Royalist: 28 years later, Princess Diana’s death looks more & more like murder

August 31st marks the 28th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death in Paris. This year, there have been fewer articles about Diana and her death, especially compared to previous years’ coverage. Personally, I think the way the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been treated by the monarchy and the British establishment have opened up some old wounds, and made some people rethink what happened to Diana. I still believe there was more to the story with what happened to Harry, Meghan and Doria Ragland in New York in 2023, and I believe Harry when he’s said (repeatedly) that he fears that people want his wife to end up like his mother. The older I get, the more I believe there was a coverup and that Diana’s death was incredibly convenient for the Windsors. Well, Tom Sykes devoted a Substack piece to HIS evolving thoughts on Diana’s death and the alleged coverup. You can read the full piece here. I just wanted to show a few excerpts:

But, 28 years later I want to challenge that wisdom. At the risk of being branded a “Diana Truther” or conspiracy theorist, I believe there is just way too much about the events of that night and its aftermath to fit the accident narrative.

There are great differences of opinion about who ordered the killing. Mohamed Fayed famously blamed Prince Philip, but I side with those who argue that the most credible suspect is a powerful group of insiders in the British security services, who may have disposed of Diana, without consulting or seeking approval from individual royals, believing that Diana was a grave threat to the monarchy and the wider establishment. Don’t forget, she said in her Panorama interview, that she didn’t believe Charles was fit to be king. Imagine if she were the one living in California and giving interviews to Oprah. Can anyone really imagine a Queen Camilla in such a scenario?

I believe that the white Fiat Uno that clipped Diana’s car just before it entered the tunnel was driven by a security operative, and that the collision triggered the car’s airbags, obscuring the driver’s view for a crucial few seconds. Even if the airbags didn’t go off prematurely, as the writer Lady Colin Campbell believes, I suspect that the collision created a chaotic moment of panic that led to the car smashing into the 13th pillar.

The keystone of all this conventional wisdom is that Henri Paul was drunk. Alas, it is an unquestioned fact that one post-mortem test on “his” blood showed a carbon monoxide level of 20.7 per cent. With that amount of carbon monoxide in your blood, you’d hardly be able to stand up, let alone walk normally, or bend down to tie your shoelaces, as CCTV showed Henri Paul did at 11:12 pm as he was preparing to leave the Ritz Hotel. The British police inquiry into Diana’s death ultimately concluded the sample was contaminated. And yet tests on his blood from the same French labs saying he was three times over the drink driving limit were accepted as accurate without question.

Then there is the extraordinary matter of the embalming of Diana’s body. We all remember Charles arriving in Paris and bringing Diana home that miserable Sunday evening. She was pronounced dead at 4 am. Between 2 pm and 4:30 pm, according to Operation Paget, a report carried out by the British police to address and investigate Mohamed Fayed’s claims of conspiracy and cover-up, the blood was drained out of her body, destroyed, and replaced with formaldehyde, fatally compromising all further tissue testing. The Paris authorities said this was because it was very hot and they wanted the body to look presentable for viewing. And yet Dodi Fayed, who died in the car, was not embalmed.

[From The Royalist Substack]

Yeah, I agree – the white Fiat, Henri Paul’s sketchy bloodwork, the embalming. It was all so bizarre. Sykes then references Noel Botham’s book, The Murder of Princess Diana, and the case Botham made. Botham references Diana’s own belief that Charles and the establishment would kill her, likely through a staged car accident. She even wrote down her fears (as did her lawyer). There’s also the matter of Henri Paul’s mysterious deposits in the months before his death. There’s also a rumor that someone replaced Paul’s bloodwork with a sample from a man who died by suicide that same night. There’s also the absence of any CCTV footage from around the tunnel. Granted, CCTV wasn’t as omnipresent in 1997 as it is now, but there were still cameras set out around the tunnel, yet none of them caught sight of Henri Paul’s car or the other cars around it.

Sykes added something else I didn’t know: Diana’s sister Sarah McCorquodale was the one who gathered some of Diana’s most personal belongings from Kensington Palace following Diana’s death. Sarah took custody of Diana’s mahogany box, the box where Diana stored all of her sensitive letters, tapes, videos and evidence of other people’s dirty deeds. Sarah said that she looked inside the box when she took it and found it full. But a short time later, she checked again… and the box was empty. Chilling.

Let me add something else – one of the main arguments made by Charles, at the time and in the years afterwards, is that he never would have wanted Diana taken out because it slowed down his planned rollout of Camilla as his partner/soulmate/wife. But here’s the thing… that rollout was going poorly, because Diana was still the main show. People already despised Camilla for her role in breaking up Diana and Charles’s marriage. Camilla didn’t want to compete with Diana head-to-head either. Diana’s death helped Camilla and Charles in the long run.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.