Diana Inquest: Fayed's Lawyer Steps Back From Murder Theory?
Written by Joanne Leyland
Friday, 29 February 2008
The
lawyer representing Mohamed Al Fayed at the official British inquest into the
deaths of his son Dodi and Diana, Princess of Wales has claimed that the events
of August 31st 1997 may have been a "scare tactic" which went too
far.
This theory could be interpreted as suggesting that Mr Fayed’s legal team are
now stepping back from accusations of "murder" ahead of the verdict of the jury which could come at any time after March (no specific timeline has been set for the end of the
inquest).
Upon hearing the comments from Mr Fayed’s lawyer, the coroner Lord Justice Scott
Baker interrupted proceedings to seek clarification, asking: "Mr Mansfield, are you really suggesting
that the collision was a plan to scare that went wrong and it was a plan that
could have been orchestrated by somebody in MI6? Is that what you are really
getting at?"
"Because I think the witness ought to have a chance of dealing with
reality rather than amorphous speculation."
Asked about such a theory, the witness who cannot be identified due to the fact
he/she is a serving or retired member of the British intelligence agency denied
that such a plan would ever be implemented.
Looking
ahead to the time when the court will finally hear a verdict on the
deaths of the two British victims of the Paris crash - Henri Paul was a
French citizen - Mr
Mansfield QC told the jurors in a somewhat unfortunate piece of
phrasing that
they face the task of "looking at the evidence and seeing where it drives
you".
Comment: Perhaps Mr Fayed can see where the inquest is heading . Most people can . He has given this fight all he has , but in the end the deaths of Diana and his son will not be brought home to the perpetrators . Even Diana's ex-husband who she named has not been questioned . The cover-up and the delays have been simply amazing from the beginning
Name: anyacat
Comment: When did the secular al Fayed become a fundamentalist terrorist? The cap, by the way, is American and has an American Flag on the front. So, I assume Harry wore it by choice.
Name: Emily Elizabeth Windsor-Cragg
Comment: If the Royal Hosue were innocent, they would have pressed for the truth from First Responders, and they would have demonstrated that MI-6 had been taken OFF Diana's case.
That's my take on it.
Name: exploora
Comment: I am starting to look closer at the theory now, considering, and I am making an assumption here, that the government does not only allow but encourage young men, like Harry, to wear a cap saying "we do bad things to bad people", when in a foreign land to fight against terrorism, and if another young who is Afghani, could read that, who probably has nothing to do with the Taliban but could still get pretty angry while reading that,could respond without planning too, which in return gives the other, the foreigner, the one who is supposed to be fighting terrorism, the license to kill.
No judge, no jury, just the license to kill.
I understand the caps are supposed to boost morale, there are stake holders in the equation which probably would feel less hopeless if they were included in the "agenda" whether it is secret, open, or what have.
I mean if the authorities did suspect Di of collaborating with the "enemy", they could possibly have the "authority" to kill her. And policy related to minutes and memos as we have learned in this hearing, do not have followed.
The scarry thing, is it only took one, as I am aware of, assination attempt to kill JFK.
Shelley's post was very interesting.
Name: anyacat
Comment: Apparently, Al Fayed is paving the way for a new round of inquiries in the event that these findings match those of the other two inquests. He and his supporters will simply not accept that sometimes and accident is an accident.
Name: Monika
Comment: For Fayed, this is a rather large step backwards.
Name: shelley
Comment: Over 60 assination attempts on Castro makes one wonder about such things.
