Princess Diana Crash: The Realm Of Reasonable Doubt.

Princess Diana Crash: The Realm Of Reasonable

Historically Britain and France have over the ages squared off as enemies who from time to time, when the occasion so demanded, joined together in an uneasy alliance to pursue a common goal. Strong circumstantial evidence tends to suggest that such an occasion did indeed arise on August 31, 1997 when Princess Diana was killed.

Paris: Romantic City To Lovers; Convenient Killing Spot To Others

One of the more controversial aspects concerning the night Princess Diana died was the fact that it took just shy of two hours to drive her to a hospital that was merely 3.25 miles away? This issue is one amongst many smoking guns that conspiracy theorists are quick to whip out from their arsenal as evidence that what happened in the Pont de l'Alma road tunnel in Paris that night was anything but an accident!

So assuming that the crash was indeed no ordinary accident but rather a high profile assassination made to look like one, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume whoever carried it out did thorough research beforehand. Such research would likely entail finding a location with restricted access points and also one that was fairly obscured from public view; a long enough tunnel would cover these two very necessary characteristics beautifully. Staging a late night crash also guaranteed that there were less unwanted eyeballs around to eyeball that which they were not supposed to see.

With just two entry/exit points, a tunnel affords easy control to incoming and outgoing traffic if ever the need were to arise. An accident in a tunnel also offers other advantages from an assassin's perspective. If the assassination is to be in the form of a road traffic accident (RTA) the chances of success are hugely magnified if a high velocity collision is staged in a confined area like a tunnel. A high speed accident in a place like the Paris Pont de l'Alma road tunnel would almost certainly result in the vehicle being buffeted from concrete wall to concrete wall over and over again like a pinball in an arcade game. Such a multiple-impact scenario greatly increases the chances of killing the target yet still allows room for the event to be termed a tragic accident!

An accident staged in Paris had other attractions too.

Other than the obvious that Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed were already there and had made little secret of the fact that they intended to spend an enchanted evening in La Capitale Romance Du Monde (Paris), the other very attractive feature about France (from the plotters' perspective) was the rather unusual French ambulance evacuation policy.

In the wake of much finger pointing, recriminations, and accusations over the now infamous 2-hour ambulance ride, the French authorities (backed up by their British counterparts) went to great lengths to assure everyone that there was nothing suspicious about it at all. That in fact that was just the way it was done in France! Okay, granted that the ambulance policy in France may actually require that accident victims be stabilized at the scene, you can bet that the people behind the plot were well aware of that fact too. It is quite probable that whilst brainstorming various scenarios on how, where and when to execute the assassination, someone in the conspiracy stumbled across that unusual French policy and immediately saw its value as a tool for deflecting suspicion from a situation that would otherwise scream nothing but!

Blaming The Usual Suspects

In the this vein one can see why such an "accident" could not have been pulled off in England; The ambulance evacuation policy in the United Kingdom (Britain) like most other countries is radically different from that in France; namely that it requires a seriously injured victim to be rushed to hospital as expeditiously as possible where far better care may be administered. Besides, staging the crash in France gave the plot originators another very convenient patsy; albeit a complicit one!

Giving a distraught and hysterical British public someone to blame (who better than those dastardly French) not only took care of a very necessary emotional outlet, it also minimized the possibility of an immediate under-the-microscope investigation that would certainly have ensued had Princess Diana been killed in England. Having the French handle the investigation on French soil conveniently allowed any accusations of ineptness and bungling to rest squarely on the shoulders of the French.

Such a course of action could only work however as long as the necessary French security agencies were privy to the plot. It is unimaginable to believe that the French authorities would ever agree to shoulder the blame for an event of such magnitude unless various security agencies of theirs were complicit to the plot to some degree or other. If there had been no French involvement you can bet that the French secret service (DGSE) would have been the first to point fingers at the British secret service (MI6). In fact without the French connection it is highly improbably the entire event could have been pulled off at all.

As it was, the manner in which the plot was contrived ensured that the British public at least had the usual (dastardly) suspects to voice their anger against but most importantly it afforded the plotters multiple opportunities to confine their achievement firmly in the realm of reasonable doubt!


Tomorrow: Whatever happened to the mysterious white Fiat Uno that several witnesses claim to have seen speeding away from the accident in the tunnel! Were paparazzi really involved in any way in the plot to kill Princess Diana? What connection did the charred remains of a body found in some woods near Paris have to do with the accident that claimed Henri Paul's, Dodi Fayed's and Princess Diana's lives?