https://www.facebook.com/pages/Alan-Heaths-History-Page/173472422695696
http://www.ceepackaging.com
twitter : @ceepackaging
https://www.facebook.com/pages/CEE-Packaging/135108923181666
Just after midnight on 31 August 1997 Princess Diana was involved in a car crash in Paris that killed her friend Dodi al Fayed and the driver Henri Paul immediately and led to her death a couple of hours later. Only her bodyguard survived. In this short lecture I give the reason for the crash.
Press stories relevant:
(please tell me how to add a link so I do not have to copy and paste the whole thing)
BBC Monday, 26 November 2007:
There was no physical evidence that Diana, Princess of Wales was pregnant, according to the British pathologist who examined her body.
Dr Robert Chapman, who carried out Diana's post-mortem, told her inquest that her womb and ovaries did not show the tell-tale signs of pregnancy.
But he said they would not necessarily be visible very soon after conception.
Meanwhile, the coroner has lost his bid to have testimony from paparazzi involved in the case read to the jury.
Lord Justice Scott Baker lodged an appeal on Friday challenging a High Court ruling which prevented the inclusion of statements from French photographers who pursued Diana on the night she died.
He had sought to include the written testimony after French authorities ruled they would not force the paparazzi to appear at the inquest in person.
But Lord Justice Waller, sitting with Lord Justice Dyson and Lord Justice Latham, said the appeal had been dismissed and the reasons for the decision would be given in a written judgment later.
The princess and Dodi Al Fayed died as a result of a car crash in a Paris tunnel on 31 August, 1997, along with their driver Henri Paul.
'No indications'
Opening the inquest in October, Lord Justice Scott Baker said any pregnancy was unlikely to "be proved one way or the other".
Then on Monday the jury at the High Court in London heard that Dr Chapman examined the bodies of Diana and Mr Al Fayed at Hammersmith and Fulham mortuary in west London on the evening after they died.
He told them he inspected Diana's womb and ovaries for signs of pregnancy as he would for any woman of child-bearing age.
The court heard those signs included a thickening in the wall of the uterus, the presence of an embryonic sac and changes to the appearance of the ovaries.
Dr Chapman said he would "expect" to see these when the embryo was three weeks old, but they could be visible as early as seven days after conception.
Nicholas Hilliard, counsel to the inquest, asked him: "Were any of these indications present here?"
He replied: "No."
Dr Chapman said his findings would have been "more complete" if he had taken a tissue sample from the princess's body.
But he said he was "very satisfied" that his visual examination was thorough enough to support his view that she was not pregnant.
'Covered up'
The jury has heard that Mr Al Fayed's father, Mohamed, believes Diana and his son were murdered by the security services because she was pregnant.
He also claims Diana's body was deliberately embalmed in Paris to obscure the results of any pregnancy test that might have been conducted.
Dr Chapman confirmed that fluids used in embalming could lead to some changes in a body, such as causing blood clots to form, but he said the chemicals would not obscure the physical evidence of a pregnancy if one existed.
He added that in his experience it was usual for bodies to be embalmed after repatriation not before.
As the pathologist began his evidence on Monday, two members of the public had to be ejected from the courtroom after interrupting proceedings by shouting about "the conspiracy".
Dr Chapman also told the hearing that tests showed Diana had not drunk any alcohol in the hours leading up to her death, although Mr Al Fayed had.
A statement on behalf of Lord Justice Scott Baker said he was "disappointed" to lose the appeal as the absence of paparazzi testimony was likely to prolong the inquest and increase costs.
"However, the coroner will do what he can to minimise these while taking such steps as he can to enable the jury to hear the evidence, in a manner consistent with the Court of Appeal's judgement," the statement said.
Meanwhile, one of the paparazzo witnesses to the crash has been summoned to give evidence on Tueday, it has been revealed.
Romauld Rat has been contacted by French officials and may appear via video link.
But it is unclear whether Mr Rat, who allegedly phoned the Sun newspaper from the crash scene demanding £300,000 for photos, will attend.
http://www.ceepackaging.com
http://www.pbn.com.pl
Loading...
@tmmy773 con't i have no idea about the "boston brakes" idea...if it was a CIA MI5 they could have done it of course but i don't know anything about this topic or anything they do and i'm not sure i want to.
tmmy773 1 day ago
@alanheath Yes, driver was drinking before crash...i saw car after..
was very smashed "totaled" as we say. Must have been going very fast...was a solid car.. no question the driver guilty of gross negligence. Would be hard to plan accident unless driver was seriously impaired and even so difficult. Two more questions please, a "head-on collision with a stone pillar?" driver must have been very drunk and going very fast. and "Why take so long to get the Princess to the hospital?"
tmmy773 1 day ago
@alanheath Wow,
Diana was rumored to be pregnant with Dodi's son. If this is true then William and Henry would have ummm let's see here--a HALF BROTHER. Not just any half brother, a Muslim one; another reason for the royal family to "rid" Diana. (I'm done with this topic. I'm in that part of youtube again. )
prettygalwithabrain 2 days ago
@CoolCollectableToys Of course I am an unappointed sokesperson (sic - part of it sic anyway - I am not using your sexist terminology).
You could also be a 'sokesperson', what you are soaking up could possibly be out of a bottle?
alanheath 2 days ago
@alanheath my view of world is unreal to you as you are a contributor taking part in hiding the truth. You even became an unappointed unqualified sokesman on Russia News for the Polish people for the Russian propoganda machine on a subject you know little about. You are possibly a UK or Russian paid informant, that would not surprise me, but as your ego would support such an assumption I dont think you are. But for whatever reason you have bcome a systematic robot for the NWO but why?
CoolCollectableToys 2 days ago
@tmmy773 Of course it was gross negligence - I agree. There are times when people have employers who ask for things and one cannot refuse. Ironically a very same thing happened with the crash that killed members of the Polish government near Smolensk in April 2010.
alanheath 2 days ago
@CoolCollectableToys No, I do not assume that someone who disagrees with me made it up however in this case I asked it this person made it up him or herself. Your version is the fantacist view of the world which needs to twist things to fit the fantacist viewpoint.
alanheath 2 days ago
@alanheath Why is Alan that if anyone disagree's with your version then you say "they made it up" lol
CoolCollectableToys 3 days ago
@tmmy773 No proof of speeding infact the bodyguard the only survivor of the crash told the enquest that the driver was not speeding, plus it's a bodyguards sworn duty to make sure that the driver would not to do anything to danger the person he was protecting.
CoolCollectableToys 3 days ago
@alanheath You are right speed was prob higher and driver was exp and knew the route. Resentment of a person's popularity is not a motive in itself...it could be but we don't know unless more evidence to back up. You are right when exp driver is killed that is cause for concern. If it was say generic Mr Smith would be sad but not a fed flag bc we would not expect Mr Smith to be the best driver. So why was the driver drunk carrying a Princess? That is gross negligence at best.
tmmy773 3 days ago