End of a circus?
Peter Hoskin 5:26pm
So there we have it. According to Lord Justice Scott Baker, there is not a “shred of evidence” that Diana was assassinated by the Royal Family or by anyone else. A line can finally be drawn through the conspiracy theories of Mohamed Al Fayed. (Although will his supporters be placated? I doubt it. To paraphrase Karl Popper: a Diana conspiracy theorist cannot open a newspaper without finding on every page confirming evidence for their view of history.)
But it’s taken some £6 million of taxpayers’ money to reach this sensible conclusion. And that’s before we consider the distress caused to Princes William and Harry, as their mother’s name has been dragged through the mud. In this light, does the end justify the means?
Previous
Comments
Ray
March 31st, 2008 5:38pmSo can we taxpayers send Mr Al-Fayed his share of the bill for this farce?
Mike
March 31st, 2008 5:48pmI think the blame attaches to those who have enriched themselves yet are unaccountable for the nonsense they have peddled. Step forward Michael Mansfield QC and take a bow!
Max Kaye
March 31st, 2008 5:59pmThe end never justifies the means. And, especially not in this instance.
What next? A taxpayer funded examination on whether or not Elvis is alive on the moon?
Al Fayed should pay for this circus. (Although, in my view it was an outrage that this expensive legal process happened at all. Perhaps, then, lawyer should cough up the cash).
dexey
March 31st, 2008 6:11pmMax Kaye
March 31st, 2008 5:59pm
What next? A taxpayer funded examination on whether or not Elvis is alive on the moon?
Total nonsense. I saw him issuing parking tickets in Birmingham only last week.
Alan Scott
March 31st, 2008 8:05pmPerhaps the media will now stop reporting Mr Al Fayed's nonsense?
Some hope.
John Lewis
March 31st, 2008 10:59pmIf we can't get the money back from Al Fayed then the answer is simple: boycott Harrods. I know I will.
salieri
April 1st, 2008 3:57pmI'm puzzled by the criteria of the Monitor who blocked a short comment from me yesterday. I won't repeat it but it concerned the ethical rules which Counsel are required to follow in any Court. Is this really out of bounds? If so it's worrying.