Martin Bashir???

[CuriousaboutSamphire]

What the hell?!?!?!?!

@MrsTwitcher

Are they saying that they showed Earl S. false bank statements to gain his trust, were those investigated and shown to the police or the security services and protection people to see if they were genuine or did they just take them at face value? that's what I don't understand.

There wasn’t a “they” who could take them for verification. Diana was sneaking around behind the backs of her staff, even hiding the meetings from her butler and housekeeper. Definitely not telling her office staff (who Bashir had said were her enemies). Panorama bosses were making the programme without the knowledge of BBC management. All completely hush hush so that neither the BBC or the palaces could find out and cancel the programme.

I agree if Bashir (and/or whoever sanctioned it) did all that, he was very much in the wrong - but it's wrong in itself, not because of the consequences.

I thought at the time that she wanted to tell her story, blow the royal family apart, get sympathy and attention, and give charles a right kicking. Tbh I didn't blame her for that. And the divorce was inevitable anyway. No, it wasn't good for her kids but nor were a lot of things that both Diana and Charles did, although I blame the whole set up and the fact that he couldn't marry who he wanted, for the fact that they were both so unhappy.

It's all a bit weird, quadruple heart bypass, gravely ill from covid yet photo'd with walking down hte street with a take away on Friday.

Whatever happened I doubt MB was the power behind it.

I'm sorry to hear he is very ill but he has got a lot to answer for. He managed to build a very successful career on the back of that interview and indirectly ruined the lives of others along the way.

Why all the '???' and '!!!'? Is it such an astonishing, world-shaking revelation?

@HappyThursdays

I think it's disgraceful. The man lied, got documents forged to gaslight Diana. Whatever you think of her or her brother, this man should be punished. As someone else said on the thread, if we let journalists behave like this - where does it stop?!

I'm amazed that there isn't more outrage tbh. And to say he can't answer because he's seriously ill when he's been caught walking outside to pick up a takeaway is taking the piss!

Our money pays for this man to have a job - he should be called to account!

Exactly

Look, I can only explain for so long... 4th post... top of the thread... I was listening, posting and looking for more information at the same time. I was interested...

You could have chose to ignore it!

You could have chosen to to read it.

You could have chosen to add to the discussion as it is now!

But you chose, 100 posts in, to repeat tedious snarks.

Why did you choose to do that?

Jesus
Came onto the thread with not a clue what it was all about, but if this is true, it's absolutely fucking sick.
Needs holding to account, I'm old enough to remember the media absolutely hounding her and if she was gaslighted like that all for a story they need rooting out and held to account
To those saying "gossip" it's hardly the same, is it?!

This. Let the poor woman rest in peace. It can’t be undone

No, it can't be undone, but what about those responsible?
Should they just be allowed to get away with it if they did it?

@jessstan1

Oh so what.

Journalists use dishonest means to get their stories. Is that news?

Bashir is now a scapegoat.

Seriously you honestly think to deliberately lie to someone to get them to take part in an interview is just one of those things? To manipulate an already vulnerable woman to believe the people around her are constantly spying on her?

If journalists routinely behave like this then yes it bloody should be news!

Bashir isn't a scapegoat, he's had a successful career off the back of this. He should be held to account

You have to be innocent to be a scapegoat, don’t you?

It does matter when a public service, state funded broadcaster does stuff like this.

Exactly. We're constantly told how wonderful the BBC is, in order to justify the tax (sorry TV licence) that we have to pay for it. They need to be accountable and to comply morally and legally with the laws of the land etc if they want to continue to enjoy public funding. The whole rationale of the BBC is that it is fair/impartial/honest etc which sets it apart from the other media outlets.

It's like how the BBC consistently fails to report on the 3 million self employed excluded from Covid support and failed to report on the IR35 fiascos (personal service company tax). The BBC and their presenters/producers etc had their noses in the trough by extensive use of personal service companies to reduce tax and avoid national insurance. They were scared stiff of reporting on any of that because their own use/abuse of personal service companies would be thrown back at them.

We really can't have a state funded broadcaster who is afraid of certain news stories because it shows them in a bad light.

BBC = scum. Would love to not pay the licence.

I think this is significant even after all of this time. MB was not just a journalist he was working for the UK's public service broadcaster. Maybe I need to have a little more sympathy for H's paranoia about the UK media. If he knows about any of this no wonder he hates them.

My main concern here is what happened to the graphic designer - he seems to have been scapegoated. Can't see why he would have been blocked from working while the journalist who asked for them was made religious editor for the Beeb. Seems very unfair

I think this is significant even after all of this time. MB was not just a journalist he was working for the UK's public service broadcaster. Maybe I need to have a little more sympathy for H's paranoia about the UK media. If he knows about any of this no wonder he hates them.

Yes a lot of things are starting to make sense now. And how ironic to be made religious editor after pulling a stunt like that.

Maybe I need to have a little more sympathy for H's paranoia about the UK media. If he knows about any of this no wonder he hates them.

If he knows any of this (he will now) he needs to completely disengage from all media and go live the simple life on an African animal reserve or something. For his own sanity. William doesn’t even get that option. I can imagine William really becoming very anti BBC over this. He doesn’t like media at the best of times. BBC are supposed to be more responsible than this.

Her brother is the only character in this business who is concerned for her reputation

I wouldn't even want to assume that, TBH - I've always thought there's a certain self interested cruelty about the man, like his father before him

The one thing which does seem clear is that there's an awful lot of dirt swirling around this, too much of it among those who enjoy a lack of accountability - and as said, I doubt any of them will wish to forego that any time soon

Always thought there was something very "whiffy" about that interview, and that interviewer! It was just all a bit creepy ....

Some serious accountability there, if this is true. I half watched the guy on the news last night saying Bashir told him the statements he mocked up were to be used as "props", but he didn't know the purpose or context they were going to be used in.

^^This

Being asked to mock up a document wouldn't have been that unusual, especially something where the original might refer to other transactions/third parties unrelated to the issue at hand. What the designer said was that they were requested in a much shorter time frame than usual - I think I read somewhere that this had made him suspicious and that he had reported it to his manager. If that is so then scapegoating him as has happened makes him yet another victim of some unscrupulous journalism and I'd like to know which BBC governor threw him to the wolves TBH. But no doubt as he will be one of the great and the good the old boys will pile in to let him continue to shelter behind a redaction.....

I thought his Michael Jackson interview was a disgusting piece of manipulation and downright dishonest in some respects. It come as Zero surprise he has done this. Nasty, nasty man.

Charles Spencer was shown the forged bank statements by Bashir, and was convinced enough to arrange a meeting with Diana. He took copious notes during the meeting, of all of the things that Bashir said - Charles' affair with Tiggy/HM with heart condition/spy watch for William. There were 14/15 accusations in all. Apparently Spencer was also told that PC hated his then wife and wanted her dead (PC had only met once, at their wedding), at which point Spencer realised Bashir was a fantasist. The meeting ended, and Charles Spencer apologised to Diana for wasting her time.

She was sufficiently guillible to be taken in by the lies, which reinforced her paranoia, and kept in touch directly with MB, without her brother's knowledge, culminating in the documentary.

Charles Spencer tried to raise the issue at the time, but couldn't prove that he had been shown forgeries. The BBC conducted an internal investigation which, surprise surprise, found that there were only minor failings, and that Diana hadn't made her decision to proceed based upon the forgeries.

Only recently has the 'forger' come forward, which is why Charles Spencer and the BBC have resurrected the issue.

Maybe I need to have a little more sympathy for H's paranoia about the UK media. If he knows about any of this no wonder he hates them

Always thought good on him and M for getting out and away.
I see The Daily Fail has their claws out past few days, it's awful

Of course this is is significant now, it’s a current issue with some serious allegations made.
If it turns out to be true then it’s disgusting, dishonest and reprehensible behaviour.
I also read that he made promises to parents of bereaved children that the BBC would pay to get bloodstained clothes reanalysed for DNA but never did and then denied taking the clothes which were subsequently ‘lost’.

It sounds as if there was gaslighting and Martin is the ultimate DARVO.