Demotion from Deputy Coroner to the Royal Household to Assistant Deputy
Coroner for Inner-West London has not dampened the spark of Baroness
Butler-Sloss.
At yet another preliminary hearing yesterday on the interminable path towards
a full inquest on the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed in
1997, Lady Butler-Sloss bluntly told Mohamed Al Fayed’s legal team that she
had not received a shred of evidence to support their allegations of how the
couple died in a Paris underpass.
Mr Al Fayed claims that the Duke of Edinburgh was behind a plot to have the
couple murdered by British secret intelligence services.
Lady Butler-Sloss told Michael Mansfield, QC, appearing for Mr Al Fayed, in no
uncertain terms: “It would be enormously helpful to me if I had some
evidence from Mr Al Fayed’s team to support the allegations that are being
made, because at the moment there is not a shred of evidence given to me
about any of those allegations, and for me to explore them, particularly for
me to present them to the jury, I would need some evidence.” She added that,
if evidence of a plot were produced, she would allow the jury to consider Mr
Al Fayed’s claims. “But if there is no evidence to support them I shall not
present them to the jury because it would be my duty not to do so.”
Mr Al Fayed sat at one side of the crowded courtroom listening to the exchange
with no visible expression. On the other side of the room, separated by
teams of lawyers, Lady Sarah McCorquodale, the late Princess’s sister,
listened with equal impassivity.
Mr Mansfield, chubby, massively grey-haired and a seasoned veteran of the
endless Bloody Sunday inquiry, would not back down. “There is evidence,” he
said.
“I would like to see it,” retorted Lady Butler-Sloss, who on the bench gives
the impress of a jolly and jovial headmistress with a steely core.
“You have it already,” Mr Mansfield said.
“Ah,” said m’lady, as if in anticipation of being enlightened a little more.
A starting point, Mr Mansfield said, would be the premonitions and fears that
the Princess harboured over her fate for two years before her death. They
would like to see the original of letter she wrote to Paul Burrell, her
butler, allegedly expressing some of her concerns.
How many witnesses would Mr Mansfield require to give evidence on what the
Princess had been thinking in her last two years?
“Eighteen,” he said.
Lady Butler-Sloss’s usually animated mouth, on which a good-natured smile
usually plays, fell open in disbelief. “Eighteen!” she exclaimed. “We can’t
have eighteen.”
Mr Al Fayed’s team are seeking a delay in the opening of the full inquest
proceedings to allow them to gather large quantities of original documents,
and to line up an unspecified but undoubtedly large number of witnesses,
many of them French.
Another lecture from the bench: “You do realise, Mr Mansfield, that we are
entirely in the hands of French witnesses, and they have no obligation to
give any evidence at all. If they say they won’t give evidence, there’s
nothing I can do about it.”
Lady Butler-Sloss said that two French doctors involved in the tragedy had
been approached by the inquest. One had agreed to talk on the phone but not
give evidence, while the other had not yet responded.
“This is a serious matter, but these are French citizens with their own
rights,” she said.
Two witnesses that Mr Al Fayed’s team would like to call, however, are
distinctly British. Mr Mansfield said that the Prince of Wales had been
interviewed for Lord Stevens’s recent report, but the Al Fayed legal team
would like to see a full transcript.
“Also, the Duke of Edinburgh was responsible for letters sent to Princess
Diana, but he has refused to be interviewed. We would like to know whether
we can go beyond that,” Mr Mansfield said, suggesting that Mr Al Fayed
should be told the reasons for the Duke’s refusal.
Lady Butler-Sloss said that the number of witnesses must be kept in check,
especially those who were likely to be repetitive or peripheral, otherwise
the jury would become overloaded, bogged down and possibly confused.
More witnesses and more demands for original documents would create a vast
explosion of paper, again probably far too much for a jury to go through.
She suggested that the teams present her with a list of their proposed
witnesses, and just how important they would be to the core of the case.
The assistant deputy coroner pointed out that she had a staff of only two, a
legal assistant and an administrative assistant, which is two more than most
coroners have but still nowhere near enough to sift through and organise a
huge new influx of documents.
Mr Mansfield claimed that there were 145 missing exhibits, mainly photographs,
which his team wanted to see.
“Some of these photographs are intensely sensitive and terribly sad; I would
be happy for lawyers to see them, but it would be disastrous if they
appeared on the internet,” Lady Butler-Sloss said.
The hoped-for May opening of the inquest proceedings now looks unrealistic and
a likely date will be some time in the autumn.
Richard Keen, QC, representing the Ritz Hotel in Paris and the parents of
Henri Paul, the chauffeur at the wheel of the Mercedes, appealed for the
hearing to take place after the tenth anniversary of Diana’s death on August
31 this year.
By a French statute of limitations, the paparazzi involved in the crash scene
on the night could no longer face possible criminal charges, Mr Keen said,
suggesting that they might then be more willing to step forward as
witnesses.
Lady Butler-Sloss was beginning to take a gloomy view of when the inquest
might start, and how long it might last, which could now be eight months.
She said that she had hoped originally to have it concluded by the tenth
anniversary, but that appears now an unrealistic hope.
Yesterday’s hearing was enlivened by a postlunch outburst by Lady
Butler-Sloss. During the morning she had asked all the main counsel involved
to meet over lunch and decided which date for the next hearing would suit
them all best. The reply was April 30.
“I am trying to keep this inquest moving; I am finding it extraordinarily
difficult to find anyone else who will move it with me,” Lady Butler-Sloss
said.
“This inquest matters,” she announced loudly and with animation. Lady
Butler-Sloss is not in the habit of shouting, but she came close. “You have
all spent the morning telling me how much it matters. It will resound across
the world.
“Now you can’t even agree the next meeting for two months. It’s outrageous,
and utterly unacceptable from the public perspective.”
There were mutterings of contrition among the bad boys who had received the
headmistress’s verbal caning.
Mr Mansfield offered to have it within the 24 hours; the others, of course,
couldn’t make it that soon but they can, and will, make March 21.
Dramatis personae
Baroness Butler-Sloss, 72
The former High Court judge brought out of retirement to act as coroner. At
one stage the most senior woman judge in the country, she headed the
Cleveland child abuse inquiry. Criticised last week by her former colleagues
in the Court of Appeal over her decision not to have a jury and act as
coroner for the Royal Household. She wants to get on with the inquest as
soon as possible and has said it should start in May
Mohamed Al Fayed, 74
Egyptian father of Dodi Fayed who died with Diana, Princess of Wales. The
owner of Harrods and the Ritz Hotel in Paris he maintains that his son and
the Princess died in the car crash as a result of a plot hatched by the Duke
of Edinburgh and MI6. Has spent millions in the past decade to prove his case.
He wants the inquest to look at the conspiracy theories and start in the
autumn after months of preparation
Michael Mansfield, QC 65
He is Al Fayed’s lawyer. A senior criminal defence lawyer famous for his grasp
of detail and persistence who has appeared in many of the most celebrated
cases of the past 20 years including the Birmingham Six, the Stephen
Lawrence inquiry; he defended Barry George over the murder of Jill Dando and
appeared for Kenny Noye, the gangland road-rage killer. Is also appearing
for the family of Jean Charles de Menezes, killed by counter-terrorist
police at Stockwell
Lady Sarah McCorquodale, 51
Representing the Spencer family. The Princess’s sister and the eldest daughter
of Edward Spencer, 8th Earl Spencer. Lady Sarah is married to Neil Edmund
McCorquodale and was coexecutor of her sister’s will. She is president of
the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund. Supports wish of Prince William
and Prince Harry for the inquest to be “open, fair and transparent but move
swiftly to a conclusion”
Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington, 63
Former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police who oversaw a three-year £3.6
million investigation into the conspiracy theories surrounding the deaths.
Delivered his 800-page report last December concluding that the deaths were
a tragic accident and not the result of a plot. The Al Fayed camp want to
put the report and its evidence in front of the inquest jury
Michael Cole, 62
Bouffant-haired spokesman for Mr Al Fayed and often the public face of his
case on television. A former BBC royal correspondent, he worked for Mr Al
Fayed at the time of the deaths and then left to set up his own PR business.
Now returned, Cole has never liked the “bouffant-haired” description. He
once told a newspaper: “My hair grows like this without aid or
encouragement,” adding that he never dyed his hair “unlike some politicians
and TV presenters”
If this was your son or daughter I think you would try everything possible to find the truth!!!
Viv Patterson, Edinburgh, Scotland
If Princess Diana was so concerned about dying in a car crash should she not have taken the one action that would have improved her chance of survival significantly? That is wearing a seat belt. There were four people in the car, three died. The survivor, though injured, was the only one wearing a seat belt.
Rebecca, Brussels,
Why is an inquest being held in this country at all for Dodi Al Fayed, who to the best of my knowledge was neither a British citizen nor domiciled here? It seems a total misuse of taxpayers money just to give his ridiculous father an unjustified platform to air his completely unfounded and surely libellous views.
Michael Brow, Winchester,
Congratulations to Baroness Butler-Sloss. She, at least, seems to be prepared to stand up to Mr al Fayeds posturing. Mr al Fayed is responsible for this particular incident to be dragged out for nearly 10 years, with his wild accusations and conspiracies. No evidence has been found by any investigation that either Prince Philip, MI6 or the tooth fairy were involved in the accident that claimed the lives of Diana, Dodi and Henri Paul. I, like Diana, also have dreams. Unfortunately I have yet to win the lottery, for which I personally blame Mr al Fayed and Michael Mansfield QC. Unfortunately, as in the case of Dianas dreams, this does not constitute evidence.
David Leslie, Perth, Scotland
To avoid further doubt and in the interest of fair justice the Al Fayed camp should be allowed to present their case after being allowed access to all the evidential documents. It's a kill or cure situation and I feel that in view of the great sensitivity and feeling this case has and will evoke that the circumstances should be allowed to complete conclusively.
Martin Benn, East Grinstead, England
ref. the unfortunate deaths of diana and dodi al fayed. dont you think it is time that mr m al fayed put away his paranoia and got on with life. i.ve only seen on t.v. the set up he has in his london store but i find it sickening and just plain tacky to say the least. if he had little less money the event would have been consigned to history many years ago.
S. Baron, leith, tasmania
Dam Butler Schloss seems very keen to keep things from the jury, indeed she didn't even want a jury, wanted it held in private, and wanted to be royal coroner so that palace flunkies should decide. The whole point of a jury is that they should decide if Philip or Charles had any involvement, given that Diana's memo directly pointed the finger.
kerry livermore, London, England,
If there isn't a shred of evidence, there isn't a shred of evidence. Mr. Al Fayed needs to appreciate that British justice is based on evidence, not personal assessment of character. If he doesn't like the system, and would prefer his personal assessment of character to dictate what the law should do, he can go and live in a country where that kind of thing does actually happen.
Edmund Burke, Kingston upon Thames, England
It looks like another Hutton already with a pro establishment outcome likely. When are we going to have an inquiry of kind on similar issues of national importance that are held on behalf of the people.
garth wiseman, london, england
Why do we have to waste even more of the taxpayers money on this inquest. It is obvious that there was a terrible accident caused in part by the papperatzi. If the royal family were behind it; and I doubt this is the case; there is no way that any evidence would be left behind. Mr Al Fayed should get on with the grieving process and stop trying to blame others for his sons death. How much more money will we waste?
Joseph Kellie, Edinburgh, Scotland