please..
The owner of the car that Diana was travelling in when it crashed wants it back..
It is a Mercedes Benz .. He does not know where it is being kept..
Experts believe it to be worth a staggering 10 million..!!
He would like to put it in a museum ( yeah! right)..
The royals would like it disposed of.
In 2017 it was being kept in a shipping container in a police pound on the outskirts of Paris..
But it must be a twisted wreck?
It wouldn't be worth much if it was not a twisted wreck..
It has a macabre value to some..
Hadn't thought of that.
It will be worth a lot if it's still in the exact condition as when it crashed.
Everything has a price, her old Ford Escort Turbo sole for £722,500 very recently.
https://bit.ly/3ThjvmZ
Why would they have kept it for so long ?
Quote from: Alex on October 20, 2022, 05:07:21 PMWhy would they have kept it for so long ?
The question is why hasn't it been returned to the rightful owner.
Quote from: Diasi on October 20, 2022, 05:47:45 PMThe question is why hasn't it been returned to the rightful owner.
Maybe not all has been disclosed about the accident ?
Whatever happened is very unlikely to be fully known. Plenty of unexplained stuff so rich pickings for conspiracy theorists.
I have no theories and have largely forgotten what I did know. What I recall is a very strong feeling that there was something distinctly fishy about it at the time.
I reckon they are hanging on to the motor as evidence should something new crop up.. Obviously they are allowed to do this..
Why would the royals want it destroyed.. ?
In time no-one will know where it is.. It will mysteriously disappear..
We were under the impression that they were worried about Diana getting so close to Dodi Fayed, if she had married him then the young prince's would have had a foreigner with a different religion for a step dad.
No way would the old guard let that happen, so she had to go.
Ooooo!! Be careful what you say Raven.. You might get put in the tower.. :grin:
Quote from: Scrumpy on October 20, 2022, 07:19:51 PMOoooo!! Be careful what you say Raven.. You might get put in the tower.. :grin:
My mother always used to say my mouth would get me in big trouble. 😊 But seriously, a lot of people think along those lines.
That was the "something fishy" I meant. First thought that sprang to mind at the time.
Muslims in the Royal Family, heaven forbid !!!!
Quote from: Alex on October 20, 2022, 06:56:48 PMMaybe not all has been disclosed about the accident ?
Well I've helped you to answer your own question.
Yes you're far too clever for me :yay:
You are ALL too clever for me..
Whoever got rid of her was too clever for the world
I've always been intrigued by the conspiracy theories which I find ridiculous. Henri Paul, the driver was drunk and also had prescription drugs in his system which may have worsened his drunkenness.
Some conspiracy!
Mike
I agree with Michael.. Drunk driver.. No seat belts in use..
Ah but he doesn't appear to be drunk on ghe CCTV. Apparently.
Quote from: klondike on October 21, 2022, 10:45:10 AMAh but he doesn't appear to be drunk on ghe CCTV. Apparently.
And that outweighs the pathologist's examination? - get real
October 21, 2022, 10:48:12 AMjust think what would be needed for a conspiracy theory to hold water. Persuade the not drunk driver to kill himself, talk folk out of wearing seat belts. Ockham's razor'
Don't forget the white car... :grin:
Plus how much do pathologists earn?
There were pictures taken by morbid onlookers who were first on the scene..
The mysterious white car.. !!!
October 21, 2022, 12:37:48 PM
If there had been a white car driven by just a regular guy they would have come forward.. Every driver who was in that vicinity knows whether they were there at that time.. The world press reported every detail.. and a genuine ( white car) driver would have made themselves known .
The white care was mentioned.. but no-one came forward.. Very strange...
Quote from: klondike on October 21, 2022, 10:45:10 AMAh but he doesn't appear to be drunk on ghe CCTV. Apparently.
I have seen this CCTV footage loads of times, he seems perfectly OK.
Now Dodi didn't drink alcohol, nor did Diana I don't think. As someone who hasn't had a drink for years I can tell if someone has been drinking, you can smell it, that rubbish about vodka not smelling on the breath is not right, and anyone smelling of mints is suspicious to me. They were all very close together when they came out of the Ritz, if he had been drinking as much as he was supposed to have done they must have known, would Dodi have got into a car with someone he suspected of drinking? I wouldn't. It is all very fishy indeed.
rubbish
I don't think you can dismiss it by saying "rubbish " There are lots of questions that will never be answered.
There aren't quite as many theories about the events in the Pont de l'Alma tunnel as there are about that grassy knoll in Dallas but it comes close.
Quote from: Alex on October 21, 2022, 02:53:14 PMI don't think you can dismiss it by saying "rubbish " There are lots of questions that will never be answered.
I just did. A drunk killed three people, including himself, by hitting an immovable object with his car. End of story
Yeah that's certainly one of the less compelling of the competing theories. :grin:
Quote from: Michael Rolls on October 21, 2022, 09:30:22 PMI just did. A drunk killed three people, including himself, by hitting an immovable object with his car. End of story
Rubbish
Still unanswered questions.
what? Car tampered with? Pathologist lying? Owt else?
I don't know what happened as I wasn't there so I can't say 100% whether or not it was an accident or a deliberate act, as the evidence on both sides is circumstantial.
The crash happened & that is the only known fact.
Much is said about the driver's blood test but a blood sample can be doctored, so whether or not it was I don't know.
I have to agree with Jacqueline that I wouldn't get into a car with a pissed driver & as a teetotaller I too can tell a mile off if someone has been drinking.
October 22, 2022, 08:35:29 AMQuote from: Michael Rolls on October 21, 2022, 09:30:22 PMI just did. A drunk killed three people, including himself, by hitting an immovable object with his car. End of story
Just as well you had a career in NHS management & not a job as an criminal investigator.
I reckon you nailed it there Phil. We don't know for sure and almost certainly never will. There is a nasty smell surrounding the incident and it ain't just booze.
Quote from: klondike on October 22, 2022, 08:40:41 AMI reckon you nailed it there Phil. We don't know for sure and almost certainly never will. There is a nasty smell surrounding the incident and it ain't just booze.
Most people who are dubbed as conspiracy theorists are, in fact, doing no more than looking objectively at all the possibilities.
for what it's worth, as a fairly experienced rifle shot, I am not convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone - but these half-baked 'questions to answers' theories are ridiculous.
Lee Harvey Oswald.. !!
Very suspicious over that case.. He was quickly disposed of by Jack Ruby I think..
Quote from: Scrumpy on October 22, 2022, 10:26:58 AMLee Harvey Oswald.. !!
Very suspicious over that case.. He was quickly disposed of by Jack Ruby I think..
Yes he was, wasn't Jack Ruby Mafia? the plot thickens!
The mysteries of life...
I have long studied the Kennedy assassination. Forget Diana - if you want a real menage of fact, theory and downright incredulity, study November 22nd, 1963 (frightening to think that next year it will be 60 years ago - and I still remember it as if it were yesterday.
The Warren report concluded that Oswald acted alone but critiques of that report raise a lot of objections to its findings. As far as I can discover, nobody has ever explained the murder of Officer Tippet - the easy explanation is that Oswald killed him - but why? And some evidence places Oswald nowhere near where Tippett was killed - but others contradict it.
Were there three shots or four? Four shots would explain the various wounds to Kennedy and Connoly, but four shots from Oswald's bolt action Mannlicher-Carcano in the time available to him seem to be verging on impossible, whereas three would be believable.
Some of the proponents of the three bullet theory, to make it credible claim that one of the bullets fired, after passing through Kennedy went on to strike Connoly - but analysis of the film evidence demonstrated that for that to happen the bullet would not only have to change direction twice (once is highly likely, but twice virtually impossible) but would also have to take 1.2 seconds to cover the few feet separating the two men - quite impossible.
The 1969 House Select Committee decided that there may have been more than one shooter involved, but couldn't prove it.
Diana and Paris? Walk in the park