BBC Martin Bashir - Diana shocked.

[justasking111]

The more that comes out about the panorama interview and the way things were invented/forged. Bank statements, telephone records, stories about the family to encourage Diana to talk to Bashir. I just cannot believe what is emerging from this, things that would have influenced me if I had been Diana and no-one verified it independently.

It’s quite easy to draw a direct line from the Panaroma interview to the awful night in Paris. It’s incredibly sad. I remember watching the interview feeling shocked but if I’d known the full story, I’d have felt sickened that a vulnerable person had been exploited to further someone’s career.

I haven’t seen Panorama yet, only the news at 6 but it looked like this situation with faked statements contributed to Diana’s death. Off to see it now on Iplayer.

@HagenDaz

A very furrowed brow.

People say the interview was not a direct cause of her death but I disagree. It was the catalyst for a spiral of events.

Yes. I think so too.

Harrys epistle is a bit woolly, there is no chance of misunderstanding where William stands.

The timing is weird. Why now? 25 years on?

This feels like an extension of the ongoing attempts to rehabilitate Charles ahead of his accession.

Exactly what part of Diana's interview was false? It may have been embarrassing, and perhaps Martin Bashir manipulated his way to the interview, but what part of her account was false? No, the painful part was all the truths she told.

If William is so livid, perhaps it's time for him to speak out about the ongoing harassment of his sister in law and nephew - which eventually led to the suicidality of his sister in law and his brother choosing to emigrate with his family. William's "livid-ness" is a nonsense and something about all this is very contrived.

Goodness, that’s quite the statement from William. No holds barred. Good for him.

Bloody hell. He's furious, isn't he? I can't say I hugely blame him. I love the BBC but this was and is a disaster.

The timing is weird. Why now? 25 years on?

Because there’s just been a six month official enquiry which published its report today.

Some new details came to light last year and Earl Spencer made it known he was shown forged documents & had notes from a clandestine meeting. It’s all been unraveling since then.

I very much doubt Spencer would lift a little finger to help rehabilitate Prince Charles. He wants the truth to come out, to explain why Diana was so paranoid at the end, to rehabilitate her memory.

It is horrific to read how underhand and manipulative they were in trying to get the interview, they tried to scare her into doing it..

What I don't understand though, is why was her brother involved at the beginning, why was he having meetings with the BBC and Bashir ?

The timing is weird. Why now? 25 years on?

Picsinred ‘manipulated’ is hardly what Martin Bashir did. Forgery more like.
Do you not think if a crime is committed a long time ago and new evidence comes to light then the crime should be investigated?
The BBC is supposed to be honest and impartial - but maybe you think what Martin Bashir did is perfectly acceptable, or maybe you welcome anything that causes grief to the royal family.

That was a powerful powerful statement by William. It's hard to imagine the hurt and anger he must be feeling now

This is genuinely shocking and I’m not easily shocked. I think that the BBC will have a hard time coming back from this whilst keeping its whole “impartial national broadcaster” image intact. When you think of the relationship that the crown and the BBC traditionally have- this could really be at stake now. If I was Prince William I would have a tough time maintaining that monarch/national broadcaster relationship now. There will be big repercussions from this.

I very much doubt Spencer would lift a little finger to help rehabilitate Prince Charles. He wants the truth to come out, to explain why Diana was so paranoid at the end, to rehabilitate her memory.

A little bit from column A, a little bit from column B.

No doubt Spencer wants to rehabilitate his sister's memory, but also the Spencers have long been associated with the Crown, Earl Spencer's nephew will not long from now sit on the throne, and I have no doubt he would like the rift to disppear and a return to the long respectable association of old. That's how these things work.

They mainly concentrated on the documents , but telling lies about her closest staff and being bugged as well ,shocking . When you watch the interview now it makes so much more sense . She must have been paranoid

Also,we dont know what else he told her privately do we ?

We’re there rumours she had been told Charles had got the someone pregnant ? Or was that a myth?

@Andante57

The timing is weird. Why now? 25 years on?

Picsinred ‘manipulated’ is hardly what Martin Bashir did. Forgery more like.
Do you not think if a crime is committed a long time ago and new evidence comes to light then the crime should be investigated?
The BBC is supposed to be honest and impartial - but maybe you think what Martin Bashir did is perfectly acceptable, or maybe you welcome anything that causes grief to the royal family.

I think if the royal family and the media were also focusing on changing how the media is presently having towards current members of the royal family, any of this concern might seem real. That there is such focus on the hounding of an unfortunate woman 25 years ago... but yet no focus on the present day, ongoing hounding of another mentally fragile member of the same family? Right now? Still happening? Meh.

@artquejtion

It is horrific to read how underhand and manipulative they were in trying to get the interview, they tried to scare her into doing it..

What I don't understand though, is why was her brother involved at the beginning, why was he having meetings with the BBC and Bashir ?

Bashir approached Spencer first and showed him a different set of forged statements about one of Spencer‘a employees. Then he got Spencer to introduce him to Diana.

Tonight’s Panorama programme explains it reasonably well. Although it could have done with being twice the length to explain the whole saga properly. I think spect the BBC management aren’t too keen to dwell, though.

I feel so sad about this. Diana must have felt tormented, not being able to trust anyone around her. It’s so bloody sad!

And it’s not just Bashir who needs the book thrown at him but those at the BBC who ignored staff and believed Bashir.

Jimmy Saville and now this, something must be done to the BBC to ensure these things can never happen again.

PicsInred I completely agree. The timing is odd. And when you think about the many, many underhand things the press routinely do, why does Prince William speak out so strongly now.

I absolutely, of course, think what the programme makers did was terrible, that goes without saying. And I understand why William would be angry. It's just that...

I believe the Queen is about to announce her retirement from public duties (not abdicate) which effectively means Charles becomes acting monarch. It's obvious he's not very popular and his history with Diana is one of the main reasons (Harry and Meghan's interview won't have helped.) I think it's a strong move to change the narrative. Plus, kicking the BBC when it's down will be a popular move in some circles too.

I am not condoning what happened at all. But we will look back on the BBC as it was as the golden age of information broadcasting and a key, absolutely key part of how our country is viewed. Lost. Be appalled by what the programme makers did by all means but don't let sentimentality of suggestibility as far as the BBC is concerned blind you to what is going on here.

He was his mother’s confidant

He was 13 years old. He watched the Panorama interview in his housemaster’s study in Eton. Imagine going into classes the next day.

We’re there rumours she had been told Charles had got the someone pregnant ? Or was that a myth?

Tiggy Legge-Bourke. Charles Spencer confirmed last year that Bashir was the source of that misinformation.

It explains so much. I remember at the time discussing in the pub that she seemed to have gone quite mad. Now we know why.

The BBC cover up was almost worse, though. Until that it was just a case of Bashir being a bad apple, and the graphic designer being a stooge.

Andrew Neil is weighing in now.

Kick the BBC (there are a number of rich and powerful people who will gain from this)
Rehabilitate Charles

That is what's happening here

I thought that Diana died in a car accident? It sounds like the BBC treated her badly but come on. That's a huge stretch. She'd already had 15 years of the RF and a load of secret recordings and 'friends' selling stories to the papers. As if this led to a sudden lack of trust in humanity. She died because the driver of her car was drunk and because she didn't wear a seatbelt.

We're seeing industrial levels of hypocrisy in some of the newspaper reports on this. Special mention to the Mail.

I'm puzzled. Faking up bank statements is appalling, but how did it affect what Diana said at the interview. And how does all this relate to whoever called Henri Paul in to drive drunk, and the decision not to wear seatbelts in a speeding car?