Michael Mansfield, probably Britain’s most famous lawyer, has just published his autobiography "Memoirs of a Radical Lawyer" in which he details his role in the investigation of the death of Princess Diana in Paris on August 31, 1997. It is a fascinating account and it is clear that he is still not convinced that the “accident” was an accident at all. He believes the truth has not yet emerged.

What happened that night? With the crushed Mercedes came Diana’s death, as well as the two others’ in the car, Dodi Al-Fayed and Henri Paul, the driver. From a young woman hated at that time by most of the British media for her association with Dodi and the Al-Fayeds, she was suddenly transformed Cinderella-like into the “People’s Princess”.

Mansfield, as many others, especially outside the UK, found it difficult to accept what happened in the Alma Tunnel in Paris as given in the police report. Mansfield says he agreed to represent Dodi’s father, the owner of the famous Harrods store, because he had real sympathy for this father who wanted to know why and how his son had died

He explains he started from the question “who might this death benefit?” and then worked back, emphasising that the inquest pushed the justice to return , in April, 2008, a verdict, not of “accident”, but of “unlawful killing”. The jury stated it was an “unlawful killing”. caused by the drivers of both the Mercedes and the following vehicles. The “following vehicles” was not only a reference to the chasing pack of paparazzi, but also to other vehicles clearly present, but never traced.

There are other unsolved mysteries around this “accident”: for instance, the missing three hours on the evening of August 30, 1997, during which Dodi’s chauffeur Henri Paul’s movements could not be traced, or the unexplained regular and sizeable sums of money going into Henri Paul’s several bank accounts over the three months before the crash.
Then there is also the question of a box of missing personal papers belonging to Diana, described as the “Crown Jewels” because of what they said.

Diana was very critical of the Royal Family and presented a threat to the established order . Her life was being monitored by the British state itself. In 1995 she gave a famous TV interview to Martin Bashir, in which Diana described her own situation as being at war with the Royal Household. When Diana visited Angola in January 1997 in order to highlight the inhumanity and destruction caused by landmines, she was criticised for interfering in political affairs and accused of being uncontrollable. Her telephone communications were being tapped and her movements by car were being tracked. Simone Simmons, a close friend of Diana, said the Princess was undertaking research and had “compiled a dossier which she would claimedprove that the British Government and many high-ranking public figures were profiting from landmines in countries like Angola and Bosnia.

Two years before her death Diana told her solicitor, Lord Mishcon, that “efforts” would be made to get rid of her. She believed she would meet her death, or incur serious injury, while travelling without her children in a small form of transport, be it car, helicopter or light aircraft. If it didn’t kill her, it would leave her so injured as to be declared unbalanced. This premonition was kept secret until after the crash, when Lord Mishcon revealed his note to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Paul Condon. This note was never disclosed neither to the French judge nor to the English coroner Dr [John] Burton. This crucial note remained a state secret locked in a safe at New Scotland Yard.

Was Diana mad to suppose the British State was interested in silencing her? At least, in the view of one of the Britain’s most high profile lawyer, “Diana’s fears for her safety and her preoccupation with surveillance were entirely justified. Unfortunately her predictions came to pass.”

By PCampbell

Douze ans après la mort de la Princesse Diana, l'avocat de la famille Al-Fayed, Michael Mansfield, publie son autobiographie. Il y donne son opinion sur l'enquête qui a été menée et y fait part de ses doutes sur les conclusions de la police. (A écouter en V.O. (cliquez sur le fichier MP3) à la fin de l'article. A noter également qu’en passant votre souris sur les mots en italique, ces derniers apparaissent traduits en surimpression.

Article publié en partenariat avec MyCow.eu