Diana's in her own words. Children 4

She didn't marry him when she was younger because she was already married...

Agrees with Marieeliz 're Diana's affairs. I used to be staunchly Diana. To an extent Ì still am. I am now more pragmatic over the whole business.

Diana was used as a breeding machine as the next Queen had to be of the right faith, no baggage and a virgin. It was how it was then. Doesnt mean it's right cos it isn't. Putting it in the context of the time.

Diana could not get out of marrying Charles. Same vice versa. How do you announce to the world it isny happening? Its not your average marriage. Both of them were supposed to have tried to enf it but were told they couldn't.

Camilla was indeed part of them meeting. Camilla wasn't considered the right woman even before she married Parker Bowles because she was of the wrong faith.

Diana was treated appallingly by the royals. There was no help, support for her into the role, coupled with Camilla still being in the background as the Kings mistress it's no wonder her mental health failed.

If you look back there was no template for a young bride as The Queen who has been bought up in that role would have had no idea of the support she would need. It was a different world back then too when the last Queen came to the throne

I don't believe it was a genuine accident. Too many things that don't add up. I am not one for conspiracies either. This is I do believe is a cover up. The truth will never out. The inquest in the U.K was a waste of money. No one was going to come out and say "oh sorry Wills and Harry, M15 bumped your Mom off"

As for the driver on the night he wasn't as drunk as they say he was. No way he would have been able to walk if he was. I could go on as there is too much that doesn't add up 're the "accident"

I agree Camilla is far better suited to Charles though. Just a shame that lives had to be ruined for them to come together.

If Diana had lived and carved out a happy life for herself turn I think they would have had less problems. She died and indirectly they will always have responsibility for that.

Diana had affairs yes however only when she realised Charles was never going to give up Camilla. She was looking for what he couldn't give her.

Yes she was mentally unstable but it's hardly surprising given her childhood and her adulthood with no support and help from anyone in the royal family.

I do agree that it's Diana's boys that saved the royal family has if it wasn't for them, the love and support for them through the public cos of their mom the monarchy would have fallen and very nearly did

Exactly, Ana. She would have probably married him like a shot if he'd asked her in the first place instead of leaving her dangling while he was away at sea.

Camilla was not deemed suitable as she'd been a 'girl about town' - not a virgin in other words. Andrew PB was a philanderer and made her miserable with his affairs so I think it's great that they are now together as some things are meant to be.

I was amazed when Diana said they had only met 13 times before the wedding. They seemed to have nothing in common, he must have been desperate and she seemed to think she was in a Mills and Boon, she apparently read a lot of them. I might have erred towards a conspiracy on the fateful night but how could they make sure she didn't put her safety belt on?

How did they get them to leave the ritz ?

Hear hear Merlotgran!

How did 'they' know they'd take that route? How did they know that the driver wouldn't be stone cold sober and would drive with care and attention, that she wouldn't wear a seat belt, and last but not least, that they wouldn't decide to stay put? as anyone with a grain of sense would have! Murder? bit tenuous I'd say!!

Heavily edited programme and yes she should have worn a seat belt. Sorry to the majority but I was never a fan of Diana.

There was a really good programme on last week about an investigation into the car crash (can't remember which channel though). It was all thoroughly explained and was an accident. Just googled it and found this blurb: (it might be on again I suppose)

About Princess Diana’s Death: Mystery Solved
In Princess Diana’s Death: Mystery Solved internationally renowned detective, Colin McLaren – the man who cracked the case of who really killed JFK in the REELZ documentary JFK: The Smoking Gun – sets out to find answers to questions that still surround the death of Princess Diana. The only independent detective at the crash site in Paris in 1997, McLaren immediately noticed the many mistakes made by the French police. In addition to missing vital clues they were misled by unreliable witnesses and failed to see crucial forensic evidence at the scene. McLaren didn’t. He photographed a trove of evidence while French authorities saw it merely as a car accident and swept away the clues. McLaren re-examines every aspect of the French and British investigations, interviews witnesses and offers viewers the real truth into how and why Diana was killed. His whodunit search sees him track down and confront the driver of a mysterious car that collided with Diana’s car just before her Mercedes slammed into the tunnel.

She wasn't married when they were having a 'dalliance' but she was keen on Andrew PB too.
So when Charles got sent away to sea to get over her because she wasn't suitable (according to Royal Family rules) she married Andrew PB instead.

However, it appears that she is suitable now.

She being Camilla of course.

I like Camilla too, I could never take to Dianna as I thought she was manipulative too.

Times change, even in royal circles Jalimal!!!!

Skweeki,
I'm with you.

I've only just caught up with the programme about the Duchess of Windsor's letters suggesting that she was desperate to get out of marrying the Duke and go back to her husband. If she found herself trapped in spite of being a mature woman who had been married before, then Diana and even Charles had no chance of backing out.

What a silly girl not to wear a seat belt though. She would never have let William and Harry do it.

I watched it as I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. I don't think it revealed anything that we didn't already know. He didn't love her, never did love her and wasn't prepared to give up the Rottweiller. Diana was a young naïve girl. As soon as Charles withdrew any form of affection (which she desperately needed as so young and unworldly) Anyone remotely showing her any kindness or affection in her limited circle - mainly those who worked for her - she was bound to warm to.

The royal family and Charles in particular, who is nothing but a spoilt brat (even now) were completely at fault for not offering her more support. As the queen said herself when confronted by the problem - oh Charles is just impossible! His own mother for goodness sake.

I hope and pray Charles is never crowned King. The 'rottweiller' just wouldn't disappear would she - despicable. How they got William and Harry to accept her considering what she did to their mother I will never quite understand.

William for King - then he can go ahead and modernise and cull the monarchy and take out all those grasping free loaders.

Yes, they were unsuited but Diana was too young to be fully aware of that or of the massive step she was taking in marrying a royal- and a boring, pompous and self-centred royal at that. Charles was fully aware of who and what he wanted but chose to go ahead with the marriage to Diana because it suited the royal agenda.

I think to refer to a young woman as being "like the local bike" is a truly horrible expression and it is interesting that Charles's many dalliances are not referred to in a similar fashion.

I agree with Tegan that Diana should be commended for all she did to de-stigmatise people with leprosy and AIDS and for supporting the campaign to ban land mines. To my mind, apart from her obvious affinity with people, that is her greatest achievement.

I'm hoping with the uncharismastic and hypocritical Charles the royal family will become less and less popular and will eventually fizzle out, or at least be much reduced in size and influence. I'm not a fan of William or Harry, neither of whom seem to be doing very much.

Skweek1 & muddy nails, I'm with you too.
I think the marriage was a mistake on both parts, but I've never been under the self inflicted or family pressure either party was under.
I'm not condoning Charles' behaviour, but he can't be wrong for having an affair and then have people decide Diana was right for doing the same thing-several times over.
The explanations about the accident are like statistics -they can be changed to suit the purpose of the writer or program producer.
What IS wrong (and especially unkind to the princes unless they are making money out of it, in which case . . .) is the constant rehashing of the case. It can't be pleasant to see a constant barrage of information about your parents' poor morals, but if they decide to join in the information flow, then perhaps it gives them a strange sort of gratification.
Unfortunately the press have an easy milk cow to sell their papers, anyone with even a remote link can make money out of it and people are willing to spend hard earned cash to read the same old, same old.

Diana was an immature 19 year old when she married. If she did have a borderline personality disorder as one poster here suggests and people like Nicholas Soames have implied, it is likely the self harming, depression and anxiety would have been noticed from at least her early teens. She soon discovered her husband was a cheat and a liar. She'd to somehow learn to cope with this at the same time as growing up in the public eye and being the young mother of two infants.
Her own childhood, like that of her husband left them ill prepared to manage their lives.

I always had serious misgivings about Charles & Diana. I believe Charles was presented with Diana as a "suitable wife".
Diana fell for the whole fairytale, I think she wanted to escape her family as she hated her Step-Mother. Diana had met Charles when he was dating her sister, perhaps she believed he had finally noticed her. Maybe she had a " teenage crush".

She was a very manipulative woman, I also suspect she would not have started an affair before Harry was born even though she already knew Hewitt (who is alive & living with his Mother). She used the Press to her own ends & then cried "foul" when pictures appeared which she hadn't orchestrated.

She certainly loved the boys but let's not forget that Charles has played a very big part in their upbringing.

Charles & Camilla stopped their affair before the engagement & didn't start it again until it was clear the marriage had broken down. Diana was also a marriage wrecker. I found here comments about Manakee offensive, his poor wife & children.

She was certainly playing with fire with Hasnet & Dodi due to their Religion. What possessed Dodi & Diana to leave the Ritz that night we will never know & yes she should have been wearing a seatbelt, just because she was in a Limo doesn't mean you're above the Law.

I look forward to Charles following the Queen as King with Camilla by his side. I admire Charles for a lot of his foresight, definitely ahead of his time as a "Green", conserving water, using economical fuels in vehicles, organic farming.

William needs time to become more involved in Royal Duties but be allowed to be a parent to George & Charlotte.

I agree Leggs55. But I do think William and Harry need to do many more duties.

lot of Lazy entitled eegits,if it was anyone else holding out their hands for ever increasing amounts of cash we 'd be down on them like a ton of bricks..so why is it OK for queenie and her ever growing band of hangers on? This monarchy has to end when Lizzie dies.I have no major problem with her ,she did what she thought was right with her life and it WAS very different just after the war...but honestly HOW can anyone still believe a monarchy can be justified.How many young people could afford Williams lifestyle on a part time wage ? How many people could be fitted into even ONE of his homes ..and they probably wouldn't get a full refurb every time they decide to move.Its ridiculous ! As for all their recent wailing about their mental health issues ,its all about PR ..anything to keep them in the limelight..just like the sainted Diana ..all tarred with the same brush .They WANT thepress when it suits them and then bad mouth them when it doesn't. Make them do a real job ans see how long they'd last!!

Diana was a very needy woman, no doubt for various reasons. I always felt that, up to a point, she knew what being married to Charles might be like, and maybe had a naive, romantic idea that she could change things. I think that the approval and adulation that she received for the 'good deeds' she did like visiting people in private, (not a very 'Royal' thing to do) and the mines and AIDS charity work, fed that neediness. That's not to say that she wasn't a kind or genuine person. I didn't like the fluttering eyelashes and coy looks that she often gave to the cameras though.

Just two things: first, Charles didn't say 'whatever love means' - he said 'whatever in love means', and I think he was trying to point the difference between 'loving' and 'being in love', which is valid. I think he's been misrepresented here. Also, why is Diana's mother never mentioned? She was around at the time, wasn't she?

No need for the Royal Family. They are costing the tax payers a fortune! It's all ridiculous!