Olivia Simmons
The Demise of Diana
Conspiracy
theories tend to arouse a sense of discomfort when mentioned in common
conversations. Images of aliens and men in tin hats usually flood the brain,
but there are a few which may hold some validity. The death of Princess Diana,
a royal with rebellious tendencies, is one such example. The “People’s
Princess” was tragically killed in a car accident while fleeing paparazzi in
Paris on the morning of August 31, 1977 (“Princess Diana.”). Although the tale
of her death seems quite straightforward, there are many discrepancies which
have caused people to tilt their heads and question the validity of the
official report. Was the princess killed by her driver, Henri Paul (McDermott)?
Was the accident intentionally planned by the Royal Family as a cover-up? Or
were bright flashes of light the ultimate reason for Diana’s demise (Griffin)?
These theories will be further explored in the following essay.
Diana Spencer was a woman full of
beauty, grace, and charm. These qualities almost always accompany her name in
any given conversation regarding the Princess. Slender, blonde, and blue-eyed,
Diana was an icon in many ways. She was constantly pushing the traditional
definition of royalty and regality. She was also affectionately dubbed the
“People’s Princess” due to her caring heart and her overall personableness with
the common man (“Princess Diana.”). A
woman held so prominently within the hearts of the general public appeared to
be flawless, untainted by the common grime affecting the entirety of the human
population. Yet sadly, Diana was no different. According to numerous sources,
Diana was pronounced to be self-condescending and was alarmingly paranoid
(“Diana: the Rebel Princess.”) (Smith). Nevertheless, Princess Diana was an
emotionally complex woman, full of kindness as well as conflicting secrets.
Diana
Spencer has been immortalized in history as the “Rebel Princess” (“Diana: the
Rebel Princess.”). One way in which she defied the standards placed before her
was through her wedding ring. Traditionally, royal engagement rings are custom
made, but Diana selected her a12-carat sapphire and 14 solitaire diamond ring
from a Garrard jewelry collection catalog (Fogle). She also did not conform to
normality in regards to the upbringing of her two sons (1). Diana frequently
exposed them to societal norms such as McDonald’s, the tube, and waiting in
line just like everyone else (1). Fashion was also a rebellious output for the
princess (1). An iconic example of such defiance is Diana’s black, form-fitting
mini dress, which she wore for the Serpentine Gallery benefit (1). Such a
worldly and unorthodox article shocked the world and sent ripples of excitement
through the media (1). Although Diana’s unconventional actions greatly display
her rebellious nature, she was fully aware of her emotional tendencies. She
herself said, “I don’t go by a rulebook, I lead from the heart, not the head,”
(Smith). Princess Diana was a rebellious royal who established her own set of
standards for what it meant to be royalty.
Diana
Spencer lovingly became known as the “People’s Princess” as a result of her
kindness, compassion, and simple ability to relate to the common man. In her
book, Diana In Search of Herself:
Portrait of a Troubled Princess, Sally Bedell Smith raved about her “informality”,
“small talk”, and her ability to “...step down and make you feel special”
(Smith). Diana would frequently speak with children, meeting them at eye level
(Fogle). This was a yet another royally revolutionary act on her part, but it
also painted a gentle portrait of the woman (1). Diana also displayed her
tenderness in dozens of other ways. She shook hands with an HIV positive
patient as well as visited Brazilian AIDS orphans (1). Overall, Princess Diana
was a woman filled with selflessness and compassion toward those around her.
Although
Princess Diana appeared to be unscathed by the negativity of human emotions,
she tragically struggled with self-condescending thoughts as well as paranoia.
According to Sally Bedell Smith, on numerous occasions Diana belittled herself
saying that she was “thick as a plank” and “had the brain the size of a pea,”
(Smith). Behind closed doors, Diana was known to focus on her misgivings.
Dwelling on her enemies-both real and imaginary-and betrayals, Diana would
spiral into fits of crying and “vengeful schemes” (1). Diana was also
incredibly paranoid (“The Operation...” 95). She was utterly convinced that
someone was out to get her, whether it be an individual or an institution
(Smith). In an excerpt from the official police report, Diana said “This
particular phase in my life is the most dangerous. [...] is planning ` an
accident' in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the
path clear for Charles to marry. ...” (“The Operation…” 94). As her divorce
finalized and her ties with the royal family became strained, she grew
increasingly eccentric (“Diana: the Rebel Princess.”). Rumors of affairs,
nuisance calls, and New Age therapies arose (1). This social backlash no doubt
contributed to her mental and emotional struggles. Despite the fact that
Princess Diana appeared picture perfect, her emotions slowly ran rampant in the
form of self-loathing and vicious rumors.
Princess
Diana was a woman bubbling with waves of emotional complexity. The media
portrayed her humanitarian heart well, giving the entire world a loving and
compassionate portrait of the royal. Sadly, much like the common man, Diana
Spencer was not spared emotional trials and tribulations. She struggled with
ailments behind closed doors, including self-deprecating thoughts and paranoia.
Yet, Diana’s paranoia may have not been a delusion. Perhaps, her fears were
well placed and her enemies had plotted her untimely demise or possibly these
intrusive thoughts were all illegitimate.
The first theory regarding Princess
Diana’s death involves Henri Paul, her driver (McDermott). Due to the fact that
the beloved icon was mortally wounded in a car accident, placing the blame on
Paul appears to be an obvious conjecture (Griffin). According to The Independent, Henri Paul was the
acting Head of Security for the Ritz Hotel in Paris, which was owned by Mohamed
Fayed (Griffin) (McDermott). Mohamed was the father of Dodi Fayed, Diana’s
newfound lover who perished at her side in the fatal crash (1) (1). Media outlets
claimed that Paul, an assumed alcoholic, was in a drunken state when operating
the vehicle (1). This action is believed to have been what ultimately caused
the crash (1). Skeptics counter this by
proposing a rather sinister alternative. According to them, Paul plotted the
assassination of Princess Diana and intentionally wrecked the vehicle (1). They
also believe that Paul’s body was swapped in order to give a false positive on
the toxicology report, all the while masking the true objective of the crash
(1). This "body swap" theory implies that Paul was sober, calculated,
and fixated on the task of killing Diana. There does appear to be some validity
to this theory. On that fateful night, he did not portray classic drunken
characteristics (1). One of the claims in the official police report stated
that “Contemporaneous evidence from the Ritz Hotel's video cameras from about
10 pm when Mr. Paul returned to the hotel until 12.20 am when he left does not
suggest that he was under the influence of alcohol” (“The Operation...” 150).
Furthermore, his toxicology report identified a very high average carbon
monoxide level within his bloodstream (1, 151). With his levels of 20.7%, Paul
would have most definitely appeared drunk and incapable of operating the vehicle
(1, 151). The postmortem examination of his liver also disproves the claim that
he was an alcoholic. His liver appeared to be completely normal (1, 150).
Although the postmortem examinations and toxicology report were incredibly
compelling, experts proceeded with hesitance (1, 152). They theorized that the
samples collected by the French authorities could have not been Paul’s blood
(1, 152).
There are also those who approach
the Henri Paul information with timidity (Griffin). He did have a high average level
of carbon monoxide running through his veins and very well may have been drunk
(“The Operation...” 151). Swapping a body is no simple task. If Paul’s body was
swapped, a scheme with this magnitude of complexity would have taken months of
planning and perhaps other parties to orchestrate it. Paul also appeared to
have no motive or gain in regards to Diana’s murder. Overall, the “Henri Paul”
theory is a compelling one that could be true but is full of curious
assumptions, compelling facts, and holes as well.
The second
theory surrounding Diana’s demise is increasingly sinister compared to the
“Henri Paul” theory. It entertains the idea that the Royal Family plotted
Diana’s death due to her impending proposal to Dodi Fayed (Griffin)
(McDermott). Mohamed Fayed, the father of Dodi Fayed, surmised that Diana’s
family “...could not accept that an Egyptian Muslim could eventually be the
stepfather of the future King of England” (1). Rumors of a future engagement
surely would have added to the Royal Family’s vengeful fire. According to USA Today and Martyn Gregory, Dodi was
planning on proposing to Diana the night of the crash (1). Whether this is
purely coincidence or fact is left unknown, but Dodi supposedly ordered a ring
for his lover and had it delivered to the Ritz Hotel in Paris (1). Mohamed
Fayed also stated in the official police report that on numerous occasions
Diana feared death at the hands of the Royal Family (“The Operation...” 95).
This postulate appears to have valid points, but it also contains substantial
gaps regarding information. Rosa Monckton, an old friend of Diana’s, recalled that the princess had never
mentioned that she “feared for her life” and had never written about anyone
wishing to kill her (1, 112). In contrast, Mohamed Fayed made numerous claims
in regards to Diana’s apprehension regarding her life (1, 110). According to
the police report, in mid-July 1997, he also mentioned that “...the Princess of
Wales told him during this summer holiday that she feared she would be murdered
by the Royal Family” (1, 110). Perhaps Mohamed was distraught over the death of
his son and sought to blame Diana’s family and said statements out of spite, or
maybe his words hold some merit. As mentioned earlier, the Royal Family
appeared to have reasonable grounds for animosity. Yet, would Diana’s own flesh
and blood plot her demise? In recent decades, the Royal Family has never openly
appeared to be morbid or sinister. However, in a survey of twenty-five
Houstonian respondents, 48% believed that Diana’s family did orchestrate the crash (Simmons). The
masses suspect that the Royal Family is most definitely capable of committing
such a heinous act. Ultimately, there does appear to be reasonable facts
regarding this “Royal Family” theory and it overall seems more realistic than
the Henri Paul “body swapping” theory.
The third
and final conspiracy theory states that bright flashes of light in the Alma
underpass were the ultimate reason for the death of Diana (“The Operation...”
428). According to The Independent,
numerous reports of light flares emerging from the tunnel arose after the crash
(Griffin). The police report provides compelling evidence in support of this
“flash before the crash” theory (McDermott) (“The Operation...” 427). It
mentioned Alain Guizard, a photographic agent that followed Diana’s doomed car,
who said: “There were some flashes at this point, but I do not know where they
were coming from” (1, 448). A former
member of MI6 spoke of an untitled assassination technique used by the United
Kingdom Secret Intelligence Service (1, 428). This method uses a stroboscopic
light to disorient the driver in the hopes of causing a collision (1, 428).
Perhaps the Royal Family issued the usage of such a morbid technique, or
possibly there was an independent party which used the device to plot Diana’s
demise. However, there is not a vast amount of evidence in support of this
theory. Some claimed that the lights originated from paparazzi chasing Diana’s
vehicle (1, 447). Others stated that the lights were simply a result of the
crash (Griffin). Additionally, if this stroboscopic technique were used,
vehicles would have been seen fleeing the scene of the crime, and there is no
record within the police report regarding the cars that did exit the tunnel
(“The Operation...” 428). Overall, the final conspiracy theory regarding
Princess Diana’s death is the weakest of the three and has the least amount of
supporting evidence.
Conspiracy
theories do not tend to be topics discussed in conventional conversation. They
tend to arouse feelings of discomfort due to their incredulous natures. Yet,
there may be some theories that are not completely peculiar. The death of
Princess Diana is one such event that was filled with inconsistencies and which
sparked numerous theories filled with hints of truth. Did Henri Paul, Diana’s
drunken driver, cause the fatal wreck? Was the Royal Family seeking vengeance?
Or were bright flashes of light the ultimate cause of Diana’s demise? Although
all of these theories hold points of validity and are thought-provoking, the
“Royal Family” theory, despite its lack of concrete evidence, appears to have
the largest volume of truth and motive.
Works Cited
“Diana: the Rebel Princess.” History Extra, 5 Sept. 2018,
www.historyextra.com/period/modern/diana-the-rebel-princess/.
Fogle, Asher. “14 Ways Princess
Diana Bucked Tradition.” Good
Housekeeping, Good Housekeeping, 22 Apr. 2018,
www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/entertainment/g3675/princess-diana-royal-protocol/.
Griffin, Andrew. “People Still Don't
Believe Diana Died in an Accidental Car Crash. Here's Why.” The Independent, Independent Digital
News and Media, 19 May 2018,
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/princess-diana-death-conspiracy-theories-paris-tunnel-car-crash-reasons-why-not-clear-planned-murder-a7918766.html.
McDermott, Maeve. “Who Killed
Princess Diana? Conspiracy Theories Endure, Twenty Years Later.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information
Network, 29 Aug. 2017,
www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2017/08/29/who-killed-princess-diana-conspiracy-theories-still-endure/543939001/.
“Princess Diana.” Biography.com, A&E Networks
Television, 18 May 2018, www.biography.com/people/princess-diana-9273782.
Simmons, Olivia. “The Death of
Diana.” SurveyMonkey, 2018,
https://www.surveymonkey.com/analyze/k_2FkUTzrPHAUENGTyFJmDwHvMHHckFO0qY24n7vofG2A_3D.
Smith, Sally Bedell. Diana in Search of Herself: Portrait of a
Troubled Princess. New American Library, 2000.
“The Operation Paget Inquiry Report
into the Allegation of Conspiracy to Murder.” CBS News, www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Diana_Study.pdf.
No comments:
Post a Comment