Diana

SigersonCup

Hi, I am 16 years old and don't really know much about Princess Diana's death apart from it was in a car-crash in a tunnel in Paris and she was reportedly chased by the Paparazzi who we are told caused the crash.
I believed this story but I was then told that she was supposed to have been having an affair and I'm not sure whether it was with the driver of the car that night or not, but there was something about the driver, I think.
The reason I am bringing this up is because a few weeks ago I was with my dad and he was talking to another man about Diana, can't remember how it came up but the other man said that he is fully sure (don't know why) that the Royal Family had her killed over an affair she had.
I'd just like to know what ye think about it as you can't really read any of the newspaper articles as they're all edited to cover the real truth.
I'd like to thank you for taking the time to read my thread and I look forward to your replies.

Monty Burnz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoZ71sj3Kn0

ed2hands

Hi OP,

I haven't heard the "affair with the driver" story hehe. If you saw the driver you'd know why. Seem to remember he was rather plump and balding; not exactly Dianas cup of tea i'd say:)
What i guess that your fathers friend was referring to is the theory that the royal family didn't approve of Diana marrying Dodi (who she was allegedly engaged to and who also died in the crash). The theory goes that they didn't approve because he was a coloured Egyptian and not English aristocracy, so the marriage would be bringing shame on the monarchy. So they somehow staged the crash and murdered them both (along with the poor driver).

Dodis father is a man called Mohammed Al Fayed. A very wealthy and a very eccentric man. He owns Harrods in London.
He still to this day believes this theory and has gone to great lengths to prove it, without success.

Di0genes

There were four people in the car. One wore a seat belt. He survived everyone else died.

It'd be a fairly **** assassination if it was thwarted by seatbelt.

Monty Burnz

Di0genes wrote: »

There were four people in the car. One wore a seat belt. He survived everyone else died.

I thought that too, but it seems that Rees-Jones wasn't wearing one either. He survived, but with very bad injuries - it says his face was flattened, and had to be reconstructed based on photographs :eek:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Rees-Jones_%28bodyguard%29

nullzero

Here's one link that discusses this topic from a conspiracy theory point of view... http://vigilantcitizen.com/vigilantreport/princess-dianas-death-and-memorial-the-occult-meaning/

I'm not saying that the information in that link is correct, it's just a set of ideas/opinions.
I'm guessing that the OP may well know the official story and they are interested in the more unusual explainations regardless of how it stands up to scrutiny. Hopefully the link I gave will be of interest and give the OP a good read at least.

Di0genes

nullzero wrote: »

Here's one link that discusses this topic from a conspiracy theory point of view... http://vigilantcitizen.com/vigilantreport/princess-dianas-death-and-memorial-the-occult-meaning/

I'm not saying that the information in that link is correct, it's just a set of ideas/opinions.
I'm guessing that the OP may well know the official story and they are interested in the more unusual explainations regardless of how it stands up to scrutiny. Hopefully the link I gave will be of interest and give the OP a good read at least.

Thats not really conspiracy theories about the crash more lurid occult nonsense about her burial

uprising2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Diana,_Princess_of_Wales_conspiracy_theories

There ye go OP, I simply took the words "diana" and "conspiracy" and put them into google with a space between the words and clicked search.

This will give you the jist of it all. I somehow think your post isn't entirely honest, maybe I'm wrong, but rule number one, Trust Nobody.....:eek:....It's a bad world out there.

ed2hands

Di0genes wrote: »

Thats not really conspiracy theories about the crash more lurid occult nonsense about her burial

Eh, it is actually. A very unusual CT, but one all the same.

Brown Bomber

SigersonCup wrote: »

The reason I am bringing this up is because a few weeks ago I was with my dad and he was talking to another man about Diana,

Were you in Harrods at the time by any chance?

Seriously though welcome to the forum. Hope you find what you are looking for.

A little known fact is that the reason it is accepted that Diana was not pregnant with Dodi's half-Arab child is down to widely regarded shill Lord Christopher Moncton's sister. She was the one who claimed that Diana had her period at this time.

If you want a conspiracy about Diana this is another one.
http://www.independent.ie/unsorted/features/a-murky-question-after-a-decade-of-mushy-ps-and-qsthe-mind-can--truly-be-disturbed-by-tragedy-writes-a-convinced-declan-lynch-1069975.html

Zak Goldsmith of the billionaire Goldsmith family currently related Rothschild cabal.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Were you in Harrods at the time by any chance?

Seriously though welcome to the forum. Hope you find what you are looking for.

A little known fact is that the reason it is accepted that Diana was not pregnant with Dodi's half-Arab child is down to widely regarded shill Lord Christopher Moncton's sister. She was the one who claimed that Diana had her period at this time.

And y'know the physicians in the French Hospital who treated her.

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

A little known fact is that the reason it is accepted that Diana was not pregnant with Dodi's half-Arab child is down to widely regarded shill Lord Christopher Moncton's sister. She was the one who claimed that Diana had her period at this time.

Also,
Her brother Anthony described by the Times of London as "Britain's most important secret agent in the Balkans".
http://cryptome.org/mi6-monckton.htm

His father, Gilbert Monckton was founding Chairman of the Blackwater/Xe alike and very spooky "Defense Systems Limited" http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ystems_Limited

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

And y'know the physicians in the French Hospital who treated her.

actually I don't. I know feck all about the case and won't be saying too much more.

Tayla

Apparently all who knew Diana said she always wore her seat belt, there was a lot of talk after the accident that the mercedes they were in had been stolen a while before the accident and the back seatbelts were broken and so that is why the back seat passengers were not wearing them.

I cannot wait to see the new film 'unlawful killing' which is showing at Cannes and is about Dianas death

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

actually I don't. I know feck all about the case and won't be saying too much more.

Well then coming out with comments like

A little known fact is that the reason it is accepted that Diana was not pregnant with Dodi's half-Arab child is down to widely regarded shill Lord Christopher Moncton's sister.

were a little bit presumptuous.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

Well then coming out with comments like



were a little bit presumptuous.

True. Bad word selection on my part. I just think it is quite strange that a family up to their knecks in MI5/MI6 connection would turn out to be the same family who confirms to the world that Diana wasn't having a half-Arab child when the charge is placed by the would-be grandfather of this child that it was British intelligence who plotted to murder his son and girlfriend.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

True. Bad word selection on my part. I just think it is quite strange that a family up to their knecks in MI5/MI6 connection would turn out to be the same family who confirms to the world that Diana wasn't having a half-Arab child when the charge is placed by the would-be grandfather of this child that it was British intelligence who plotted to murder his son and girlfriend.

These families are neck deep in the British establishment and royalty.

You might want to bring something into the fact that the woman Diana thought she was getting bumped off for ended up married to man who arranges ex SAS Soldiers as security.

The claims that Diana was pregnant come from Al Fayed. And Just Al Fayed. He's come out with dozens of lurid fantasies in the decades after the crash.

Talk E

DIANA INQUEST SAMPLES SWITCHED



PRINCESS Diana’s post-mortem samples were switched with those from another woman, an explosive new book claims.
Adding weight to “cover-up” theories, it says samples were swapped prior to toxicological testing.



According to documents uncovered for the book, published this week, the toxicologist at London’s Charing Cross Hospital received the samples of another female and tested them in the belief that they were from Princess Diana.


In his latest volume in a series about the Diana inquest, author John Morgan believes he has discovered the truth of what occurred in the 24 hours following the deaths of the Princess and Dodi Al Fayed in a Paris car crash on August 31, 1997.



“There is a lot of evidence which points to the toxicology testing being carried out on samples that did not come from the body of Princess Diana,” he said last night, pointing out that the documents were, along with others, withheld from the inquest jury.


Mr Morgan said he had uncovered a litany of conflicting evidence, inconsistencies, mis-labelling of body samples, cover-ups, evidence and witnesses who were never called to give evidence at the *inquest.

I believe that John Morgan has done more to expose the facts of this case than the police in France and Britain

Mohamed Al Fayed





He is now calling for independent DNA tests to be carried out on the body samples. “The samples at Charing Cross Hospital have never been subjected to DNA testing. With so much conflicting evidence, how can we be sure?” he said.



“The evidence I have studied indicates that there are two lots of samples. One belongs to Diana, which is held by the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Paget, and the other lot are samples from another body and held by Charing Cross Hospital.



“Diana’s UK post-mortem samples were switched ahead of the toxicology testing.”


He added: “The jury were not given the post mortem and toxicology reports on Diana. If they had, they should have been able to work out that the toxicology testing was conducted on samples that weren’t Diana’s.

Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/245718Diana-inquest-samples-switched#ixzz1MbYpTmub

Di0genes

Talk E wrote: »

Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/245718Diana-inquest-samples-switched#ixzz1MbYpTmub

I really wish you'd quoted the source at the top of that.

Mistyeyes321

:pac:Seriously the Royal Family with all their connection's couldn't come up with a Better idea of how to get rid of Diana?:pac:

Talk E

Looks like the sh!ts gonna hit the fan pretty soon. New documentary coming soon. Funded by none other than Mohamed al Fayed.

She wrote a note to her friend stating : My husband is planning an accident in my car. haha

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5PFWc8DgFw

Talk E

Unlawful Killing Banned in the UK. And they say the establishment have no real power :eek:

Unlawful Killing is a documentary about the suspicious death of Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed in a car accident. If you’re an American, “unlawful killing” is basically the legal term in England for “murder”, and it’s the verdict that was given in the trial after the accident. From the beginning you have to understand that this movie was sponsored entirely by Mohamed Al Fayed, Dodi’s father, and in my opinion this puts a question mark on how objective facts are presented. Of course some of the presented facts are clear, but the weak point in this is the opinion of those close to Diana (such as Tony Curtis or Piers Morgan).
Since Unlawful Killing tries to solve some of the mysteries surrounding Diana’s death, Brits would be the most interested people in the world to see it, right? Well, it seems that the Establishment wanted some 87 cuts to be made into the documentary, but when the director refused the movie was banned in England. So it will be in theaters all over the world, except in the one country where everyone would want to see it. I’m not a conspiracy theory adept, but it is a shame that in 2011 censorship at such a high level still exists in England. It only fuels conspiracy theories and increases movie’s popularity.

http://www.seetrailer.com/2011/05/14/unlawful-killing-banned-in-england/

Talk E

Kinda funny that the skeppies are avoiding this one like the plague. You guys dont think there is a real conspiracy here, do you ?

Di0genes

Talk E wrote: »

Kinda funny that the skeppies are avoiding this one like the plague. You guys dont think there is a real conspiracy here, do you ?

What's to avoid?

i dont think there's anything remotely new been said on this thread since the first page

humanji

Talk E wrote: »

Unlawful Killing Banned in the UK. And they say the establishment have no real power :eek:


http://www.seetrailer.com/2011/05/14/unlawful-killing-banned-in-england/

In fairness, some of the cuts include removing footage of a dying Diana being removed from the wreckage. There'd be absolute uproar if they allowed a national icons dying moments to be shown.

Talk E

humanji wrote: »

In fairness, some of the cuts include removing footage of a dying Diana being removed from the wreckage. There'd be absolute uproar if they allowed a national icons dying moments to be shown.

Source ?:D

humanji

Fromt the horses mouth himself: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1386137/Princess-Diana-death-conspiracy-started-crash-says-Unlawful-Killing-director-Keith-Allen.html#ixzz1MDoj8SQ7

What’s caused the most heat this week is the inclusion of a photograph of Diana, taken shortly after the crash. I’ve been accused of cheap sensationalism (and worse), and Mohamed Al Fayed has also been attacked, even though he’s just a backer who had nothing to do with the editorial decision to include it.

Talk E

humanji wrote: »

Fromt the horses mouth himself: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1386137/Princess-Diana-death-conspiracy-started-crash-says-Unlawful-Killing-director-Keith-Allen.html#ixzz1MDoj8SQ7

Oh come on... You of all people know better than to post sources from the Daily Fail

jackiebaron

Mistyeyes321 wrote: »

:pac:Seriously the Royal Family with all their connection's couldn't come up with a Better idea of how to get rid of Diana?:pac:

Well how would you suggest getting rid of both of them with as few witnesses as possible and making it look like an accident?

jackiebaron

Di0genes wrote: »

What's to avoid?

i dont think there's anything remotely new been said on this thread since the first page

How is it that when investigations are blocked, stonewalled or interfered with, when evidence is surpressed, destroyed or stolen, when witnesses are threatened or discredited, you simply go along and never once think for yourself and question anything.

Is it that you are so gullible, so trusting or that you are just afraid to be labelled an upstart or idiot for questioning anything?

Your ilk are the very type who would say to someone who doesn't want to have his email read "Well if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear" yet when the authorities block investigations you are fine with that and if someone says "have an independent investigation. If they've nothing to hide they've nothing to fear" you'd call them a CT nutjob.

Anyway I'm not sure I believe that she was assassinated because she was carrying a half Arab baby. It's hardly THAT big a deal unless there was going to be some serious ramifications of having a "Prince Muammar" or whatever.

But they wouldn't allow Mercedes-Benz Engineers examine the car. Why? Surely the very lads who designed the damn car are in the best position to conduct an examination. Also why did the ambulance take 2.5 hours to get to a hospital that was 3 km away, passing 4 separate hospitals along the way.

Let me guess, Diogenes, your rationale will be "traffic was bad and the other hospitals were either full or on strike. This is France after all!" :rolleyes:

Di0genes

jackiebaron wrote: »

But they wouldn't allow Mercedes-Benz Engineers examine the car. Why?

Source?

Surely the very lads who designed the damn car are in the best position to conduct an examination.

Source? Why did Mercedes want to examine the car?

Do they regularly do this?

Also why did the ambulance take 2.5 hours to get to a hospital that was 3 km away, passing 4 separate hospitals along the way.

Source?

And are you really arguing that there are 4 separate hospitals with emergency rooms within 3kms of each other in Paris?

Let me guess, Diogenes, your rationale will be "traffic was bad and the other hospitals were either full or on strike. This is France after all!" :rolleyes:

No it was quiet a weekend night. I'm just incredulous that there are 4 separate hospitals with working emergency rooms in such close approximation.

Tayla

Di0genes wrote: »

Why did Mercedes want to examine the car?

Do they regularly do this?

Several reasons I suppose, one being the fact that the seatbelts were broken, also apparently the car had previously been stolen, who better to check whether the car had been tampered with then the company who made the car?

Di0genes

Tayla wrote: »

Several reasons I suppose, one being the fact that the seatbelts were broken, also apparently the car had previously been stolen, who better to check whether the car had been tampered with then the company who made the car?

Could you provide a source that the seatbelts were broken, and that the car had previously been stolen.

I've not heard these particular claims before.

deelite

I may be mistaken but I'm sure when she was on the yacht a week or so before she died, there were photographers around and Diana made a comment to them along the lines of "you won't believe what I'm going to do announce / do next". Has anybody any idea what this was. I thought at the time newspapers were reporting of a possibly pregnancy.

jargon buster

What do you get if you cross the Queen and Prince Phillip?

Killed in a tunnel.

snafuk35

She faked her death of course!

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

And y'know the physicians in the French Hospital who treated her.

source?

kryogen

Its pretty clear that there will be no sources (believable) offered with these accusations/theories, no point in asking for opinions to be validated tbh

Also, if Diana being killed, accident or otherwise is really that important to your life then fair play, you are living the dream! Far more important things going on, far more important potential shady dealings happening.

But hey, dont let me stop you discussing the death of 1 woman, which in the greater scheme of the history of the world, assasinations and accidents, is largely irrelevant

SNAKEDOC

Talk E wrote: »

Unlawful Killing Banned in the UK. And they say the establishment have no real power :eek:


sure that only takes a phone call fro any number of guys saying ban that film or start lookin else where for employment. power is not having a movie banned but murder and getting away with it. or as it is readily called assassination. that is power. do you really think that the royal family wanted an arabs son to be third in line to the thrown of England. it simply was not even an option.

Di0genes

davoxx wrote: »

source?

Still haven't bothered to learn how to use the search function?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=52626962&postcount=25

Doing some more digging on Mailliez.

This page doesn't make any mention of pregnancy at all.

This one does, but doesn't attribute it to Mailliez.

Another Time article with no mention of pregnancy.

He didn't mention it when he spoke to CNN.

This page, which appears to be a CT site, tosses around a lot of innuendo about Mailliez, but never mentions anything about him claiming she was pregnant.

In short, I can't find any evidence for your original assertion, but I'm open to correction if you have a link to something credible.

http://articles.cnn.com/2004-01-07/world/diana.claims_1_royal-coroner-straightforward-road-traffic-accident-dodi-fayed?_s=PM:WORLD

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

And y'know the physicians in the French Hospital who treated her.

Di0genes wrote: »

Still haven't bothered to learn how to use the search function?

there is so much i could say, but i think the following is enough ...

Di0genes wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=52626962&postcount=25



http://articles.cnn.com/2004-01-07/world/diana.claims_1_royal-coroner-straightforward-road-traffic-accident-dodi-fayed?_s=PM:WORLD

obviously you read the article you linked and realised that the in the first line:

Princess Diana was not pregnant when she died, a former royal coroner says, apparently ruling out one of the rumors which has swirled around her death in a car crash six years ago.

mentioned nothing about the french hospital staff.

hell even in the article is says:

However, Dr. Burton says the French did not carry out a post-mortem examination on the body of the princess.

so that just leaves the hospital staff that tended to her.

so did you actually read the source or any of the sources in the linked post?
if so where is it implied that "y'know the physicians in the French Hospital who treated her" concluded that she was not pregnant?

Di0genes

Again your inability to read and general agressive tone is used instead of any actual argument.

This is the quote I responded tp

A little known fact is that the reason it is accepted that Diana was not pregnant with Dodi's half-Arab child is down to widely regarded shill Lord Christopher Moncton's sister. She was the one who claimed that Diana had her period at this time.

And y'know the physicians in the French Hospital who treated her.

I pointed out that on a earlier thread in this forum that the physician that some CTers claim said that Diana was pregnant made no such claim that she was pregnant.

There's no evidence Diana was pregnant. Or claimed that she was pregnant. And no physician who examined her in france supports this claim.

Id suggest a new years resolution for you davoxxx is to stop picking pointless petty arguments.

Penn

Both of you calm your tones and don't post so aggressively.

barone

as anyone seen the docu? any links to it? ive tried the web and it seems only have trailers, pm if you want

amen

arabs son to be third in line to the thrown of England

what ? Diana was only a member of the royal family by marriage.

A child born of her that was not by Charles(or any of his brothers/father!) would not never be in line to the throne.

Di0genes

amen wrote: »

what ? Diana was only a member of the royal family by marriage.

A child born of her that was not by Charles(or any of his brothers/father!) would not never be in line to the throne.

Trust me I've tried to explain this on the other thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=52626962#post52626962

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

Again your inability to read and general agressive tone is used instead of any actual argument.

This is the quote I responded tp





I pointed out that on a earlier thread in this forum that the physician that some CTers claim said that Diana was pregnant made no such claim that she was pregnant.

There's no evidence Diana was pregnant. Or claimed that she was pregnant. And no physician who examined her in france supports this claim.

Id suggest a new years resolution for you davoxxx is to stop picking pointless petty arguments.

so the french hospital staff never said whether she was not carrying a child? to assume that she was from the lack of a definitive that she was not, is incorrect.

there are many reasons why hospital staff would not disclose whether a woman was pregnant or not.

that's all i was trying to establish.

Di0genes

davoxx wrote: »

so the french hospital staff never said whether she was not carrying a child? to assume that she was from the lack of a definitive that she was not, is incorrect.

there are many reasons why hospital staff would not disclose whether a woman was pregnant or not.

The hospital staff never said she was pregnant and the Doctor (Malliez) who conspiracy theorists claim said she was pregnant said nothing of sort.

In short there's no evidence that she was pregnant and plenty of evidence that she wasn't, unlike what brown bomber was claiming in the post that started this off.

that's all i was trying to establish.

Oh I'm sure.

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

The hospital staff never said she was pregnant

okay, but they never said she was not. one does not imply the other

Di0genes wrote: »

and the Doctor (Malliez) who conspiracy theorists claim said she was pregnant said nothing of sort.

he was the first doctor on the scene. this is different to claiming that the french hospital that treated her said she was not pregnant.
he is also know to have changed his story.

And also Frederic Malliez, who was the first doctor to arrive the scene, in his 31 august deposition to the police described the Princess as being unconscious and moaning, and in an interview with the Times of London was quoted as saying the Princess had spoken to him and later denied ever saying she spoke to him, and yet, Bill Frost, the Times correspondent who wrote the story, firmly stands by it, he said Malliez not only told him Diana had spoken to him, but that he explicitly quoted her as saying “I’m in such a pain and oh God I cant stand this”.

http://yusufgamawa.hubpages.com/hub/PRINCESS-DIANA-AND-DODI

Di0genes wrote: »

In short there's no evidence that she was pregnant and plenty of evidence that she wasn't, unlike what brown bomber was claiming in the post that started this off.

well no. there is evidence to support both cases, just not physical.

this is the level of evidence that she was not pregnant ...

The heart surgeon who had a two-year relationship with Princess Diana told police he doubted she was pregnant when she died because she always took her contraceptive pills, a coroner's jury heard on Monday.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-03-03-diana-inquest_N.htm

so all we have are people claiming that she just had her period, and we have others claiming that she was pregnant.

a full autopsy at the time of death would show this. an autopsy afterwards would more than likely show this, but this is dependant upon on how far along she was and storage conditions of the body.


at this stage it is incorrect to assume that she was 100% pregnant or not.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/03/monarchy.haroonsiddique

Di0genes

davoxx wrote: »

okay, but they never said she was not. one does not imply the other

Should a hospital issue a denial with every woman they treat?

he was the first doctor on the scene. this is different to claiming that the french hospital that treated her said she was not pregnant.
he is also know to have changed his story.



http://yusufgamawa.hubpages.com/hub/PRINCESS-DIANA-AND-DODI

Do you have a credible source. Did Malliez claim to Frost that Diana said she was pregnant?

well no. there is evidence to support both cases,

I'm sorry what evidence is there that she was pregnant. I suspect you're confusing conjecture and speculation with evidence again.

just not physical.

There is physical evidence in the form of the coroners report.

this is the level of evidence that she was not pregnant ...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-03-03-diana-inquest_N.htm

so all we have are people claiming that she just had her period, and we have others claiming that she was pregnant.

a full autopsy at the time of death would show this. an autopsy afterwards would more than likely show this, but this is dependant upon on how far along she was and storage conditions of the body.


at this stage it is incorrect to assume that she was 100% pregnant or not.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/03/monarchy.haroonsiddique

[/quote]

Did you read that article in full

theguardian wrote:

After her death, she was examined both externally and in a formal post mortem examination, where no evidence that she was pregnant was picked up.

In case you missed how this started, Brown Bomber was the one claiming that the only evidence that Diana was not pregnant came from conjecture from a witness I've amply proven that this isn't the case.

Now do you believe Diana was pregnant? Or what is the purpose of your quarreling on this thread.

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

Should a hospital issue a denial with every woman they treat?

should they or do they? what about privacy?
i'm sure there are privacy laws regarding this.

but the crucial part here is that one can not infer a woman is or is not pregnant just because the hospital did not mention pregnancy. i thought that this is obvious.

Di0genes wrote: »

Do you have a credible source. Did Malliez claim to Frost that Diana said she was pregnant?

that the doc changed his statement, that was provided in the link.
that the doc claimed that diana was pregnant, i never said that the doctor said she was pregnant or that diana told the doctor that she was pregnant.

the fact that the doctor did not state that she was pregnant, does not mean she was or was not pregnant.

Di0genes wrote: »

I'm sorry what evidence is there that she was pregnant. I suspect you're confusing conjecture and speculation with evidence again.

sorry there batman, but a person claiming that the victim told them something is evidence, specifically called hearsay.
conjecture is a proposition that is unproven but is thought to be true and has not been disproven.

Di0genes wrote: »

There is physical evidence in the form of the coroners report.

nope, the point was that they could not tell definitively one way or the other whether she was pregnant due various circumstances.

i even linked the article that states that.

the quote is "However, he added: "It is likely that pregnancy is a matter that cannot be proved one way or the other in scientific terms in this case."

Di0genes wrote: »

Did you read that article in full

sure did, i read the whole article before posting.

Di0genes wrote: »

In case you missed how this started, Brown Bomber was the one claiming that the only evidence that Diana was not pregnant came from conjecture from a witness I've amply proven that this isn't the case.

it is. the fact is that the only claims that she was not pregnant are from people claiming that she had her period or that she never missed her pill.

you mistakenly claimed that the french hospital staff said that she was not pregnant, and then back tracked since.

Di0genes wrote: »

Now do you believe Diana was pregnant?

what i believe eh? that is simply, i believe that the french hospital authorities would never confirm nor deny whether she was pregnant.

Di0genes wrote: »

Or what is the purpose of your quarrelling on this thread.

i'm not quarrelling, i thought that perhaps they released her accident medical reports ... but you made an unfounded claim, i never heard of it, so i asked for a source, which you could not provide, because as i correctly thought, you misinterpreted the actual article.

like i said, i believe that the french hospital authorities would never confirm nor deny whether she was pregnant.