Diana Spencer, Princess of Wales

[Rumpel]

5 of 5 say …. no

 

[nota bene]

Here are some photos published in 2007 of the Mercedes: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...es-amazing-pictures-Diana-car-took-death.html

 

[bomberfox]

i dunno, it was just really hard for me to relate to royalty so at the time it just wasnt that hard hitting for me.

 

[JoeyJoystick]

was there a conspiracy in her life?

Hi Rumpel,

No, I really do not think there is a conspiracy here. I do admit, it may have been very convenient for some people. But she was also still loved by many on the day she passed.


Joey

 

[nota bene]

The shame is that 25 years later, she still can't rest in peace and that her younger son is damaging her reputation.

 

[Higgins86]

The shame is that 25 years later, she still can't rest in peace and that her younger son is damaging her reputation.

She would be over the moon that Harry stuck his fingers up to the royal establishment and pout his wife first.

 

[nota bene]

She would be over the moon that Harry stuck his fingers up to the royal establishment and pout his wife first.

I'm enjoying watching the Sussexes circle the drain. I don't think that Harry's mother would appreciate at all the renewed interest in her because of Spare (And Omid Scobie's Endgame, otherwise known as Spare 2, which will drop on the 28th).

 

[Higgins86]

I'm enjoying watching the Sussexes circle the drain. I don't think that Harry's mother would appreciate at all the renewed interest in her because of Spare (And Omid Scobie's Endgame, otherwise known as Spare 2, which will drop on the 28th).

I think you have a poor understanding of just how much Diana hated the Royal family and the British Press by the end of her life. The fact that Harry has managed to successfully sue the British press whilst getting to tell his own story would be something she would completely get behind.

 

[nota bene]

I think you have a poor understanding of just how much Diana hated the Royal family and the British Press by the end of her life. The fact that Harry has managed to successfully sue the British press whilst getting to tell his own story would be something she would completely get behind.

You apparently have little understanding of how Diana played the media. https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/share/81f2c07a-ece0-4bb7-841f-08baeab9e0c3

To which of Harry's lawsuits are you referring?

 

[Higgins86]

You apparently have little understanding of how Diana played the media. https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/share/81f2c07a-ece0-4bb7-841f-08baeab9e0c3

To which of Harry's lawsuits are you referring?

You think Diana played the media????? lol.

The media played her like a fiddle for years. Completely destroyed her.

As for Harry he's won several defamation cases and just last week a judge sided with him in his privacy lawsuit which will now go to trial.

MSN

 

[nota bene]

You think Diana played the media????? lol.

The media played her like a fiddle for years. Completely destroyed her.

As for Harry he's won several defamation cases and just last week a judge sided with him in his privacy lawsuit which will now go to trial.

MSN

So you still buy the doe-eyed innocent routine? How sweet. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/jun/17/biography.monarchy

So never mind the histrionic personality disorder or the fact that she cheated first and with many, many more people, including married men whom she harassed (e.g. calling Oliver Hoare's home over a hundred times a day), or that because of Martin Bashir's duplicity she became paranoid and convinced that the Palace was out to kill her. She was a real person, a deeply flawed but good-hearted person, and no saint. Brilliant at playing the paps. Ha, even now naifs think she was victimized by Charles.

Which defamation cases has Harry won?

Prince Harry and his lawsuits against the press

Prince Harry's lawsuit against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday, can go to trial, London's High Court ruled on Friday.

www.reuters.com

I can't keep up with them all, but I did find utterly hilarious this dimwit's court testimony in June. He actually expected the other side to provide HIS evidence.

 

[Higgins86]

So you still buy the doe-eyed innocent routine? How sweet. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/jun/17/biography.monarchy

So never mind the histrionic personality disorder or the fact that she cheated first and with many, many more people, including married men whom she harassed (e.g. calling Oliver Hoare's home over a hundred times a day), or that because of Martin Bashir's duplicity she became paranoid and convinced that the Palace was out to kill her. She was a real person, a deeply flawed but good-hearted person, and no saint. Brilliant at playing the paps. Ha, even now naifs think she was victimized by Charles.

Which defamation cases has Harry won?

Prince Harry and his lawsuits against the press

Prince Harry's lawsuit against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday, can go to trial, London's High Court ruled on Friday.

www.reuters.com

I can't keep up with them all, but I did find utterly hilarious this dimwit's court testimony in June. He actually expected the other side to provide HIS evidence.

doe-eyed routine? lol.... they literally chased her until she literally died.

Our print media were and remain instructive, illegal, manipulative, and dangerous. Fact you seem to think Diana of all people had any kind of hold over them its utterly bizarre. Also don't really know why you seem to be against Harry putting them in their place? His lawsuits are not only important but backed by other high profile celebrities and politicians who have also experienced having their phones and emails hacked by the press. Why don't you go ask the parents of Milly Dowler what they think of Harrys privacy case.

 

[nota bene]

doe-eyed routine? lol.... they literally chased her until she literally died.

Our print media were and remain instructive, illegal, manipulative, and dangerous. Fact you seem to think Diana of all people had any kind of hold over them its utterly bizarre. Also don't really know why you seem to be against Harry putting them in their place? His lawsuits are not only important but backed by other high profile celebrities and politicians who have also experienced having their phones and emails hacked by the press. Why don't you go ask the parents of Milly Dowler what they think of Harrys privacy case.

You're trying to tie Harry's privacy case to Milly Dowler? Alrighty then.

 

[Pippi Longstock]

doe-eyed routine? lol.... they literally chased her until she literally died.

Our print media were and remain instructive, illegal, manipulative, and dangerous. Fact you seem to think Diana of all people had any kind of hold over them its utterly bizarre. Also don't really know why you seem to be against Harry putting them in their place? His lawsuits are not only important but backed by other high profile celebrities and politicians who have also experienced having their phones and emails hacked by the press. Why don't you go ask the parents of Milly Dowler what they think of Harrys privacy case.

Imagine having such disdain for someone who is dead. Everyone saw how the press hounded her and how much of a used tampon her husband was.

 

[Mindful]

The JFK assassination is correctly called the granddaddy of all conspiracy theories!

But here, the iconic woman who died was only 36 and had been brilliant at playing the press, so that after the notorious Bashir interview (during which she said that her marriage was a little crowded with three people in it), every bought the mean, coldhearted, cheating husband routine, and this really did make people suspect perfidy.

She also said Charles would never be King. That was enough for the Crown to say “off with her head”.

OTOH, she wasn’t wearing a seatbelt, whereas her bodyguard was, and he survived.

But l’ve often wondered what were they doing careering around Paris, going from venue to venue, knowing full well they were being pursued by the Paparazzi. When they could have chosen a quiet night in at the Ritz hotel.

 

[Pippi Longstock]

People can't leave her alone in her death because they worship the church King and the truth hurts.

 

[Rumpel]

question …. who played whom more?

 

[nota bene]

She also said Charles would never be King. That was enough for the Crown to say “off with her head”.

OTOH, she wasn’t wearing a seatbelt, whereas her bodyguard was, and he survived.

But l’ve often wondered what were they doing careering around Paris, going from venue to venue, knowing full well they were being pursued by the Paparazzi. When they could have chosen a quiet night in at the Ritz hotel.

There have been multiple inquests; this issue is long resolved. Such a tragedy, but Diana wasn't murdered. She refused royal protection officers because Martin Bashir's evil machinations had her spun out.

Diana Had 80 Percent Chance of Survival if She Wore Seat Belt—Investigator

Princess Diana "would have been badly injured" but "probably" not killed if she wore a seatbelt, an official police investigator said.

www.newsweek.com

Princess’ death was avoidable, expert says Diana should have let Scotland Yard guard her, security consultant says

Princess Diana would still be alive if she had allowed Scotland Yard to protect her, an international security consultant said yesterday. “The accident was completely avoidable,” said R…

www.baltimoresun.com

 

[Mindful]

There have been multiple inquests; this issue is long resolved. Such a tragedy, but Diana wasn't murdered. She refused royal protection officers because Martin Bashir's evil machinations had her spun out.

Diana Had 80 Percent Chance of Survival if She Wore Seat Belt—Investigator

Princess Diana "would have been badly injured" but "probably" not killed if she wore a seatbelt, an official police investigator said.

www.newsweek.com

Princess’ death was avoidable, expert says Diana should have let Scotland Yard guard her, security consultant says

Princess Diana would still be alive if she had allowed Scotland Yard to protect her, an international security consultant said yesterday. “The accident was completely avoidable,” said R…

www.baltimoresun.com

Drunk driver, and no seat belt, and speeding. A recipe for disaster.

I went to look at the Pont de l'Alma when l was in Paris, to take in the whole setting. That tunnel was very short in length.

 

[Higgins86]

You're trying to tie Harry's privacy case to Milly Dowler? Alrighty then.

Absolutely…. They are still using the same tactics hence the lawsuit from Harry and others. Keep up.

 

[nota bene]

Absolutely…. They are still using the same tactics hence the lawsuit from Harry and others. Keep up.

Harry has three cases ongoing. Here, you're referring to the MGN one.

The prince who fell to Earth

During his day in court, Harry seemed to have a sparse understanding of how journalism works.

www.newstatesman.com

So do you think he "chanced" into David Sherborne through Uncle Elton? (However this case is resolved, Sherborne wins.) From the Guardian:

There is no call data​

Unlike previous successful hacking claims, there is no call data to back up Harry’s allegations against MGN.

The barrister representing MGN said that there was no call data between Harry’s phone and any MGN journalist, whereas there was call data in previous and forthcoming litigation involving other newspaper groups. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/07/what-we-learned-from-prince-harrys-day-in-court

From the Daily Beast [bolding mine]:

Harry and his legal team submitted a witness statement saying why they believed each of these 33 articles were illegally sourced, and Green’s job was to knock down the allegations.

Green did repeatedly succeed in doing just that because Harry does not have any hard evidence that his phone was hacked.

So a pattern emerged in which Green would ask Harry why he believed a story was based on hacked intel, Harry would say he couldn’t see how the story could not have been based on hacked intel, and Green would say he was speculating, and Harry would be forced either to agree or resort to saying it was difficult to to prove very carefully covered-up criminal activity carried out on burner phones. https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...ing-cross-examination-with-credibility-intact

Harry, besides disrespectfully not appearing in court on the first day he was called, embarrassed himself by his lack of knowledge. Here is the Telegraph's live blog, and you can read for yourself how frequently Harry was unaware that palace sources and various publications had published info that he claimed was obtained by hacking: https://web.archive.org/web/2023061...rror-phone-hacking-evidence-court-case-live1/

 

[Higgins86]

Harry has three cases ongoing. Here, you're referring to the MGN one.

The prince who fell to Earth

During his day in court, Harry seemed to have a sparse understanding of how journalism works.

www.newstatesman.com

So do you think he "chanced" into David Sherborne through Uncle Elton? (However this case is resolved, Sherborne wins.) From the Guardian:

There is no call data​

Unlike previous successful hacking claims, there is no call data to back up Harry’s allegations against MGN.

The barrister representing MGN said that there was no call data between Harry’s phone and any MGN journalist, whereas there was call data in previous and forthcoming litigation involving other newspaper groups. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/07/what-we-learned-from-prince-harrys-day-in-court

From the Daily Beast [bolding mine]:

Harry and his legal team submitted a witness statement saying why they believed each of these 33 articles were illegally sourced, and Green’s job was to knock down the allegations.

Green did repeatedly succeed in doing just that because Harry does not have any hard evidence that his phone was hacked.

So a pattern emerged in which Green would ask Harry why he believed a story was based on hacked intel, Harry would say he couldn’t see how the story could not have been based on hacked intel, and Green would say he was speculating, and Harry would be forced either to agree or resort to saying it was difficult to to prove very carefully covered-up criminal activity carried out on burner phones. https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...ing-cross-examination-with-credibility-intact

Harry, besides disrespectfully not appearing in court on the first day he was called, embarrassed himself by his lack of knowledge. Here is the Telegraph's live blog, and you can read for yourself how frequently Harry was unaware that palace sources and various publications had published info that he claimed was obtained by hacking: https://web.archive.org/web/2023061...rror-phone-hacking-evidence-court-case-live1/

You may not like Prince Harry but his win against the Mirror is huge – and he’s not finished yet | James Hanning

Piers Morgan now has a problem, but so too does much of the press, says James Hanning, author and former deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday

www.theguardian.com

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-67707931?src_origin=BBCS_BBC

Looks like the High Court disagrees with your assessment. Huge win for Harry.

 

[nota bene]

You may not like Prince Harry but his win against the Mirror is huge – and he’s not finished yet | James Hanning

Piers Morgan now has a problem, but so too does much of the press, says James Hanning, author and former deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday

www.theguardian.com

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-67707931?src_origin=BBCS_BBC

Looks like the High Court disagrees with your assessment. Huge win for Harry.

When he was awarded only a third of what he asked for? When the ruling was that he was "modestly hacked" (15 out of the claimed 33)? When he's going to have uncovered and unrecoverable legal costs? When he looked like an absolute tit on the stand because he himself had no evidence and actually expected the defendents to provide his evidence for him?

Well, alrighty then. What a huge victory! Totally cancels out the Hollywood "bible, Hollywood Reporter, saying he and the psycho he married have been named "Losers of the Year" and when Spotify called them "****ing grifters"? https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-grifters-bill-simmons-1235647643/#!

I hope he enjoys the money. He needs it. Desperately. Go, Harry! Pyrrhic victory is yours!

 

[Higgins86]

When he was awarded only a third of what he asked for? When the ruling was that he was "modestly hacked" (15 out of the claimed 33)? When he's going to have uncovered and unrecoverable legal costs? When he looked like an absolute tit on the stand because he himself had no evidence and actually expected the defendents to provide his evidence for him?

Well, alrighty then. What a huge victory! Totally cancels out the Hollywood "bible, Hollywood Reporter, saying he and the psycho he married have been named "Losers of the Year" and when Spotify called them "****ing grifters"? https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-grifters-bill-simmons-1235647643/#!

I hope he enjoys the money. He needs it. Desperately. Go, Harry! Pyrrhic victory is yours!

It’s not about the money and this is literally being called a landmark ruling with several other lawsuits in process . Also this particular lawsuit had nothing to do with his wife. The hacking happened long before he met her when former gfs of his were also targeted by this illegal practice and this form of “ vendetta journalism”.

It’s ok to be wrong mate.

 

[yankintx]

was there a conspiracy in her life?

Nope

Al-Fayed was the source of many rumors within days of the Princess's death. It diverted attention away from the fact that the driver in the vehicle was over the legal limit. A driver employed by Al-Fayed. It was classic diversión.

Al-Fayed also spread the rumors that the Princess was pregnant, and would marry his son. Both CT's are false, fueled by the man who's driver was in his employment which killed the Princess.

Let her rest in peace