Newspaper Cover Page
Our Paper

Front and Back Pages, E-Edition and Back Issues...

Weather
 26°C
London
Saturday 30th August 2008 Make us your HOME PAGE  What is RSS?
Diana Inquest

THE INQUEST THAT MADE LEGAL HISTORY

Story Image


The Princess's final moments captured on CCTV

Monday April 7,2008

FOR AN INQUEST described as “unique” by the coroner, it was always likely to make legal history.

After 10 years and four separate coroners, the hearing finally got under way at the Royal Courts of Justice in London in October.

Potential jurors were all rigorously questioned to screen out anyone with ties to the Royal Family, MI6, MI5, GCHQ or Fulham FC.

The 11 jurors were given police escorts to and from their homes every day to prevent harassment, the kind of security arrangements usually reserved for high profile criminal trials such as drugs or terror cases.

Within days the jurors were flown to Paris to visit the scene of the crash and retrace Diana and Dodi’s final journey from the Ritz Hotel to the Alma underpass.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** CLICK HERE TO VIEW OUR DIANA GALLERY ***
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEARCH DIANA INQUEST:


It was the first time a British inquest had been in session abroad and only the second time for any UK court.

The only precedent was the 1999 war crimes trial of former Nazi Anthony Sawoniuk, when a jury was taken to the scene of the murders in the village of Domachevo in western Belarus.

Following the French Government’s refusal to force paparazzi living there to testify, the coroner proposed having their previous statements read to the jury.

He immediately faced a legal challenge from lawyers arguing that he could not introduce such controversial evidence without calling a witness to cross-examine.

The coroner lost at the Court of Appeal but the matter sparked calls from senior judges for the law to be redrafted.

Branding parts of the 1984 Coroners’ Rules, which govern inquests, as “antiquated rubbish” and “improper for the modern age”, Lord Justice Thomas asked: “Who is responsible for this lamentable state of affairs? Someone should be politically answerable for this.”

There was another first in February when several MI6 agents gave evidence to the inquest to answer Mohamed al Fayed’s allegations that the agency murdered Diana and Dodi in a staged car crash.

The organisation’s former head, Sir Richard Dearlove - known as “C” during his time in the job - explained in his evidence that his appearance was a departure from MI6’s usual policy of neither confirming or denying any claims about its activities.

“When matters of let’s say grave concern arise, rare exceptions of policy are made, and obviously, in this particular instance in this court, I think one can understand why an exception is being made,” he said.

While Sir Richard, who is now the master of Pembroke College Cambridge, appeared openly, several serving MI6 employees gave their evidence to a cleared court, with the media and public consigned to an annexe with only an audio link.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** GET ALL THE LATEST UPDATES FROM THE DIANA INQUEST NOW **
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


User Image

OH YEA!

09.04.08, 2:45pm

i wasnt wondering where that report went? lol i was waiting for them to tell us gone very quiet hasnt it lol

• Posted by: xlouisexReport Comment

User Image

70,000 PAGE FRENCH DOCUMENT

08.04.08, 2:54am



It would seem that with the assistance of all of the establishment witnesses and the disappearance of the 70,000 page French Investigation it made it impossible to verify any of the testimony or the facts used by the French and upheld in Padget.

Does that honestly sound right to you?

Or, did I miss it. Honestly, I am asking a question; did they ever find the 70,000 page document and get it to the inquest?

If the jury had that large 70,000 page French investigation maybe the facts were upheld. But without it, there would be no way to uphold anything.

So, I am not making a statement, but asking a question. Anyone's answer would be appreciated.


• Posted by: DianaReport Comment

User Image

THE VERDICT

07.04.08, 10:39pm

The verdict was a Travesty of Justice.


"a Public convinced against their will
Is of the same opinion still."









• Posted by: CathyKReport Comment

User Image

LEGAL HISTORY IS ... R+I+G+H+T ... WHEN THE CORONER HIMSELF PROCLAIMS HENRI PAUL'S BLOOD TESTS TO BE AN "AFFRONT TO ANY SCIENTIST"

07.04.08, 8:21pm



... And then finds the two fakers, Dr Pepin and Professor Lecomte, refuse point blank to give evidence!


.... Do you think Lord Justice Scott Baker is still wondering why? ...


... I AM!

• Posted by: BrightravenReport Comment

User Image

THIS IS THE INQUEST

07.04.08, 6:51pm

that will make legal history alright.

the inquest that didn't know who's blood test is who's. which car was which, who was who.,
and they still don't....

• Posted by: jessicaReport Comment

View All Comments

To view all 'Have Your Say' comments, click this button...

Share...

Got A Story? Get in touch online
Email the news desk directly here!


Diana Inquest: Twists, revelations and conspiracies

IN OCTOBER last year a group of ordinary people, chosen at random, were marshall...

Read More Comment Speech Bubble Have Your Say(2)

Strange but true facts from Diana's inquest

THE INQUEST into the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi al Fayed unearthed some u...

Read More Comment Speech Bubble Have Your Say(6)

Todays best TV right here for you at the Express. • See Guide

The Political Cartoonist of the Year

POPULAR SEARCHES