princess diana*s inquest should be public jury ,do you agree or not?
2007-01-15 06:28:14 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
yes
2007-01-15 06:33:33 · answer #1 · answered by chav69 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Personally I see no reason why the Public Taxes are to be spent on an inquest at all! If there was anything to suggest it was other than an accident it would have been found by the French. The French hate us and would be more likely to bring in an open verdict or suggest a conspiracy theory so by the very fact they didn't is all the proof I need.
I don't even understand why people should care! She knew exactly what she was doing when she married Charles and it was her position as his wife not his love that she was after. How can people who obviously dislike or hate the royals, look up to someone who willingly joined their ranks?
Its her sons I feel sorry for! How would you like to be in their shoes? You lose a Mother you love and then have to put up with people saying your Father or Grandmother who you also LOVE did it!
2007-01-15 07:38:17 · answer #2 · answered by willowGSD 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
You misunderstand the point of a jury: it's to assess the EVIDENCE put before it. It's not there to give its opinion based on what they read in the Daily Express.
A judge cannot be biassed or prejudiced so having a judge preside over the inquest is fine.
2007-01-15 06:31:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
i locate it unusual that the paparazzi were so aggressive as to chase down at dizzyingly severe speeds, intervene with--and intensely in all probability helped reason the famously deadly coincidence that killed Diana. Paparazzi frequently are not so aggressive--and that i'd imagine they does no longer placed themselves in such an portion of criminal duty--only to get some images of Diana. So i will comprehend the suspicions posed that the "paparazzi" gained't were valid photogs. by using same turn, that's both unusual that Fayad's bodyguard/motive force grow to be talked about in the inn bar, ingesting alcohol and suspicions he grow to be impaired are a logical given to boot. Did the Royals order a "hit" on Diana? Doubts exist they did; otherwise, Harry and William would painfully tear faraway from the relatives and bitter mega-huge proceedings would splash everywhere in the courtrooms.....and in the tabloids. As issues stand, Harry and William--both now grown self reliant men--are nevertheless on the aspect of their Royal linkage. Diana is loved global, because she defied Royal conformity by using only excellent genuine to her genuine self; Queen and Queen Mum were too embitterly ignorant of see the ease of Diana's organic bigheartedness. yet on an same time as divorce loomed between Diana and Charles, i do not sense the Royals needed the mess "wiped clean up" by using way of a perilous coincidence.
2016-10-31 04:29:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I strong believe that princess Diana wasn't killed .She died in an accident because God has allowed this.
I cannot understand how is it possible that someone be accused of her death.
The divorce is legal nowadays , a lot of people divorce , because people disobey God more and more, and don't love each other.
I am sure it was an accident . Very sure. If the divorce would have been considered a blasfhemy , the second marriage of prince Charles is also a blasphemy , bigger then a divorce.But God has aknowledged the situation of divorce since Moses , so why so many problems . Of course God said it is best that man and woman avoid divorce and love each other , but just in case someone doesn't love you , you can divorce and remarry.
I am sure it was am accident.Please stop accusing the most honourable family of the world.The royal family, who rules for the name of God....
2007-01-15 06:51:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
the inquest will find that she died because she got in a car with a drunk driver. it would be pointless to have a jury when the outcome has already been decided
2007-01-15 09:59:40 · answer #6 · answered by gina 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes I do agree entirely with you. I am so annoyed about it not being a public jury hearing. The whole case stinks, I am now beginning to smell a rat.
2007-01-15 09:20:58 · answer #7 · answered by CT 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Disagree, because there are still people around who have huge feelings for how she was apparently treated by the royals and Papparazzi, so a fair trial would be very difficult.
2007-01-15 06:31:27 · answer #8 · answered by bassmonkey1969 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, because the jury will always come to the same conclusion and carry on promoting the lie, that Diana died in an accident, -when she was actually murdered. Princess Diana was lovely, they killed her because she was different and because she had the power to end conflicts, -she had the power to bring world peace.
2007-01-15 06:30:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Who on earth in their right mind is interested in the death of this mentally ill female and her arab lover?
2007-01-16 08:15:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it should just come to its conclusion and give William and Harry their life's back again, they have suffered enough already.
2007-01-15 09:29:10 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋