The Mammoth Book of Cover-Ups
Page 10
Suddenly, it wasn’t only Al-Fayed raising questions about the crash in the tunnel under Pont de l’Alma. Why had the lights and security cameras in the tunnel been turned off just before the crash? Why did the ambulance take 43 minutes to get Diana to Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital? Why had her body been embalmed before a proper autopsy could be undertaken? Why had the crash site been cleansed and disinfected before a forensic examination could be carried out? And where was the driver of the white Fiat Uno? Wasn’t it too convenient that Rees-Jones had “no memory” of the crash?
Then a former MI6 agent, Richard Tomlinson, revealed that MI6 had been planning an assassination at the time of Diana’s death. In a sworn affidavit Tomlinson stated that MI6’s Balkans operations officer had shown him the service’s plan to assassinate Slobodan Milosević, the Serbian president, in a car crash . . . in a tunnel. Tomlinson stated that MI6’s planned assassination of Milosević showed “remarkable similarities to the circumstances and witness accounts of the crash that killed the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al-Fayed, and Henri Paul”. How had MI6 caused the car to crash? Possibly, suggested Tomlinson, with a disorientating strobe light held by an operative in the tunnel, or by another car forcing the Mercedes into the pillar. There were rumours that Henri Paul was a CIA/DGSE/MI6 agent and had deliberately taken the roundabout Pont de l’Alma route to the Al-Fayeds’ Paris flat to get Diana into the killing zone. (If Paul was a spook this might explain, people said, the series of 40,000-franc deposits in his bank account.) A more farfetched suggestion was that Rees-Jones, a former paratrooper, wrenched the wheel from Paul’s grasp. Suspicions of a cover-up mushroomed when the body of James Andanson was found in a burnt-out car in 2000. Andanson, a paparazzo, had owned a white Fiat Uno three years before and had been investigated by the French police. There was a final oddity: just after Andanson’s death his office was burgled. Meanwhile, an investigation by French forensic specialists found no significant mechanical faults in the Mercedes S280, ruling out the possibility that the crash had been caused by some internal failure.
So far, so bad for the Windsors. Yet Al-Fayed’s case has a number of weaknesses:
The only source for the story that Dodi and Diana were to be married, and that an engagement ring had been bought from Repossi in Paris, is Al-Fayed himself.
Despite a multi-million-pound personal investigation, Al-Fayed has been unable to establish any link between Prince Philip and MI6.
Although Diana reportedly told Frederic Mailliez, the off-duty doctor who first attended her in the Pont de l’Alma tunnel, that she was pregnant, the only other evidence of pregnancy came from an anonymous French policeman who said he had the papers to prove this but to date has not made these public. By contrast, scientific tests carried out on Diana’s pre-transfusion blood have shown no evidence of pregnancy. Myriah Daniels, a holistic healer who travelled with Dodi and Diana on their cruise aboard the Jonikal yacht at the end of August 1997, stated:
I can say with one hundred per cent certainty that she was not pregnant. I will explain how I can be so sure of this fact. Firstly, she told me herself that she was not pregnant. Secondly . . . It is incomprehensible to me that Diana would have allowed me to carry out such an invasive treatment [massage] on her stomach and intestines if she thought she was pregnant.
The Operation Paget Inquiry (see below) was given access to MI6 to investigate Tomlinson’s claims. The inquiry tracked down the assassination plan he referred to and found the target to be not Slobodan Milosević but another Serbian figure. Since it is against British government policy to carry out assassinations, the memo’s author was disciplined. Tomlinson admitted this memo was the one he was referring to in his claim.
Given the long-standing antipathy between France and Britain, why would the French police/security services collude in the conspiracy to kill Diana?
In December 2006 the Independent newspaper stated there were at least 14 CCTV cameras in the Pont de l’Alma tunnel, yet none recorded footage of the fatal collision. Mohamed Al-Fayed has also raised the absence of CCTV images of the Mercedes’ journey on the fateful night as evidence of conspiracy. A Brigade Criminelle investigation, however, found only 10 CCTV cameras along the route, and it was for a quite simple reason that none had relevant images: they were security cameras on buildings and were pointed at those buildings’ exits and entrances. Inside the Alma underpass there was one camera, which was under the control of the Compagnie de Circulation Urbaines de Paris (Paris Urban Traffic Unit). The CCUP closed down at 11 p.m. and made no recordings after that time.
The lengthy “43-minute” ambulance journey of Diana from the Pont de l’Alma tunnel to hospital was no such thing, taking from 1.41 to 2.06. The SAMU ambulance did admittedly stop en route for 10 minutes, but that was because the accompanying doctor needed the ambulance to be stationary while he gave Diana blood-pressure treatment. The ambulance did not go to the Hotel Dieu, the nearest hospital to the crash scene, because Pitié-Salpêtrière was the main centre for multiple trauma cases.
Fayed challenged the French investigators’ conclusion that Henri Paul was drunk (with an alcohol level three times the legal limit) on the evening of the tragedy; his bearing, as captured on the Ritz hotel CCTV that evening, showed a man apparently sober. There were also suggestions that the blood samples tested belonged not to Henri but to another subject. There certainly seem to have been irregularities in the report of French forensic pathologist Dominique Lecomte, but in December 2006 DNA testing confirmed that the blood samples showing a level of alcohol in excess of legal limits did indeed belong to Paul.
Al-Fayed nonetheless maintained that his son and Diana died as the result of a vast conspiracy by the Royal Family and MI6. In response, the coroner of the royal household requested Lord Stevens, a former chief of the Metropolitan Police, to head an investigation into the deaths. The subsequent “Operation Paget” agreed that some questions asked by Al-Fayed were “right to be raised” and confirmed that Paul had been a low-level informer for the French domestic secret service, DST. The Operation Paget report also pointed out that hotel security staff the world over act as low-grade informers for their national spy organizations.
Essentially, the Operation Paget report came to the same conclusion as had the French inquiry into the tragedy. Mme Coujard, the prosecutor heading the French inquiry, determined: “The direct cause of the accident is the presence, at the wheel of the Mercedes S280, of a driver who had consumed a considerable amount of alcohol, combined with . . . medication, driving at a speed . . . faster than the maximum speed-limit in built-up areas.”
In 2007 Mohamed Al-Fayed forced an inquest into the deaths of Dodi and Diana. At the time of going to press the inquest is ongoing, but its conclusion is unlikely to differ from those of previous investigations. It too will almost certainly be accused by Al-Fayed of being part of the cover-up.
There may be an innocuous reason for the serially identical conclusions: they are correct and the goddess-like Diana suffered the fate of many poor mortals. She was killed by a drunk driver.
Prince Philip and MI6 assassinated Diana, Princess of Wales: ALERT LEVEL 4
Further Reading
Noel Botham, The Assassination of Princess Diana, 2004
Peter Hounam and Derek McAdam, Who Killed Diana?, 1998
Trevor Rees-Jones and Moira Johnston, The Bodyguard’s Story: Diana, the Crash, and the Sole Survivor, 2000
DOCUMENT: OPERATION PAGET REPORT OVERVIEW, DECEMBER 2006
In January 2004, as Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Service, I was asked by the Coroner of the Queen’s Household and the County of Surrey, Mr Michael Burgess, to investigate a number of matters surrounding the car crash in Paris on 31 August 1997 in which Diana, Princess of Wales, Mr Dodi Al-Fayed and Mr Henri Paul died and Mr Trevor Rees-Jones was seriously injured. The Operation Paget report of that investigation, which has been wide-ranging and thorough, will, I hope, assist the present Coroner in charge of the case, Lady Elizabeth Butler-Slo
ss, to decide the scope of her inquests. This overview addresses the key issues that have emerged from what has been a most complex and challenging investigation.
The nature of this investigation has been unprecedented. I decided that only a thorough, methodical and detailed investigation would answer these extremely serious allegations. A dedicated team of New Scotland Yard Detectives from the Metropolitan Police Specialist Crime Directorate has worked on the case from the moment I took charge of the investigation. I want to thank them all for their dedication, especially the Senior Investigating Officer and his deputy.
Scope of the investigation
Together, we have examined and taken account of the French investigation but it has not been our role to pass judgment on French procedures and processes. I do, however, recognize that there are differences in the two systems. I must also make it clear that it is not our role to prejudge those matters that will be heard in the Coroner’s court. It is for Lady Butler-Sloss to decide the questions of who the deceased were, and where, when and how they died.
The primary purpose of the investigation has been to assess whether there is any credible evidence to support an allegation of conspiracy to murder.
Much has been written about the circumstances leading up to the crash and the effectiveness of the French investigation that followed. We have been acutely aware of the responsibility placed upon us to approach this investigation with an open mind and to ensure that the outcome was not predetermined.
This inquiry has largely concentrated on a number of separate claims made by Mr Mohamed Al-Fayed and his legal team in documents and public appearances over the nine years since the crash. At the heart of Mr Al-Fayed’s allegation is his belief that the crash was not an accident but murder. Furthermore, that this murder was the result of a conspiracy by the “Establishment” and, in particular, by HRH Prince Philip and the Security and Intelligence Services because of the relationship between Mr Dodi Al-Fayed and the Princess of Wales. Mr Al-Fayed and his legal team have also expressed concern that the investigation, by the French authorities, was carried out in such a way as to prevent the truth from emerging.
I have personally ensured that every reasonable line of enquiry has been undertaken in order to evaluate fully any evidence that might support this extremely serious allegation.
We have had excellent cooperation from the French authorities throughout. They have shared the dossier containing the findings of their enquiries to date, carried out enquiries on our behalf, given us exhibits and provided much other practical support to my team. Our understanding of the French enquiry has led us to draw two principal conclusions. First, the differences in procedures between the French and English legal systems in themselves provide answers to some of Mr Al-Fayed’s questions. Second, Mr Al-Fayed has brought to our attention his concerns about the French investigation and some of these have received wide publicity. They do not alter our conclusions in any way.
Representatives from Government, including the Secret Intelligence Service and the Security Service, have all given me their full cooperation and assistance, whether or not allegations were specifically made against their organizations. Some of these allegations of conspiracy to murder have been made against named individuals in the full glare of publicity. Myself and the two senior members of the team have personally examined MI5 and MI6 records. We have had unprecedented access to everything we wished to examine. We have contacted the American intelligence services and they have assured us that they have no relevant information that will in any way affect my conclusions. I am satisfied that no attempt has been made to hold back information. We are confident that the allegations made are unfounded. The relevant issues are detailed in the report.
I have been in communication with HRH Prince Philip, HRH Prince Charles, and HRH Prince William. I have spoken with Prince Charles and I have corresponded with Prince Philip and Prince William. I have always said that the direction of the investigation would be governed by the evidence. I have seen nothing that would justify further enquiries with any member of the Royal Family.
I know that this report will be the subject of closer scrutiny than anything I have done before and people may continue to raise issues – it is inevitable. However, that has not stopped the Metropolitan Police from taking the exceptional step of publishing this report. Not only do we believe that it is the right thing to do, but we also believe that the public should have the opportunity to view the investigation in its entirety. This will allow for properly informed debate about the evidence rather than discussions based on theory and speculation.
Scale and nature of the investigation
The team has interviewed over 300 witnesses, some for the first time. They have carried out over 500 actions and collected more than 600 exhibits. They have gone wherever necessary in order to pursue their enquiries. More than twenty International Letters of Request have been submitted to the French authorities. These enquiries, however, have not been carried out in order to re-investigate the French enquiry. The team has scrutinized all the statements taken from eyewitnesses at the time in order to assess if there was any possible evidence that might inform the investigation. They have not re-interviewed these witnesses. They did, however, manage to locate and interview two new eyewitnesses and full accounts have been taken from them. The evidence they provide has further informed our assessment.
Eyewitness accounts taken in France were done in accordance with the French legislation and procedures. The French authorities considered that after this length of time and so much media coverage, the proper place for these accounts to be heard was at the inquests. Many of these witnesses have agreed to attend. Both Coroners, Michael Burgess and Lady Elizabeth Butler – Sloss, have agreed that this is the correct and most appropriate course of action. I agree.
The recollections of eyewitnesses, so many years after such a fleeting and traumatic event, have to be dealt with very carefully. We have included in our report extracts from a very informative analysis by a respected psychologist. He explains these issues in detail. His full report will be made available to the inquests.
The team has drawn, during the course of the investigation, on some of the finest independent experts. We would like, in particular, to thank two of them who have been with us throughout the investigation:
Professor Robert FORREST, is a Consultant in Clinical Chemistry and Toxicology. He has provided expert opinion concerning the analysis of Henri Paul’s post-mortem samples.
Dr Richard SHEPHERD, is a Consultant Forensic Pathologist and Home Office Pathologist. He has given me his expert opinion on the medical condition and injuries of the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al-Fayed and Henri Paul following the collision.
The team has taken advantage of the latest forensic and technical developments in the years since the crash. In February 2005 we, together with the French Judiciary and Police, carried out what I believe is the largest and most comprehensive survey and reconstruction of the scene of an incident ever. We used the specialist skills of surveyors, photographers and computer modellers to collect data from 186 million points and reproduce the scene of the crash and surrounding area to within an accuracy of one centimetre. This three-dimensional model and a validated model of the Mercedes were used by the world-renowned Transport Research Laboratory to simulate and recreate the crash.
This groundbreaking work has been of crucial importance in reaching our conclusions. It will be available for the Coroner to consider at the inquests and will be, I hope, of lasting benefit to many other future investigations, whether in the United Kingdom or overseas.
Since 1997 Mr Mohamed Al-Fayed has also employed a number of experts. They too are eminent in their respective fields. I am most grateful to him for the many questions he and they have raised and for the information they have provided to the investigation. Mr Al-Fayed has kindly made many of their reports available to the team and we have included a great deal of their content in the report. My team and the experts we have emplo
yed have met Mr Al-Fayed’s experts and I have encouraged constant dialogue between them at all times.
The findings of the investigation
Our investigation into the overall allegation of conspiracy to murder has examined the following key areas: the motive for the alleged murder, and the opportunity and capability to carry it out.
Our conclusion is that, on all the evidence available at this time, there was no conspiracy to murder any of the occupants of the car. This was a tragic accident.
Motive
I and the team have spoken to people about sensitive matters, some of a deeply personal nature. We have spoken to close relatives, friends and the doctor of the Princess of Wales. All were very willing to help me in any way they could. I am most grateful for their cooperation and assistance.
We are not prepared to go into detail as much of what we have been told was on the understanding that it would be accorded proper sensitivity. However, we are certain that the Princess of Wales was not pregnant at the time of her death. Our conclusions were strengthened by forensic tests carried out on blood recovered from the Mercedes car.
From the evidence of her close friends and associates, she was not engaged and she was not about to get engaged.
Opportunity and capability
To stage an accident in order to murder the occupants of the car would in my opinion require careful, meticulous and coordinated planning. The team carried out a detailed and thorough investigation of the events leading up to the collision; from the very first beginnings of the relationship between the Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al-Fayed in St Tropez in July 1997, to the particular sequence of events which took place a few weeks later in Paris on the evening of 30 August 1997. The paparazzi were intent on following their every move from the moment they knew of the relationship and were aware of their plans to travel to Paris on Saturday 30 August 1997. Having been informed by contacts, they were waiting for them at the airport and followed them to the Ritz Hotel.