Diana's case could revive
Lord Stevens said that new witnesses had been found and that some of the issues raised were 'right to be raised'.india Updated: Jan 28, 2006 19:40 IST
Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, who is heading the police inquiry into the death of Princess Diana in the car crash in Paris in 1997, could have, albeit inadvertently, triggered another fresh round of conspiracy theories about the death of Princess Dian and her lover Dodi, son of Harrods owner Mohammad al Fayed.
Lord Stevens said that new witnesses had been found and that some of the issues raised by Mohammad al-Fayed, were 'right to be raised'. He did not specify the 'issues' but his statement would surely be seized by conspiracy theorists, who have been arguing that the couple were murdered.
Fayed had in fact also engaged private sleuths to investigate the crash and ferret out evidence to prove his allegation that the crash was engineered allegedly by British intelligence agencies. He claimed that Diana was bumped off because she was expecting Dodi's child and they planned to marry soon.
Not many subscribed to his theory. Most close friends of Diana too debunked Fayed's claim that she was pregnant.
But Lord Stevens told GMTV in an interview that his investigation had been certainly "worthwhile". "It is right to say that some of the issues raised by Fayed have been right to be raised. We are pursuing those. It is a more complex inquiry than any of us thought."
Lord Stevens has, reportedly, met Prince Charles some time ago as part of the inquiry. Princess Diana had also allegedly recorded a video in which she alleged that an attempt would be made to tamper with her car and engineer an accident.
So far the police here has been suggesting that the French authorities who inquired into the crash were very thoroughly interviewed many witnesses had essentially "got it right" by concluding the couple died when the Mercedes in which they were being driven by Ritz chauffer Henri Paul, crashed in a tunnel in an accident. It also held that the driver had drunk over the permissible level of alcohol.