PRINCESS DIANA: The Case For Assassination Revisited…

Posted: September 23, 2017 in Uncategorized

*
*
It is always worth remembering that the jury in the official inquest (an inquest that most people regard as a scripted shambles) was in fact forbidden by the judge from being allowed to reach a verdict of murder. In the end, the jury concluded that Diana had been “unlawfully killed.”

the burning blogger of bedlam

On May 5th 2000, police in the south of France found a burnt body in the wreckage of a car, deep into the woods close to Nantes.
The dead body was so extremely charred that it took a month for the DNA tests to ascertain the victim’s identity.

The burnt man in the car was Jean-Paul ‘James’ Andanson. The millionaire photographer had been one of the paparazzi following Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed during their last days before the fatal crash that killed them.

In 1999, the French investigation concluded that the Mercedes carrying Diana and Dodi had come into contact with another vehicle (specifically a white Fiat Uno) in the tunnel. The driver of that vehicle has never been properly identified (neither has the specific vehicle).

View original post 2,315 more words

Comments
  1. jtremaine says:

    we know she was murdered, she produced heirs , her job was done. Nothing personal, just business for the crown.

  2. It looks like the inquest jury knew she was murdered – and they saw all the evidence. But they were forbidden to find a verdict of murder.

  3. futuret says:

    HER DEATH WAS VERY TRAGIC, AND SHE DID LIVE A MISERABLE LIFE, AS TRULY BEING THE BLACK SHEEP OF HER FAMILY. THERE WAS NO REAL REASON TO MURDER HER, POLITICAL OR OTHERWISE, SHE JUST WANTED TO BE WITH HER CHILDREN AND HAVE SOME KIND OF LIFE.

  4. At the time of her death, futuret, she was also dating the nephew of an international arms dealer – Adnan Khashoggi – linked to the CIA, Iran Contra and 9-11. This would seem a very dangerous choice to me.

    https://www.opednews.com/populum/page.php?f=Diana-a-Link-to-Iran-Cont-by-Dr-Stuart-Jeanne-B-110514-846.html

    • futuret says:

      SO VERY TRUE AND I AGREE, BUT THE FAMILY COULD HAVE GIVEN HER MORE SUPPORT, WHICH SHE NEVER SEEM TO GET. SHE WAS VERY IMPRESSIONABLE YOURSELF, AND ALLOWING HERSELF TO ARRIVE IN THE WRONG HANDS. I REALLY DO THINK THAT THERE WAS EXTREME JEALOUSY IN THE FAMILY, IN THAT SHE OF ALL OF THEM IDENTIFIED HERSELF MORE WITH THE COMMON FOLKS OF ENGLAND, AND MOST OF ALL WANTED TO BE APPROACHABLE. SHE DID NOT ALWAYS WANT TO ADHERE TO ROYAL PROTOCOL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s