Diana

It said on the news that they are not re-opening the investigation, Nonu

Well that what was what was in my paper !

However , if what you say is correct I am pleased , because as I said before IMO there is no merit in it !

They are "looking at the evidence". How that is different I don't know.

Whoever came forward with this "information" should be well imprisoned if it is proved to be not true. Why wait this long? And just after the birth of baby George! Sounds malicious. This kind of trouble could make the Queen ill now. I hope they get to the bottom of it and do the right thing.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23741483
The BBC says an 'assessment' is being carried out, not an investigation.
It's also refusing to disclose details about the source.
The item is also tucked away on the 'most read' bit, but doesn't appear anywhere on the main news page.

I do feel sorry for William and Harry, they will have to tolerate this all their lives probably.
I hope they never read any of it.

Me too ELLA let her RIP , those chaps have been through enough !

Do you remember the Hitler diaries?

I think this has to be a load of speculation. If the car or the yacht had been blown up maybe.
I cannot see how an car accident like that in the middle of Paris could be staged with any guarantee of success. There would have been far too many uncontrollable variables.

I am sure if the government secret services wanted to kill them they would have found a far more reliable and discrete way of doing so.

I would hope they would, or they would be seen as very incompetent at their "spooks"/ special forces dirty deeds role.

Conspiracy theories are a pain in the .... neck. Ultimately they died because of two facts: the driver was not sober, and those who died were not wearing their seat belts. Those two facts are enough to answer all the questions (Occam's Razor, anyone?) without film scenario nonsense about high-placed murderers.

I wish they would let Diana rest in peace.

Feetlbaum Exactly! How would the "special forces" arrange that! I too think enough is enough on this.
Diana was a naive young woman who was stuck in an impossible situation and did not have the nous/ confidence power etc. to really get herself out of it. She did not always act properly, I agreed but she died far too young.

What I did admire was that she made a stand about land mines and was then criticised by a junior defence minister.
That criticism alone had me right on her side. The poor lass was making a humanitarian statement while visiting children maimed by these things! B*****. government policy!

"1997: Princess Diana sparks landmines row
Princess Diana has angered government ministers after calling for an international ban on landmines.

Her comments - made during a visit to Angola to see for herself some of the victims of landmines - are being seen as out of step with government policy.

The Junior Defence Minister, Earl Howe, has described the princess as a "loose cannon", ill-informed on the issue of anti-personnel landmines. "

William of Occam. My favourite bloke!

Me too! Always worth remembering, I think.

Its the last thing her boys need and is probably much more about selling nasty cheap newspapers....whatever 'really' happened - its now time to just let go and look to the future.

If there is new evidence, it should be investigated.

It sounds to me as if the soldier in question (his ex in-laws apparently released a letter he had written) was just trying to big himself up at the time he claimed that the SAS was responsible for her "murder".

Exactly feetlebaum all the murder and conspiracy theories fall down over the seat belt question. If she had worn one she would most likely still be here.

Oh lots of things make a conspiracy theory of any sort sound absurd.

• No one knew she was suddenly going to decide to leave the Ritz late at night and make a mad dash across Paris.

• No one knew that Henri Paul would be driving her in a car that he was unfit to drive.

• No one knew that Henri Paul would [unsuccessfully] treat the Alma tunnel like the chicanes on a race track.

• No one knew where she was going and what route the car would take.

• No one has made a sensible suggestion about why murdering her would have been a good idea. (It's difficult to think of one.)

and so on and so on.

However, if she habitually refused to wear a seat belt, that might be well known.

whatever, however, whenever, leave all alone, bereavement,especially at such a young age with two beautiful children,( as are all children) is a sad sad thing. Leave Diana to R.I.P and allow her family especially her two sons to to move forward with their lives as best they can. What can continuous "digging up" benefit any one. "If only's" there will always be, we cannot change the past but we can move to the future.

It happens to a greater or lesser extent every August. Sooner, or more likely later, people will get bored.

Like now.

Ariadne I have to admit that I was bored with conspiracy theories and extravagant public acts of mourning before they even buried the poor woman – let alone 16 years later (is that right?).

Just to throw a spanner in the works Absent I DO have " a reason why murdering her would have been a good idea" .

Diana is/was the mother of the second in line to the throne. She was in a serious relationship with Dodi al -Fayed the middle eastern, Muslim son of Mohamed al -Fayed.

I am not one of the conspiracy theorists but you did ask the question and I am sure history proves that the royals are not the squeaky clean individuals that they would have us believe.

So who, gillybob would have the order for her murder and how on earth would the chain of command have worked?

Well you might "have me there" Absent

But............

I personally believe that Diana Spencer was picked out by the senior royals as a kind of "rent a womb" in order to provide a "suitable" wife for Charles and a mother to the next generation. It is quite obvious that there was no love (on his part) which was proven in the "whatever love is" speech following the announcement of their engagement. Diana's demise could have been "arranged" as easily as the marriage leaving Charles free to marry the person he wanted to marry in the first place complete with 2 more heirs to the throne and no risk of the embarrassment of an Egyptian/ Muslim half brother to the future king.