Who Killed Diana, and Why? Citizens Electoral Council of Australia

11

have both directly participated. 

Motorbikes/paparazzi. The presence of “other, un-

identified motorcyclists, who may have cut in front 

of [Dodi and Diana’s] Mercedes Benz, causing the 

crash”, has been part of the case from the begin-

ning.

22

 The outrageous dismissal in Sept. 1999 of 

all evidence concerning them, by the first, French 

investigating prosecutor, who also dropped man-

slaughter charges against ten identified paparazzi 

photographers that showed up at the scene minutes 

after the crash, drove Mohamed Al-Fayed to under-

take the series of lawsuits resulting in the Paget and 

RCJ investigations. The latter, 2007-08, inquest jury 

did ultimately go beyond the French attribution of 

all blame to “drunk driver” Henri Paul: it added that 

the “unlawful killing” of Diana and Dodi was also 

caused by the “grossly negligent driving of the fol-

lowing vehicles”. 

There were genuine paparazzi following Diana 

and Dodi in Paris on 30 August, as there were wher-

ever Diana went. But a handful of them were differ-

ent from the usual photographers. They began swarm-

ing around Diana and Dodi as soon as they arrived 

at Le Bourget airport that afternoon. The genuine pa-

parazzi did not know the ones on powerful motor-

bikes, calling them “the fans”. Fabrice Chassery, one 

of the genuine paparazzi, told the French police that 

the newcomers “were behaving like madmen”, an 

observation buttressed by bodyguard Kez Wingfield, 

as reported by Morgan: “This was the first time in my 

experience that I had seen the paparazzi behaving so 

dangerously”. With six sections titled “Unidentified 

Motorbikes” and “Other Motorbikes” in his summary 

volume, Morgan presents all the testimony collect-

ed by various agencies about these suspicious vehi-

cles. No law enforcement agency has ever followed 

up satisfactorily on their identity. 

The CCTV cameras in the Alma tunnel, which nor-

mally recorded 24 hours a day, were unaccounta-

bly turned off that night, but numerous eye-witness-

es have testified to what happened as the Mercedes 

approached the tunnel. Daily Mail investigator Sue 

Reid, in her article, reminds about long-standing re-

ports of “a powerful black motorbike, with no con-

nection to the paparazzi”, which “emerged from a 

slip road and began chasing Diana and Dodi as their 

Mercedes was about to enter the tunnel. Fourteen 

eyewitnesses say it was the bike’s rider and pillion 

passenger who really caused the crash”. Continued 

Reid, “Some 15 ft. in front of the Mercedes, witnesses 

say, a fierce flash of white light came from the motor-

bike and shone straight into the eyes of Henri Paul. 

The Mercedes ploughed into the 13th pillar on the tun-

nel’s left side, instantly killing Paul and Dodi who sat in 

its front left and back seats respectively. Within seconds, 

the mystery motorbike had sped away and the two men 

on board have never been traced”. British and French 

police also claimed they had been unable to trace the 

white Fiat Uno, which witnesses said had bumped the 

Mercedes, although Morgan provides evidence that the 

22.  Jeffrey Steinberg, “Can the House of Windsor Survive Diana’s 

Death?”, EIR, 12 Sept. 1997.

French did trace it to photographer James Andanson, 

who a few years later was found dead inside a locked, 

burnt-out vehicle with two bullet holes in his head (the 

French police ruled it “suicide”).

Morgan’s books provide tables of potential wit-

nesses, not called to testify in Operation Paget or the 

RCJ inquest, as well as item-by-item annotation of Pa-

get evidence and testimony, withheld from the inquest 

jury. Lord Justice Scott Baker, presiding over the in-

quest, in his formal presentation of 20 topics for the 

inquiry, included the following two:

•  Whether and, if so in what circumstances, the 

Princess of Wales feared for her life;

•  Whether the British or any other security ser-

vices had any involvement in the collision.

Despite their obvious relevance to both counts, no 

Royals were called to testify, only the Queen’s Private 

Secretary Robert Fellowes (Diana’s brother-in-law), 

who was later demonstrated to have lied his head off 

about his role in the crucial events of the hours and 

days following the crash. 

Near the end of Keith Allen’s “Unlawful Killing” 

film, clinical psychologist Oliver James delivered his 

own verdict, one shared by many friends of Diana, as 

well as her high-powered enemies: that she “could 

have started a movement to end the monarchy”. Or, 

as Allen summed up, “The British Establishment think 

that they have got away with murder. But then, what’s 

new? They’ve been getting away with murder for cen-

turies”. But, he concluded, with the murder of Diana, 

the Royals have gone one too far: “We may soon wit-

ness what the British Establishment fears the most—

the end of the monarchy”. 

Additional Reading *

Robert Barwick, “Suppressed Film Exposes Royal 

Stonewall of Diana Murder Probe”, EIR, 9 May 

2014.

Jeffrey Steinberg, “Battle Royal Shattering the British 

Empire,” EIR, 27 May 2011.

—— “French Magistrate Caught in Princess Diana 

Murder Cover-Up”, EIR, 1 Dec. 2000.

—— “Al Fayed Charges ‘Murder’ in Anniversary 

Lawsuit”, EIR, 29 Sept. 2000.

—— “New Diana wars in Britain put focus on 

LaRouche”, EIR, 19 June 1998.

—— “The Murder of a Princess”, EIR, 13 Mar. 

1998.

Jeffrey Steinberg, Allen Douglas, “French Police 

Hush up New Leads on Diana’s Murder”, EIR, 

12 Dec. 1997.

—— “French Cover-up of Diana Assassination 

Exposed!”, EIR, 21 Nov. 1997.

Jeffrey Steinberg, “Can the House of Windsor 

Survive Diana’s Death?”; EIR, 12 Sept. 1997.

Scott Thompson, “Princess Diana’s War with the 

Windsors”, EIR, 12 Sept. 1997.

* All cited articles are available in the EIR archive at 

www.larouchepub.com

.

---