Diana Inquest

[naomi24]

A court has ruled that the Diana and Dodi inquest must be heard by a jury. Do you think this is the right decision, or do you think that the public are too emotional over the tragedy to make an unbiased judgement?

[Champagne]

I would trust the decision of a jury. It has been many years since Diana's death and although the nation felt a bond towards her, I think that enough time has passed and that people given the responsibility of deciphering such a complex case would treat it with the seriousness it deserves.

I hope this case comes to a close soon. I'm sick of hearing about it after all this time!

[tigerlily11]

Its about time some closure was made and I think they made they right choice.
Lets face the great British public thought more of her than her husband, family and inlaws ever did it would seem.

[gina32]

and who is paying for it????

[gina32]

it has been going on for 10 years now, i think most people have already made up their minds as to what happened, and a jury , i dont think, will change that, more money wasted.

[flip-flop]

Oh for F sake.

The driver was bladdered and crashed: three people died and one was injured.

Right - job done: where's me millions?

[sp1814]

You know what?

I love a good conspiracy theory, but I have to concur with flip-flop.

If the secret services wanted to off Diana and Dodi, a car crash is the absolute silliest way to do it. I mean, there are too many variables that they couldn't control.

They died in a tragic car accident.

That's it.

However Elvis is still alive, Marilyn Monroe was killed by the mafia and Rod Hull faked his own death.

[flip-flop]

...............and I'm the father of Anna Nicole Smith's baby.

[naomi24]

The question was 'do you think the public will make an unbiased judgement?', not what the outcome will be.

I asked because I was watching a debate where the pompous participants seemed to think that a jury wouldn't be capable of coming to a reasoned decision because of the emotional out-pouring that occurred at the time of the crash. I thought that was quite insulting.

[crete]

flip flop, youll get a gong for your opinion no doubt, why is there yet another enquiry anyway ?

[anotheoldgit]

I think it only right that the Deputy Royal Coroner of the Queen's Household Baroness Butler-Sloss should not be allowed preside over the inquest without a jury. It could be the thin end of the wedge for British Justice, that has served us well for many a year. And what kind of message would this have conveyed over to the conspiracy theory supporters?

This is certainly a slap in the face for the establishment, why should we have yet another whitewash inquest/inquiry presided over by yet another official that has been hand picked by the establishment ?

Perhaps we would have done better if all those other inquiries that have taken place since the war in Iraq had also been heard by a jury.

[naomi24]

I quite agree oldgit.

[maxximus]

here here! old git. completely agree with the logic of your post.

[sunny jim]

me too, if there is coruption in high places I would like to know ,there seems to be a lot of that just lately .

[idalovett]

I agree with you anotheoldgit. To comment further I would only voice your own opinion.

[stokeace]

if it wasnt for mohammed el fayed fighting for an answer as to how his son died the case would be where the establishment want it.................................hidden.

[Lindylou]

Every British citizen who dies abroad - for whatever reason - is entitled to an Inquest being held in Britain. Why has it taken 10 years for Diana's Inquest? Doesn't matter if there are no 'suspicious' circumstances, i.e. drunk driver, etc. Can't help feeling something is amiss for an Inquest to take TEN years to be held. Why so long? What's the problem? Who doesn't want an Inquest? And why not? If it were a relation of mine, I would be unhappy too!

[gina32]

does anyone really care anyway, loads of other more sensible ways of spending the money that will be used for it