To think Princess Di was killed

[Lavenderfarmcottage]

There OK I said it. You hoo, crazy conspiracy theorist over here…

Yes, I know they had an inquiry though anyone high up enough to kill a Royal could snowball an Inquiry or influence the outcome ? I think it’s naive to think the law is this perfect thing.

Ive always found it odd that she was labelled a “loose cannon” by the press and was campaigning against landmines. It was said that it caused a lot of noses out of joint in politics. I would have thought that weapons dealers and the industry would have taken a huge hit.

There aren’t many celebrities or organisations that could have taken on the weapons or arms industry as powerfully as Diana. It was until then an issue that nobody touched.

Since her death there’s still landmines and the issue has never really been addressed.

I wonder if she’d been alive today what she’d be doing. Not hard to imagine her visiting children impacted by war and maybe even Palestinian refugees, beaming images around the world to restore some sanity and humanity.

I dont think we realise the humanity, bravery and brilliance she had. Could have been going to glamorous events and being a Princess but instead she was carrying on even when powerful people were upset.

I wonder how powerful those people were or was it someone British. Men don’t take a liking to women with power and it amazes me more that she wasn’t killed deliberately in the context of this.

What are the chances she would die at such a young age and to not be wearing a seat belt seems bizarre to me. Just too many coincidences.

I assume the OP also believes the moon is made from blue cheese

I think there were way too many variables for her to be killed. Far more efficient ways of doing it than that. For a start she could have out her seatbelt on

@hihelenhi There's no reason to think she'd have been in feuds with her daughters in law! Honestly, if she were a man there would not be half the criticisms of her relationships and private life. Lots of influential men have difficult relationships, but the world does not dismiss them as thick, hysterical or attention seekers. It acknowledges their achievements.

Carole Malone wrote this article that was published in the Mirror the morning of Diana’s death… and was swiftly pulled! There were lots of negative headlines about Diana’s relationship with Dodi too - because he was Mohammed Al Fayed’s son, and his father had a poor reputation (deserved!) and Dodi’s was seen as a playboy. Plus he was currently being publicly sued by his ex-fiancée for dumping her without warning as soon as he met Diana.

It’s fair to say the press coverage of Diana in the weeks before her death was not unversally glowing. Her attendance at Gianni Versace’s funeral and a trip to Bosnia to further her landline campaign were positively covered, however.

Again. Harry didn't matter by the time he married Meghan. He was unimportant as there were now three direct heirs to the throne, with Catherine still in the baby making game. He could probably have married the stable cleaner at Balmoral and it would have been permitted, rather than put up with the fuss and fallout. It would have been rather strange that Meghan was allowed in his orbit at all if that wasn't the case.

The question is would William have been allowed to marry a mixed raced twice (if rumours are true) divorced actress approaching the end of her fecundity?

Now that's where you really would have seen if race, age, and station matters.

Well I was only slightly younger than Diana. I remember hearing on the radio in our 6th form formroom that she and Charles had got engaged. I watched all the coverage of their marriage, separation and divorce. My DC1 was 4 months old when I watched all the coverage of her death.

Diana was not murdered. She eschewed her palace-provided security and instead relied on her wealthy playboy boyfriend.

She got in a car with a drunk driver, without wearing a seatbelt. He drove too fast and lost control, and she died because she wasn't wearing a seatbelt. She absolutely was reckless; there is no rational defence of her behaviour. Plus they were supposed to stay at the Ritz - why didn't they just do that and avoid the awful paparazzi? What was the worst that could happen though - the paps get a photo, big ups!

Diana wasn't a threat to anyone planting landmines!!!

It was a tragic and very avoidable accident, nothing else.

One of my friends, who normally always put her selt belt on, didn't on one short car journey. She was involved in a freak accident, the car rolled on her and she died. Had she been wearing a seat belt she would have sustained only minor injuries. So yes, while it might be unlucky to be in a car accident the one time you don't wear a seat belt, it does happen.

She sold papers and magazines as much as ever, sure but the tone had become far more critical, especially after the Martin Bashir interview — the paparazzi and tabloid journalists thought she could no longer plead a desire for privacy when she’d put so much out there. There were lots of negative stories about her relationship with the Al Fayeds, There was a story about her pocketing the profit from auctioning dresses, and some Tory tabloids supported the idea that her anti-landlines work made her a ‘loose cannon’. And her close relationship with some journalists pissed off others.

Except the Royal Family were totally shocked by the publics reaction.

This description is pretty harrowing.

Poor Diana.

No Wine here - only coffee!

This sounds entirely plausible to me.

Personally, I think it was a terrible accident.

Diana will remain forever young and beautiful, an Iconic beautiful woman I felt honoured to meet, but I'd rather she was in her Sixties, enjoying life.

Absolutely her popularity was starting to wane. All the disclosures of multiple lovers, some of them married, whilst railing at Charles for his one affair, had started to tarnish her image.

Hanging out with Dodi Al Fayed wasn't winning her any fans either.

@HeronWing she was not a saint and not treated like one. Some of the right wing press were very unhappy at her land mines campaign because it looked like she was going to force the government to make political changes.
She was still incredibly popular.

I think it’s fairly unlucky to be in a car accident the one time you don’t wear a seatbelt. I also think with paparazzi pursuing you’d put your seat belt on.

Diana’s sister said afterwards that she always wore her seatbelt, but this wasn’t true. Diana was photographed and videoed quite a bit while alive (understatement!) and so there is lots of footage of her sitting the back of a moving car without a seatbelt on.

She also chose to sit with her back to window so as not to be photographed. Here’s a photo of Diana taken as Henry Paul drove away from the Ritz - it wouldn’t be possible to sit like that and wear a seatbelt. Obviously, a mistake, but she wasn’t to know what would happen.

If she were still alive these days she'd have been called out for her bullshit and cancelled long ago..

She was, but the cracks were beginning to show. There's only so long you can play the victim, while behaving badly yourself.

I would love to have seen the trajectory of her life continue, because whatever she was or was not, she was endlessly fascinating. I do think that her relationships going forward would always have put her in the spotlight. I don't think she spent as much time with her boys as she wanted the public to think. They must have been as damaged by her unwise relationships as they were by Charles's relationship with Camilla. At least Charles was in love with Camilla, and has remained in a stable relationship.

When was she dating that doctor bloke before Dodi?

Also why was she (allegedly) having periods? I would have expected a woman as high profile, as well connected as the mother of the future King of England and engaging in sexual relations to be on round the clock contraception. Periods should be null to just a one 'show'

The tabloids have always ripped people apart, Amy Winehouse comes to mind, poor girl. She was still loved and had fans though, so what the tabloids say tells you nothing about how the public feel.

I've never understood what was the big deal with her having a photo taken that night? There must be thousands of photos of her?

@wigsonthegreenandhatsforthelifting Your comments are the nasty rewriting of Diana after her death.
William and Harry were boarding in Eton. This was decided by the Royal family.

Then there is the matter of why they embalmed her so soon after she had sadly died

That was also gone into at the inquest. The short answer was 'It was August'.

Yes, as I said, I’m not suggesting otherwise. What I’m saying is that the tone of tabloid coverage of her had turned nasty, and I think would have got nastier had she lived and aged.

Like it or not, the tabloids influence public opinion.

Her series of affairs did nothing to enhance her public image. Whether it was Oliver Hoare, James Hewitt, 'Squidgygate', Will Carling...

Breaking up marriages has never been a good look!

Did you meet her? That's lovely! Wish I had!

I agree, I think the same.

She had massive public appeal when she was 'shy Di' but she grew up to be a woman who, despite her charitable efforts, basically shat where she ate in terms of affairs. She also used the press to her advantage. That was going to come back to bite her in the ass at some point.

No it had not turned nasty. Read the newspapers and magazines in the months before her death.