The Death Of Diana – Accident? Assassination? Or Ritual Sacrifice?

First Published: October 16, 2016 Last updated: March 13th, 2019 Written by: Marcus Lowth Estimated Reading Time: 12 minutes Posted in: Conspiracy
1 comment

Almost as soon as Princess Diana died on 31st August 1997 were a plethora of conspiracy theories born as to just what happened that fateful evening. So much so that the Metropolitan Police were forced to open Operation Paget in 2004 to officially investigate such claims of foul play, although no conspiracies were discovered – at least by them.

Others have persisted with their assertions of things not adding up. Perhaps not least of which were the apparent letters Diana sent to Paul Burrell and her solicitor Lord Mitchum. In these she categorically stated that the royal family and her husband (Prince Charles) were “planning her death” and that it would be “a car accident!”

While Burrell told of his concerns, Mitchum gave the note he had been sent to Lord Condon – the police chief at the time, who then confiscated it. The fact that he did this is an offense of concealing evidence – something that was glossed over in the inquiry. As was the fact that Condon’s successor, Lord Stevens, also illegally kept this note secret until 2003. Is it coincidence that both men were made lords soon after.

Princess Diana in foreground, her car after the accident in the background.

Princess Diana in foreground, her car after the accident in the background.

Although Diana was not royalty at the time of her death, within hours of her demise, her body was suddenly taken into the care of the royals – meaning it was essentially “off limits” to all but a few. The fact that she was partially embalmed only hours after death, and before an official autopsy raised further eyebrows, despite medical experts stating this was simply standard practice.

Alan Powell is just one of those who refuses to believe Diana’s death was just a tragic accident. In his 2012 book The Princess Diana Conspiracies Powell argued that Diana’s death was the result of secret service interference. Many people were widely critical of Powell’s version of events. Whether a publicity stunt or a genuine fear after the fact, Powell told of how he “feared for his life” in 2013 after he had been followed for some time by “shadowy men!”

You can check out a short video of Alan Powell speaking of his theories below.

Many Points Of Interest Worth Noting

You can see why some people have become quite fixated by the whole situation however. There are plenty of things that still legitimately seem to require answers.

The switching of cars at the last moment was seen as suspect for example. Although Diana and Dodi had used a particular Mercedes all day – continually followed by a back-up car – at the very last moment, a different Mercedes was sent to pick them up as they left the Ritz Hotel. Perhaps crucially, there was no back up car.

The route from the Ritz to Dodi’s flat was also questioned. Instead of taking the fastest route, they went out of their way along the River Seine and eventually to the Pont d’Alma Tunnel.

Not one of the seventeen CCTV cameras in Paris on the route taken was switched on or working, so there was no video footage of any part of the journey. These cameras run twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. The fact it was only on this particular route – which according to the official story was a route decided upon in the spur of the moment to lose the paparazzi – is suspicious to even the most sceptical of people.

Pont d’Alma Tunnel - where Diana was killed.

Pont d’Alma Tunnel – where Diana was killed.

A white Fiat Uno was also seen by eye witnesses, something which could not be denied by investigators (despite initial attempts to do so) when traces of white paint matching those of a Fiat Uno white were found on the crippled Mercedes. Had the Mercedes clipped this mystery car as it made its way along the road? Or was the “flash of light” that was seen coming from inside the tunnel actually made from inside the Fiat Uno in an effort to cause a crash?

Ex-secret serviceman, Richard Tomlinson draws comparisons to a planned assassination of a Serbian leader – the method was a car accident – set up with a bright flashing light – and was also to take place in a tunnel. Coincidence? Or standard practice?

The tunnel was cleaned and open again within hours of the wreckage and the vehicle’s passengers being removed from the site. Many people wondered why there was an apparent rush to cleanse the scene and return it to how it was the previous day, as if the collision had never happened.

All of these points led to the eventual official inquiry – nicknamed in the media as “The Diana Inquiry”.

You can check out the documentary “Who Really Killed Diana….” below – it gives a good overview of the most prominent conspiracies and points of interest regarding that tragic evening.

Unlawful Killing – The Documentary That Never Was

The aim of Operation Paget was to explore every avenue, and in reality, put to bed the conspiracy theories surrounding Diana’s (and Dodi’s) death. The evidence that had been released to this point when the inquiry began in 2004, suggested that the conspiracy was “incredibly involved” just to prevent Diana from marrying a Muslim man, or so that Charles could finally marry Camilla.

As Keith Allen’s 2011 documentary “Unlawful Killing” revealed though, it seemed the issues were much, much wider and more complex than that. The fact it wasn’t made available in Britain only seemed to confirm evidence of a cover up to some.

Keith Allen essentially reconstructed the enquiry based on all the official records. He had also employed the services of an undercover reporter, whose job was to purely watch and note what the other journalists said in relation to the inquiry, and more importantly what they chose to report, and how they chose to report it.

It was revealed that Diana was severely injured, but conscious and aware following the crash. There was also no damage to the back side of the car or the rear door next to which she sat. Had she been removed from the vehicle immediately and taken to hospital, many believe – including medical experts – that she would have survived the incident.

Unlawful Killing movie artwork.

Unlawful Killing movie artwork.

However, Dr. Jean-Marc Martino took thirty-seven minutes just to remove Diana from the car and into an ambulance. It was eighty-one minutes – nearly an hour and a half – before the ambulance began to make its way from the scene. Despite the roads being virtually empty, the ambulance did not pick up any kind of speed and almost sauntered along. There was also no radio communications to the hospital from the ambulance to announce their arrival and to have an emergency team ready and waiting.

When she finally did arrive at the hospital and hour and three quarters after the crash, she was dead. The ambulance’s speed was later explained as being slow due to high-tech medical equipment on board that the medical team were utilising on their journey. To go too fast, they said, would be to put their procedures – and indeed the slim chance to restore Diana’s life – in jeopardy.

Interestingly despite the expert opinion that Martino’s actions – or lack thereof – had contributed to Diana’s death, none of his “crew” were questions, nor even named or identified. Who exactly were they?

Landmines

Throughout much of 1996, Diana became the figure head and very much an active driving force in the campaign to ban the use of landmines. Even President Bill Clinton – surprisingly to some given the profit to many in America – got on board stating to the world’s press, “to end this carnage, the United States will seek a worldwide agreement as soon as possible!”

By early 1997 the campaign was gathering more and more momentum and support, with Diana’s continued involvement seen as the main reason for this. This agitated and angered many governments around the world – not least of which the British.

Diana campaigning against landmines.

Diana campaigning against landmines.

Simone Simmonds was with Diana around this time and claims she was present when the former royal received a phone call from a high ranking government minister. As Diana passed the phone to Simmonds so she could hear what was being said she heard:

“Don’t meddle in things you know nothing about! Accidents can happen!”

Simmonds says that Diana very much took it as a threat. It was also around this time that Diana began to realise her phone calls were being recorded and listened to. She suspected this to be British intelligence, but other parties with an “interest” in her recent landmine activities were also eager to keep close tabs on her. The NSA eventually admitted to having thousands of transcripts of her phone calls – they did however refuse to make the vast majority of them public for “security” reasons.

Another interesting point was that on 19th September in Oslo, Norway, a conference was due to take place to discuss the landmine problem on an international level. Diana was due to speak here, and given her passion on the issue and her overall popularity with the wider public, the event was viewed as being a key point in the fight to ban landmines. Did this event mean Diana had to be “taken care of” before by those with much to lose from her stance?

Henri Paul

Whether Henri Paul was intoxicated or not also came under scrutiny – as did his autopsy, which was performed by Professor Dominque Leconte. According to Allen, he states in the documentary that she is well known for glossing over and leaving out any evidence that might cause embarrassment for the French establishment. Her autopsy findings would appear to back this assertion up, as one medical expert after another cast doubt on them during the inquiry. Over fifty “basic errors” were said to have been made by Leconte. Were these errors? Or was it the purposeful distorting of facts?

Even the blood tests that were used to confirm Paul’s intoxication (conducted by Dr. Pippin) were rejected by all medical experts asked to speak at the inquiry. So much so that, as a group, they signed an official statement saying that the blood samples were “biologically inexplicable” – the only explanation they could offer was that the blood tested was not that of Henri Paul at all.

Investigative journalist Hugo Nhart revealed a further interesting point linked to the suspicion surrounding the blood samples and whether or not they were in fact Henri Paul’s. In the aforementioned documentary “Who Really Killed Diana” he stated, “By chance that night there was another corpse at the forensic institute. Someone who’d died from alcoholism. The person who dealt with the blood tests has since had a fantastic promotion, and wont talk about the tests! I simply wonder!”

Henri Paul driving the car.

Henri Paul driving the car.

It was further later revealed that Henri Paul was working for British as well as French Intelligence. Payments made into his account were not investigated by the court, but given that it was the head of inquiry who had to power to look into these mystery payments, Allen concurred that Paul was working for British intelligence on the night of the crash.

For their parts, neither Leconte nor Pippin attended the inquiry to answer questions on their apparent medical inconsistencies. Although “public order” was used to explain the court’s decision not to force them to appear – which the inquest had the power to do – it came to light after, that their testimony was not in the interests of the “protection of state secrets and the interest of the (French) nation!”

They Are Not What They Seem?

What Allen also investigated was how the whole inquest was carefully manipulated in favour of the British royal family. He made a point of stating that although many see Britain as a democracy, it really isn’t. It is still very much a monarchy, with many “unelected people” in positions of power and influence – at the centre of which is, the Windsors – the British royal family – who are funded by the tax payer to the tune of forty million pounds a year, at the very least – something that Allen notes is “just the tip of the iceberg!”

The documentary goes on to portray the royal family as a ruthless “mob” who have a tight grip on the day-to-day goings on in the country. Such phrases as “gangsters in tiaras” are used and some liken them to the mafia – it paints a vastly different picture than the one that is shown to us elsewhere.

One other thing that is noticed by Allen is that the British royal family – perhaps like other royal families around the world – are obsessed with breeding and lineage. Another researcher and author, whose own theory on what happened to Diana is a little wilder than most, also notes how breeding and lineage is particularly important to the royals.

Before we get on to that though, you can check out the full documentary Unlawful Killing below and make up your own mind. As grim as the subject may be, it is very interesting viewing to say the least, and it is maybe important to remember that the verdict returned by the jury following the inquiry was that Diana and Dodi had been unlawfully killed, and had not died as an accident due to the paparazzi as much of the media reported.

That Man Icke Again

In his book The Biggest Secret, author David Icke spoke in depth about the conspiracy surrounding the death of Princess Diana and the symbolism and ritual that was utilised. He pointed to many of the same areas of suspicion as many other theorists and investigators, although Icke believed he knew exactly why things transpired the way they did.

He also claimed he had spoken to royal family insiders, and as you might imagine, what they told him was bordering on the unbelievable.

It is on record that Diana has described the Windsors as “The lizards” for example, and while that in all likelihood was an expression of her distaste for her in-laws, it is a bizarre choice of words given Icke’s assertions of the royal family being reptilian alien human hybrids.

According to one of Icke’s sources, Arizona Wilder, Diana was witness to the royal’s true identity only days before her marriage to Charles in a bizarre ceremony in July 1981.

Already drugged to keep her docile and submissive throughout the ceremony, Diana was told by the royals that “she should consider her union with Prince Charles as only a means to produce heirs and nothing else. Camilla Parker-Bowles was his consort, not her!”

The Queen Mother and Prince Phillip then shapeshifted into their reptilian forms in order to show Diana their true strength and to threaten and scare her into silence. As doubtful as this account might be, it is worth noting the phone call that Diana apparently made in March 1997 – only months before her death – stating she had information about the royal family that would “shock the world!”

The short video below goes over the main points of what Icke claims his contacts told him of Diana’s observations and experiences of the Windsors below.

What “Really” Happened?

Based on what he claims to have been told by such close confidents of Diana, Icke then began to research the symbolism and ritualistic nature of her killing. In doing so he made the connection to ancient bloodline rituals and sacrifice.

The Merovingians and their entry into Europe Icke claimed, can be traced right the way back to ancient Troy (now modern day Turkey) and are one of the many reptilian bloodlines that dates back to antiquity. They were firstly known as the Franks and were responsible for the eventual foundation of France and Germany, as well as being hugely influential in the British royal family.

Diana’s family – the Spencer’s – were also from this bloodline, and it was this bloodline that was of great desire to the Windsors. As Keith Allen suggested that the Windsors were obsessed with breeding, so did Icke. However he stated that they specifically sought the Spencer genes due to its link to the Merovingian bloodline.

She had been targeted since she was very young, and was brought up on the Sandringham Estate in the company of the Queen Mother, Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles. Once she had fulfilled her role of providing children to the royal family and so “strengthening” their bloodline, she was essentially expendable – particularly as she became an apparent thorn in their collective sides.

The fact that she was in Paris at the time of her death was also pre-planned and connected to the Merovingian’s ancient beliefs and rituals. According to Icke when the Merovingians founded Paris (named after Prince Paris of Troy) they also constructed underground chambers where they could conduct their rituals and sacrifices. The deity they worshipped and made sacrifices to – coincidentally or not – was the moon goddess, Diana.

What’s more the ancient underground site where these sacrifices took place are located in the Pont d’Alma Tunnel – the place where the fatal crash occurred. This is why, Icke claims, Diana was held for so long in the tunnel before being moved to hospital. It wasn’t to administer emergency attention – it was to ensure that she died in that tunnel and nowhere else – otherwise the sacrifice and ritual would not be complete.

Trauma Based Mind Control?

He also picked up on how Henri Paul had apparently been made the “fall guy” for the events – someone he believed was the victim of trauma based mind control. During one of his lectures Icke stated:

“Particularly during the last war in the concentration camps of Germany, they started to perfect the manipulation of a natural mechanism in the mind that shuts out trauma. What they did was, to understand that if you can systematically traumatise someone, their mind will shut out the memory of it and will create an amnesiac barrier, which would be disconnected from the rest of the mind!”

This is essentially what happens to some people who are in very bad traffic accidents and why they have no memory of their experience.

By manipulating this natural mechanism a person’s mind can be turned into a “honeycomb of self-contained compartments – none of which are aware of the other’s existence!”

Was Paul – who is now known to have worked for British and French intelligence – what is called a “multiple”, and had he been programmed in such a way? He had gone missing for a significant amount of time on the evening in question.

Icke reasoned that the fact the thirteenth pillar was the impact of the crash, not only showed to him that it was a ritual killing due to this number “coming up again and again and again in relation to these bloodlines”, it also showed him that Paul was under such mental control.

He reasoned that the thirteenth pillar could not be purposely singled out by the driver going at such speeds. However when operating under “sub-conscious” mind control, such speeds would appear to the brain as “walking pace” and counting and singling out a specific pillar would be no problem at all.

Was the mysterious flash that was reported near the entrance to the tunnel, in fact the “trigger” for Paul to carry out his pre-programmed mission?

Not only did Icke agree that all seventeen of the CCTV cameras had been switched off, but he also mentioned reports of people who regularly tune into police radio frequencies. On this particular night, between the time the car left the Ritz Hotel and the crash itself, the radio frequency was essentially dead and could not be picked up.

The twenty-five minute video below features David Icke explaining his theory on the whats and whys of Princess Diana’s death below. It is really worth watching – if only to gain another perspective on the subject. He draws attention to many of his theories and the use of symbolism such as the roles of Mohamed Al-Fayed and Diana’s brother Earl Spencer and Diana’s eventual resting place.

Somewhere between the returned verdict of unlawful killing by the jury in the official “Diana Inquiry”, the refusal of some to believe it was anything other than an accident, and wild claims of reptilian bloodlines and ritual sacrifice, will be the truth of what happened that fateful August evening in 1997. Whether that undeniable truth comes to light however – or is allowed to – is another question.

The last written words on here however, go to Diana herself, who about herself she once said,

“Someone’s got to go out there and love people! And show it!”

About Marcus Lowth

Marcus Lowth is a writer with a love for anything interesting, from UFOs, aliens, and the Ancient Astronaut Theory, to the paranormal, general conspiracies and unsolved mysteries. He also has a passion for film, music, and the NFL. Marcus has been Editor-in-Chief for several years due to his excellent knowledge in these fields. Marcus also regularly appears as an expert on radio talk shows discussing these topics.

You can contact Marcus via email.

Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to our free newsletter and join our subscribers. Receive the latest articles directly in your inbox weekly.

If you don't like what you read, you can unsubscribe at any time.

1 Comment

Newest comments appear first, oldest at the bottom. Post a new comment!

  • Bljillian says:

    In the photo before the crash, it is obvious the flash or strobe is very bright just judging by the reflection in his glasses and other surfaces. Plus there are headlights right behind the car. Yet the police make it sound like there weren’t other cars anywhere near and the poparazzi were all hanging back. Obviously there was a vehicle right in front or the photo wouldn’t exist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *