added at 14:00 ---------- Previous post was at 13:57 ----------




AFAIK she was alive but the injuries were pretty much non survivable unless she happened to right beside a major surgery unit when the incident occurred.

does that make the events impossible?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

does that make the events impossible?

I don't think anyone is questioning the possibility, just the plausibility.

Originally Posted by Russ

I don't think anyone is questioning the possibility, just the plausibility.

so therefore there is an element of doubt which is all good and healthy

[Russ]

As you'd get in any court case but people generally seem to accept the verdict there.

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Damien

To be honest there is something that happened here and that is what happened. There is hardly any evidence that differs from the official account and while your entitled to your opinion you're not entitled to have to taken seriously.

yes, I am, which I stated earlier...

Originally Posted by idi banashapan

I agree that I think this was an accident. I too, do not know of who may have benefited from her death. but just because I don't know about them doesn't mean there isn't someone out there who did benefit in some way.

snip

All I am saying is that we might do well to keep in mind we (the public) are not privy to a lot of information about a lot of things. Diana's death may be one of those things. I like to think keeping an open mind is a good way to be on things like this. it does NOT mean I automatically think something underhand was going on.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Err no it isn't, get over yourself, it was a joke, I've no interest in this what so ever or any ones opinions on it and had the thread title had any relevance to what the thread contained I wouldn't even have opened it and the only thing I'll be trying harder to do in it is leave. I don't even find it mildly interesting that this whole plot would've fallen apart if she'd simply worn a seatbelt.

excuse me? get over myself? right-o. as for it being a joke, I shall repeat something that has been said to me in the past here on more than one occasion... you were missing the smiley to signify it was a joke. lastly, if you don't care and it doesn't interest you, then your post can only have been borne from a want to antagonise and stir. again, not very mature. and yes, if she wasn't wearing a seat belt, she should have been.

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

I am not saying I believe they had her killed but I am open enough to say I do not know for sure.

I find it deeply insulting that you think those who think different to you are both insane and foolish where your totally closed mind makes you sensible and sane

I quite agree with this statement. to blindly follow anyone or anything seems somewhat against human nature to me. we should encourage the questioning of information, its sources and its presentation, be that what our boss at work says to us, what the media relays to us, what the governments choose to tell us or what a study or survey appears to conclude. the only way to know something for sure is first-hand experience. anything beyond that is open to contamination, alteration, exaggeration, distortion and deletion.

Originally Posted by Russ

What I don't understand is if people are willing to accept the suggestion she was murdered then why would "they" have used a car crash which, as Derek said (and will have a good knowledge of) people can survive, her bodyguard being an example. High profile assassinations have occurred in the past by other methods, why not those? Why not while she was out of the country on one of her many charity missions?

I just doesn't make sense to me and there's far too much scope for it to go wrong. The secret services, SAS etc are clinical about this sort of thing. It just seems too haphazard for them or any other government "hit squad".

perhaps a car crash in another country would appear all the more circumstantial and terrible in terms of getting the public on-side to believing what the media says? it would also distance our own governments and agencies in the minds of the public as it happened abroad and not in our own back yard. by appearing as an 'accident', people are far less likely to question it. people would definitely start asking more questions if she was abroad and had a bullet put in her head, I'm sure.

DON'T FORGET - I think this was an accident and that it is unlikely anything untoward went on here. however, I am in no way going to out-rightly dismiss the possibility that there are other powers and motives at play. it may not appear plausible, but that does not mean it's impossible something we don't know about has happened for reasons that we don't know about. we are merely the public.