Friday, May 20, 2011

Conspiracy Theories: The Utter Implausibility of Mainstream Narratives Part V

Henri Paul: It's All In The Blood

A key component of the mainstream narrative that blamed the head of security for the Ritz Hotel Henri Paul is the forensic evidence, particularly the blood samples allegedly drawn from Henri Paul's corpse. The three samples showed an elevated blood alcohol level varying from 1.73 g/l to 1.75 g/l. Moreover, the samples show a crippling carbon monoxide level in Henri Paul's blood that would have incapacitated him outright.  When taken together, the alcohol and the carbon monoxide in Henri Paul's blood would have prevented him from appearing in control of his faculties the night of Diana and Dodi's death. In the fifteen minutes before Diana and Dodi left the Ritz through the service exit and headed down the Rue Cambon, it is likely that either Diana or Dodi would have noticed signs of inebriation from Paul's behavior.  Certainly, Trevor Rhees-Jones would have noticed the signs, given that he and Kez Wingfield had spent nearly the entirety of the prior three hours with Paul in the Vendome bar.  Rhees-Jones has stated that he noticed no such signs.

However, the forensic evidence is damning on its face: Henri Paul was many times above the legal limit in France, and by most estimates would have had to have consumed anywhere from eight to twelve drinks in the hours leading up to his departure from the Ritz as Dodi Al-Fayed's driver.  There's only one problem: the chain of evidence and the circumstances surrounding the collection of blood samples from Henri Paul are equally damning to the forensic pathologist and the toxicologist who collected the samples and the conducted the tests of those samples.

We begin with Dr. Dominique LeComte, who testified under oath that she collected three blood samples from Henri Paul in the presence of Commander Mule.  Two of the samples were sent to a laboratory owned by Dr. Gilbert Pepin for testing.  However, the logs indicate that five samples were drawn from Henri Paul on August 31st, 1997.  This is our first inconsistency.

Our second inconsistency, as found by Professor Robert Forrest, was that the body numbers for Dodi Al-Fayed and Henri Paul were mixed up by the morgue.  Four days later, LeComte collected another sample from Henri Paul in the presence of Judge Herve Stephan, the judge who presided over the French investigation into the car crash that killed Henri Paul, Dodi Al-Fayed, and Princess Diana.  This sample was also sent to Gilbert Pepin's laboratory.

The third inconsistency is that the three samples taken, two from the blood and one from the vitreous humor of Henri Paul, all bore a remarkable consistency in the alcohol levels present, even though one was taken four days after the fact.  The three blood samples ranged from 1.73 g/l to 1.75 g/l. Additionally, one of the samples was taken from the chest cavity.  Gilbert Pepin believed that he was testing blood from Henri Paul's heart, and the significance is this: Professor Robert Forrest testified that blood samples from the chest cavity were less accurate than blood samples from the heart.  Additionally, Professor Atholl Johnston, who testified at the British inquest, said that there was a 10,000 to 1 chance of getting such closely similar results from the three samples.

The fourth inconsistency comes from Gilbert Pepin's assertion that one of the blood tests showed 1.74 g/l.  Why is this an inconsistency?  Because no paperwork exists as documentation of Pepin's statement! The second blood test gave a differing reading, but Pepin went with the undocumented 1.74 g/l in his disclosure and omitted any reference to variation.

The fifth inconsistency comes from the Receipt of Cadaver, a document which contains the vital physical measurements and statistics of the deceased.  There were two such documents for Henri Paul, one which got his height and weight correct, and the other which did not.

LeComte also stored the samples in an unguarded and unsecured refrigerator for 24 hours, thereby failing to preserve and secure the chain of custody where the blood evidence was concerned.  She did not take any DNA samples at the time to ensure that the blood samples sent off for testing matched Henri Paul's DNA.  Of the six blood samples in play, three remained in the custody of LeComte's laboratory, while three were sent off to Pepin's for testing.

We have five blood samples on laboratory log during the LeComte's first examination of Henri Paul's body, and we have another sample taken four days later. LeComte says that she only took a total of three on the first day and one other sample three days later.   The five on the log plus the one taken three days later, and the three sent to the laboratory plus the three that remained with the morgue give us six total samples in play.

The three that were sent to the laboratory are no more. The unused portions of those three samples are no longer available. They've disappeared.  That leaves the three remaining with the laboratory, one of which was tested at the request of Henri Paul's family for DNA.  That sample was a match, but the significant fact to catch on to is this: that sample, while it was tested for DNA, has never been tested for elevated alcohol levels.  It is entirely possible that the three samples Dominique LeComte drew from Henri Paul are still in the possession of her morgue, while the three that were sent off for testing are from another individual.  We don't know, because because there was no DNA testing of those three test samples.  Moreover, while we know that the one sample still in the possession of the morgue matches Henri Paul's DNA, we do not know what its alcohol content was or is, because no test has ever been conducted on that particular sample.

We know that bodies were mixed up from both the inconsistencies on the two Receipts of Cadaver and we know that at one point the body tagging was mixed up for Dodi and Henri according to Dr. Robert Forrest.  We know that the samples were stored in an unsecured refrigerator for two hours, and we know that there is a variance between the number of samples LeComte says she drew from Henri Paul and the number of drawn samples recorded on the log.  As Forrest put in his testimony to the inquest, there were "unresolved incompatibilities," or as Forrest put it immediately afterwards, "unresolved inconsistencies" where the forensic evidence was concerned.  

Furthermore, both LeComte and Pepin refused to testify or give statements to the British inquest looking into the car crash that killed Henri Paul, Princess Diana, and Dodi Al-Fayed.  Simply put, the evidence would not hold up in a criminal court due to the myriad inconsistencies underlying the documentary chain of custody.  The inconsistencies between the documented collection of evidence in the log and the testimony of Dominique LeComte alone would raise questions as to the admissibility of the blood evidence in any court of law.  The close consistency between the three reported results and the fact that Pepin omitted mention of a variance in one of his tests would also raise questions about the evidence and his competency and ethics.

To understand why this is important, you have to understand that the dominant narrative is that Henri Paul was intoxicated the night he drove himself, Dodi Al-Fayed, and Princess Diana to their deaths in the Alma tunnel.  If the evidence used to condemn Paul as a drunk driver is suspect, so is the narrative explanation that is commonly accepted in regards to Diana's death.  

Below is a video that attempts to simulate what happened that night by showing the effects of alcohol on a driver in a driving simulator programmed with the route Diana and Dodi took the night they died.  It is informative.








Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Cops Fight to Take Money From Traffic Stops

It's a little known practice called interdiction, whereby state law permits police to stop and search cars. If the police find large amounts of cash, they can then seize the cash on the grounds that they have a suspicion the cash originated in the drug trade.  If the owners don't initiate legal action, the police can then keep the money.  There is no due process, and the burden of proof is entirely on the motorist.  Welcome to the highway shakedown by the biggest organized crime cartel in existence: the police.

Conspiracy Theories: The Utter Implausibility of Mainstream Narratives Part IV

An Interlude


So far in this series, I've been going fact by fact, witness by witness, and probably killing with you the minutae and the details. Details, however, are where the story in Princess Diana's death happen to be, and that's why it's important to dissect witness statements, and examine in depth each viewpoint to the point of exhaustion.  However, because I am merciful, I'm going to give you an interlude.

Let's go back in time, to just before Dodi Al-Fayed and Diana take off for their final ride.  We know that Henri Paul had a couple of Ricards in the Vendome bar, but a couple of Ricards do not a drunken chauffeur make.  In fact, no one seemed to be overly concerned with Henri Paul's sobriety. Trevor Rhees-Jones and Kez Wingfield did not seem to notice any sign of intoxication with Henri Paul,  and as professional bodyguards it was their job to ensure the safety of their clients.  In point of fact, despite the assertions that coroners found evidence of chronic alcoholism during Paul's autopsy, two days before he had passed his annual physical for his pilot's license. The examining doctor did not detect any sign of alcoholism.  Those who knew Paul rejected the characterization of Henri Paul as an alcoholic.

However, the first plan that night was for Mr. Paul and the couple to proceed alone after two decoy cars departed the front of the Ritz Hotel.  The two bodyguard, Rees-Jones and Wingfield, were to depart in the decoy cars.  Both bodyguards objected, citing their concerns that no security protection will exist for the couple if they follow that plan.  Mr. Fayed assents to one bodyguard accompanying the couple.  Now, before the bodyguards were apprised of this plan, Henri Paul had met with Fayed and Diana in the Imperial Suite without the bodyguards present.  This raises the interesting question of who came up with the plan?  Was it Fayed, or was it Paul?  Fayed was notorious for handling security matters himself and apprising his bodyguards after the fact.


And here is where matters get interesting: by 0011 hours on August 31st, Diana and Dodi are in the service area waiting to depart.  Four minutes before, however, something happened outside the service area that demands an explanation: a motorcycle arrived.  As you can see in the above photo taken from a video still of the Ritz surveillance camera overlooking the service area, someone has come into view just up the street.  Within four seconds, he's moved off to the side and thinks he's invisible to the cameras.


Now, at 0015 hours, something really interesting occurs.


That's Henri Paul, the driver who took Dodi and Diana on their final journey, standing outside the service exit and waving to the paparazzi across the street.  Diana and Dodi have been waiting for four minutes at this point to leave.  In every mainstream news narrative you read on Princess Diana's death, you hear about those clever paparazzo and their spotter out back on the Rue Cambon, but you never hear how Henri Paul stepped outside, spotted them across the street, and waved at them in a friendly fashion.


Within ten seconds of Henri's wave, there is no trace of the paparazzi across the street to be seen in the surveillance video.  Henri goes back inside, and makes Dodi and Diana wait another three minutes or so in the service area hallway, as the following video stills show.
1
2


3

In fact, it wasn't until 0020 hours that the Mercedes actually left down the Rue Cambon for what would be Diana and Dodi's final trip.  It seems a bit strange that you would waste all that time setting up a decoy to send those paparazzi in the wrong direction, only to walk out the service exit nearly five minute before you take the couple you're trying to protect from the paparazzi in order to wave at them.  It's even odder that they would then disappear from view within ten seconds, and that you would delay the departure of the couple you're protecting for another three to four minutes.  

But wait, it gets even stranger.  If you'll remember back to my initial post on the death of Diana, at 2300 hours on August 30, Henri Paul was out in front of the hotel telling the paparazzi that Dodi and Diana would be leaving soon.  An hour and seven minutes later, one of those paparazzo is pulling up on his motorbike to the service side of the hotel, and less than eight minutes later, he and Henri Paul are exchanging waves.  

But we're not done with the strangeness.  Not by a long shot.  It turns out that Henri Paul, the driver who waved to the paparazzi across the street at 0015 hours on August 31st, had 14 bank accounts across France with £100,000.  Additionally, the DST, or the French secret service, confirmed Henri Paul's employment with their agency in 2005.  That's right: Henri Paul was an employee of the French secret service, with 14 bank accounts containing £100,000 to his name the night he died, carrying out his duties as the head of security for the Ritz Hotel in Paris.  In fact, in the eight months leading up to Henri Paul's death, he received five deposits of 40,000 francs in one of the accounts he owned.  

However, the strangeness continues: U.S. intelligence admitted to the British inquest conducted by Metropolitan police commissioner Lord Stevens that they had wiretapped Diana's phone at the Ritz and were listening to her conversations the night that she died.  They accrued some 39 classified documents as a result of their wiretaps, but assured Lord Stevens that none of the documents were pertinent to the events leading up to Diana's death.  

But back to the service exit of the hotel, and the Rue Cambon route.  If Henri Paul knew that his cover was blown, and that the paparazzi were on to the route, why would he merely wave and then proceed to take Dodi and Diana to a Mercedes parked out in back of the service exit?  If the plan was to maintain secrecy in order to achieve security, surely Henri Paul must have known that the ruse was up.  However, there's no evidence from the video stills that Paul was upset at all with the paparazzi who were waiting around the rear of the Ritz.  In point of fact, the fact that the paparazzi all vanish within ten seconds of Henri Paul waving at them is evidence of collusion.  

Given what happened during that last ride, it becomes even more suspicious.  At the Champs Elysee, the car driven by Paul was blocked by a black Fiat, and the route to Dodi's apartment had to change.  According to witnesses, the exit right before the Alma tunnel was blocked by motorcycles, which narrowed the route options to the Alma tunnel itself.  Additionally, the eyewitnesses indicate that the Mercedes was being pursued by two or three motorcycles and at least one large sedan.  There was also testimony of a smaller vehicle as well.  

There are simply too many coincidences to discount. You have a driver in the employment of the French secret service with 14 bank accounts, one of which had received five deposits totaling 200,000 francs in the eight months before he died, and the admission of U.S. intelligence that it was, for whatever reason, wiretapping the phone of Princess Diana the night of her death.   

The point of this series is not to prove the guilt or innocence of any party.  A blogger cannot accomplish that, especially one who is in law school and is possessed of meager resources.  The point of this series is to debunk the dominant mainstream narrative, to cast doubt on the official version of events utilizing mainstream reports and sources.  What I want you to realize when you read this is that there is no pot of gold at the end of this series.  All there is is a reasonable doubt in regards to the official narrative put forth.  What I want you to realize as I write this and you read it is this: you cannot trust your government or their media because they lie, and what is more, their lies do not hold up to scrutiny.  The machinery of the totalitarian state is powerful, and the media it directs is ubiquitous, but its narrative is rarely seamless and hardly error-free.  

By examining what the state and its mouthpieces in the media construct as an official narrative, you can detect inconsistencies and contradictions that call into question the credibility of the narrative.  That's the point of this series, really...I want to make it apparent to average readers and people that by engaging in simple web searches and devoting time to the pursuit of nagging questions they have, they can come to their own understandings of what actually happened.  The fact that you don't buy the state's narrative doesn't make you a fringe lunatic; in reality, it makes you a thinking human being with the capacity to stand independently from the information controlled and manipulated by the state and its complicit media.  

The path to freedom and the reclamation of government of the people, by the people, and for the people lies through the mind.  Think for yourself, and not for the state.  


Conspiracy Theories: The Utter Implausibility of Mainstream Narratives Part III

What Witnesses Saw (Cont'd):

Mr. Gary Hunter


(Note: At the time of the inquest into Diana's death, Mr. Hunter was already deceased. His earlier statements were read aloud to the inquest, and a Mr. Read was called as a witness to explain or interpret those statements in terms of possible road routes taken.)


Mr. Hunter, a solicitor with the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, had travelled to Paris with his wife Teresa, and they had taken lodging at the Royal Alma Hotel in room 304.  The significance of the lodging is as follows: it contained a large window overlooking the Rue Jean Goujon, a road adjacent to the Alma Tunnel.  After returning from dinner at a local restaurant with his wife, Mr. Hunter stayed up watching television while his wife went to sleep.

Mr. Hunter gave a statement that at 0025 hours on August 31, he had heard a loud crash and he had immediately gone to the bedroom window overlooking the street. People were running to his left towards the area where the noise had emanated, and he returned to bed.  A minute later, he heard screeching tires and went to the window again, where he witnessed a white Mercedes driving right on the bumper of a smaller dark car down the Rue Jean Goujon.  In Mr. Hunter's statement, he characterized the vehicles as driving at an inordinate speed. Mr. Hunter said that he felt the closeness of the vehicles, combined with their inordinate speed, meant that the larger white Mercedes was shielding the smaller dark vehicle.  According to Mr. Hunter, the vehicles proceeded to the roundabout junction at the end of the Rue Jean Goujon and turned right, which would have taken them down Rue Bayard.

The Rue Jean Goujon is a one way street, and the arrows in the below aerial photo indicate the route of the white Mercedes and the dark smaller car.

The Route According to Mr. Gary Hunter
The vehicles would have proceeded up the Rue Jean Goujon towards the roundabout area to the right, and then down Rue Bayard, where they would have turned right.  Here's the problem with Mr. Hunter's story: had the white Mercedes and the smaller dark car turned right down Rue Bayard, they would have run straight into the slip road that runs alongside the Cours Albert 1er.  This slip road was a one way street that would have taken the Mercedes and the smaller car right back towards the tunnel to the overpass.  It stands to reason that if the two vehicles were involved in the death of Princess Diana and Dodi Al-Fayed, they wouldn't be driving an inordinate speed towards a route that took them right back towards the scene of the accident where they would be noticed by all of those spectators who had just a minute or so before sprinted towards the sound of the crash.  This is the route they would have taken, shown below using the same aerial photograph.

Going in a triangular circle?


The problems with Mr. Hunter's story become even more evident when you consider the route these two vehicles would had to have taken in order to get from the west end of the Alma tunnel to arrive at the Rue Jean Goujon, as interpreted by Mr. Read, the expert witness who testified as to the possible routes taken by the Mercedes and its smaller companion.

If we believe that both vehicles were involved in the crash that killed Dodi and Diana, we have to believe that they likely exited the western end of the tunnel underpass.  The route they would have likely taken, as described by Mr. Read, is represented in the map below.

A Most Convoluted Route
We'll go step by step, in accordance with Mr. Read's directions as provided in the inquest.  To arrive back at the Royal Alma Hotel after exiting the west end of the tunnel, the white Mercedes and the darker smaller car would have had to do the following (assuming they followed the rules of traffic):

1. Exit the tunnel onto the Avenue de New York.
2. turn right onto Avenue Albert de Mun.
3. turn right again onto Avenue d'Iena.
4. turn right at the Metro Station Iena onto Avenue de President Wilson.
5. approach the Metro Station Alma Marceau and fork right again still on President Wilson,
6. turn left onto  Avenue King George V heading north away from Place de l'Alma
7. and turn right onto Rue de la Tremoille,
8. only to take the first right onto Rue du Boccar,
9. and then go right on Avenue Montaigne,
10 to turn left into the Place de la Reine Astrid at the far left of Rue Jean Goujon and make another left up Rue Jean Goujon,
11. in order to turn right at Rue Bayard,
12. which takes one right back to the one way slip road running alongside the Cours Albert 1er, a road that will only lead you back in the direction of the accident and towards the gathering onlookers.

Now, I ask you, does this not seem like an incredibly convoluted route to take in order to arrive right back where you began?  When you consider that the drivers of the two cars could have merely turned south towards Place de l'Alma instead of going north on Avenue King George V, it makes even less sense.  Additionally, the route above would have taken the drivers of two cars driving an inordinate amount of speed past two metropolitan police stations in the immediate aftermath of an accident they might have caused or been involved in, at a time when one would think that the two cars would have been in a hurry to get as far away from the scene as possible.  That is, if the two cars were in fact involved in the actual accident.

A Mr. Mansfield raised the possibility of the following route after Mr. Read gave the above directions. The two cars would essentially travel the slip road, go up to the Place de la Reine Astrid, turn sharp right, and then proceed onto the Rue Goujon, where they would go to the Rue Bayard...in order to wind up right back on the slip road!  To be honest, the entire version of events strains credulity, from Mr. Gary Hunter's story to Mr. Read's interpretation and route, and on down to Mr. Mansfield's alternative hypothesis.

To be blunt: one must look at Mr. Hunter's fortuitous positioning at the Royal Alma Hotel as a gift to the British establishment. Here is a man employed as a solicitor with the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom who conveniently books lodging with his wife, stays up to watch television the night of the accident, hears the crash, and sees two cars proceeding at an inordinate amount of speed up the Rue Goujon.  One of the two cars happens to be a Mercedes, which is one of the cars reported by several witnesses as being in the tunnel with Dodi and Diana's Mercedes, but instead of a black Mercedes, Mr. Hunter sees a white Mercedes.  The smaller car the Mercedes is tailing is a dark car, when the forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony speak to a white Fiat Uno.

Mr. Hunter's statement is exactly wrong, but given that he was deceased at the time the statement was read, we may never know if Mr. Hunter, like Francois Levistre, had any issues with the statement that was recorded and read aloud at the inquest. Mr. Hunter's deceased status precluded him from raising any factual dispute with the recorded statement.  Mr. Hunter never recounts waking his wife up during either of the two incidents, from the initial crash sound to the sound of the two vehicles.  In fact, the next time Mr. Hunter's statement references any kind of recounting of the events of August 31, 1997 is three weeks later, when he returned to the Royal Alma Hotel in order to give his version of events in an interview with Dateline NBC, which was before his statement was given on October 22, 1997.

Next: Gary Hunter cont'd, and Brenda Wells


Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Conspiracy Theories: The Utter Implausibility of Mainstream Narratives Part II

The Death of Princess Diana


Princess Diana's death was greeted with the requisite tears and a plethora of collectible commemorative plates, as the deaths of all celebrity icons are greeted.  Death becomes merchandise in the case of an icon, as the Franklin Mint revels in the ghoulish opportunity to reap lucre off of the death of the fallen celebrity.  For the purposes of this article, we will not go into the standard rhapsodizing over what Princess Di meant, or what she stood for, or any of the other assorted sentimentalities that tend to characterize any discussion of her life or death.

This series is about conspiracy theories, and whether or not the dominant narrative put forth by the mainstream media is more plausible or less plausible than the conspiracy theories that proliferate around such tragic events.  It's about whether or not the evidence backs up the dominant narrative, or whether it undermines that narrative to the point of rendering it unbelievable.

Let's begin by what you'd have to believe in order to accept the dominant narrative that has come to be accepted as the official version of Princess Di's death.  A former wife of the British Crown Prince was in Paris with her current boyfriend, and they had been vacationing together for some time. During that time, the paparazzi had been following them and taking various photographs of their vacation, as paparazzi are wont to do.

The Timeline

On August 30, 1997, Princess Diana and her boyfriend Dodi Fayed arrived at the Ritz around 4:35 p.m. Photographic video stills from the Ritz surveillance confirm this, as the following photo shows Diana and Dodi Fayed in an elevator with a time stamp of 16:35:05.

At 1800 hours, Dodi Fayed departed the Ritz in the company of bodyguards for a trip to Repossi's, a jeweler just outside the Ritz, in order to pick up a ring he had ordered.  By 1900, Princess Di and Fayed had left the Ritz together in order to go to Fayed's apartment off the Champs-Elysee.  Five minutes later, the head of Ritz security, Henri Paul, departed as well, telling hotel security to call him if the couple returned.  At 2130 hours, Dodi and Diana decided to return to the Ritz after paparazzi made it impossible for them to have a quiet dinner at a restaurant.  Twenty-five minutes later, hotel security rang Henri Paul with the news that Dodi and Diana had returned.  At 2200 hours, the couple entered the Hotel Ritz restaurant, only to leave ten minutes later when Diana became visibly upset. One minute after the couple entered the restaurant, Henri Paul had arrived back at the Ritz, and he parked his car at 2201. He met bodyguards Kez Wingfield and Trevor Rees-Jones in the Vendome bar, while they waited as Dodi and Diana ate their meal in the Imperial Suite.

During his time at the Vendome, Henri Paul imbibed two Ricards, which are aniseed flavored pastis drinks.  The pastis itself is anywhere from 45%-50% alcohol by volume, although few if any people drink the pastis straight, as the custom is to dilute it with five parts water to one part pastis.  There is nothing in the record to suggest that Henri Paul drank his Ricard straight that night.  By 2300 hours, Paul was in front of the hotel talking to the paparazzi and telling them that Dodi and Diana will soon be leaving.

Around a half hour later, at 2337 hours, Paul was talking to Dodi and Diana in their suite about their plan to depart from the Ritz for Fayed's apartment off of the Champs-Elysee.  The plan Paul developed was simple: both of the cars used by Dodi and Diana would depart the front of the hotel hotel as decoys, while Dodi and Diana would depart from the rear of the hotel in an unmarked Mercedes. By 0019 hours in the early morning of August 31, Dodi and Diana were seen chatting with Mr. Paul on the video surveillance system as they all waited for the Mercedes to be taken to the rear of the hotel.  One minute later, bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones escorted Diana to the rear passenger side of the car while Dodi Fayed entered via the rear driver's side.  Rees-Jones took the passenger seat, and Henri Paul got behind the wheel.

Arrival on the Elevator

Through a lobby
Back from the Jeweller's


On the elevator
In the lobby
Waiting on the final ride

There were paparazzi present at the time the parties get into the Mercedes, and they were taking photographs.  Five minutes later, at 0025 hours, the Mercedes crashes into the 13th pillar of the Alma tunnel, and Henri Paul and Dodi Fayed died instantly.  Trevor Rees-Jones suffered significant injuries, and Diana lay trapped in the wreckage, seriously injured.  At 0026 hours, ER doctor Frédéric Mailliez, who had been passing by the wreck in his car, got out to help and made the first phone call for help to the authorities.  Photographer Romuald Rat was first on the scene, seconds after the accident.  Between 0028 and 0030, two police officers arrived on the scene but could not control the mob of paparazzi milling about, thereby rendering the scene open for evidentiary contamination.  By 0032, a fire engine and an ambulance had arrived, and eight paparazzi were arrested and taken in for questioning by the police.

It was not until 0125 that Diana's ambulance leaves for the hospital, some 53 minutes after the ambulance and fire engine arrived on the scene.  30 minutes later, at 0155, the ambulance stopped for five minutes, purportedly to inject Diana with adrenaline. At 0206, some 41 minutes after the ambulance started off with Diana and nearly two hours after the car wreck, Diana arrived at the hospital. For nearly two hours, until 0400 hours on August 31, 1997, doctors gave Diana open heart massage in vain.  At 0400 hours, Diana, Princess of Wales, was declared dead.

That's the official timeline, contained throughout the web. If you go and look it up on Google, or you peruse any number of the mainstream media outlets who still have a Diana death timeline in their archives, what you'll notice is striking: there's very little in those timelines that deals with the cause of the wreck.  There's no mention of other vehicles, including a Fiat Uno and two motorcycles, nor is there any mention of a Mercedes approaching the car Diana died in from the rear. There's no mention of the wreckage of a motorcyle that was also present at the scene of the car accident.  There's no mention of any witnesses, nor is there any mention that the tunnel itself was the wrong route for Diana and Dodi to take.

Dodi Al-Fayed's apartment was off the Champs-Elysee, which means that his exit to the apartment was on an exit off of the Place de la Concorde onto the Champs-Elysee.  The issue is why a car full of what appeared to be paparazzi was in position to block Henri Paul's access to the Champs-Elysee in a way that forced Paul to take an alternate route which placed him in the Pont de L'Alma tunnel.  Moreover, why would paparazzi care which route Fayed and Di took to Fayed's apartment?

Here's the map of the route taken by Dodi and Diana on the night of their death. The gray arrow represents the intended route to Dodi's apartment, whereas the black line represents the actual route taken.

The Final Route

What Witnesses Saw 

Jean-Louis Bonnin

According to eyewitnesses, at the Champs-Elysee, a car full of what appeared to be photographers blocked the access of the Mercedes driven by Henri Paul, resulting in Paul taking an alternate route along the Cours la Reine and the Cours Albert 1er.  Jean-Louis Bonnin, driver of a Fiat Punto, recalled seeing a scooter with two men, one driving and the other taking pictures, pulling alongside the Mercedes in which Dodi and Diana were riding.  The Mercedes was blocked by another car, preventing it from turning onto the Champs-Elysee in order to head for Dodi's apartment.

Stephane Darmon, a motorcycle driver who carried paparazzo Romoald Rat, insisted under oath that no one had taken pictures, but Bonnin's statements in 1997 and 1998 contradicted Darmon's testimony in inquest testimony heard on November 1, 2007. According to an article in the Daily Mail, Bonnin identified a dark Fiat Uno as the car blocking Dodi and Diana at the Place de la Concorde intersection, and he further identified paparazzo Christian Martinez as the driver of the Uno.

As Bonnin pulled away from the intersection, he said that he was forced to pull over on the expressway in order to allow a scooter, a white motorbike, and light colored Peugeot 205 to pass him when they repeatedly tail-gated him with lights flashing and horns blaring.  Moments later, Bonnin would pass the accident scene and witness the photographers taking photos rather than giving assistance.

According to the final report issued by the crash inquiry conducted by French authorities, Christian Martinez and fellow paparazzo Serge Arnal were in a black Fiat Uno, registration no. 444 JNB 75.  This fits the description of the car Jean-Louis Bonnin said was blocking the path of Dodi and Diana's Mercedes at the Place de la Concorde.  Romauld Rat and Stephane Darmon were on a dark blue Honda motorcycle with registration no. 2012 LXT75.  As for the white motorbike, paparazzo Nikola Arsov was identified as having driven a white BMW motorbike registration 448 BNE 91.

In regards to the light colored Peugeot 205, Fabrice Chassery was driving a charcoal grey Peugeot 205 registration no. 5816 WJ 92, which he had driven to the airport in order to intercept Dodi and Diana upon their initial arrival at the La Bourget airport on August 30.  We may account for likely suspects in regards to all of Bonnin's sighted vehicles from the pool of paparazzo who had been following Dodi and Diana ever since their arrival at the La Bourget airport.

Francois Levistre


Francois Levistre, a man who was driving through the tunnel in a rented black Ford Ka ahead of Dodi and Diana's car, testified that he saw two other vehicles in the tunnel. One was a small white car, and the other was a motorbike. He was driving around 60 mph, and he saw a bright flash of light come from the motorcycle in his rearview mirror.  According to Levistre, the Mercedes driven by Henri Paul then swerved wildly, eventually careening into the wall and the 13th pillar of the tunnel.

Levistre stopped near the tunnel exit, and claimed that as he looked back, the motorbike stopped as well. One of the men on the motorbike got off, walked to the Mercedes, looked inside the Mercedes, made a motion to the driver of the motorbike, and then hopped back on. Mr. Levistre said he did not stop to help because of "Fear...I thought they were hitmen. We thought the two cyclists had come to kill the people in the car."

Mr. Levistre gave statements to the French police after the accident, and to the inquest over ten years later. Those statements varied as to the number of motorcycles following the Mercedes in the tunnel, and whether Mr. Levistre did in fact see the Mercedes collide with the pillar.  Additionally, Mr. Levistre served two and a half years in French jail for the possession of an illegal weapon.  He had also served a jail sentence for burglary, theft, and fraud, and upon his release he was taken into custody on suspicion of trying to sell a child he had fathered to a German couple.  He was released without charges in that case.

In Mr. Levistre's defense, he insisted that the French police had made up portions of his statements, and that he had never read those portions of his recorded statements.  However, Mr. Levistre did not initially contact the French police, but chose to call a British Sunday daily, whose personnel then put him into contact with the Ritz Hotel.  The Ritz then put him into contact with the French police, and Mr. Levistre then gave his statement.

Below is a diagram taken from the Mirror which shows Mr. Levistre's testimony in graphic form, step-by-step.


The flash in the rearview





The swerve of the Mercedes into the
pillar.






The passenger gets off to inspect,
gives a hand signal.
The motorcyclists depart.




David le Ny and Jean Claude Annick


David le Ny, a young man who was traveling with his girlfriend and her parents Jean Claude and Annick Catheline, recounted Dodi and Di's Mercedes entering the tunnel side by side with another large car at 100 kmh ( 62 mph), and Jean Claude Catheline testified to the inquest that as soon as the cars disappeared from their view into the tunnel, they could hear "what sounded like from our view bodywork bumping."

Jean Pascal Peyret and Severine Peyret (Banjout)

Mr. Peyret reported hearing a loud impact, followed by an even louder impact as he departed the Alma Tunnel.  His then-girlfriend and future wife Severine Peyret reported seeing a motorcycle bearing one rider pass their car after the two impacts.  They were in a dark-blue Saab 900 convertible.

Brian Carey Anderson

Brian Carey Anderson, an American consultant for MADGE Networks, was in Paris from August 22 to September 10, 1997.  After spending August 30th doing errands like laundry and shopping, he visited one of his coworkers, a Mr. Pascal Ozanne and his wife Marilyn for dinner just outside of Paris at Chelles.  He took the subway to dinner, but Pascal insisted on giving him a ride back into Paris, and dropped Anderson off at Port de Vincennes in the southeast of Paris, where Anderson flagged a cab to take him the rest of the way to his hotel.

On the way into the entrance of the Alma Tunnel, Anderson first heard what he said sounded like a "high performance" engine, and his taxi was passed by a dark shiny car and one motorcycle initially, but eventually three motorcycles came into view, and all of them were clustered around the rear of the Mercedes.  According to Anderson's inquest testimony, it appeared as though the motorbikes were trying to overtake the car.

Diagram drawn by Anderson showing Mercedes and motorcycles clustered around the rear.



Anderson testified that it appeared as though there was less than two to three feet between the rear of the car and the first two motorbikes, with a bit more distance between the third motorbike and the car.  Anderson saw two riders on one motorbike, and one rider apiece on the other two motorbikes.  Anderson testified that he lost interest rather quickly and started looking at the trees and scenery, until he saw a flash and heard a very loud bang.  It was, in Anderson's words,  "a pretty significant flash of light."  The flash of light and the loud noise were separated by a half a second.

At that point the taxi came to a rapid stop, and Anderson slipped forward in his seat and saw an object in front of the taxi veer to the right and collide with the wall.



The position Anderson testified his taxi was in when he saw the car swerve to the right.
Anderson further testified that he saw a motorcycle laying on its side in front of the car after it had come to a rest against the wall.  The first people Anderson saw came in from the opposite side of the tunnel, running alongside the center pillars. No cars pulled up behind Anderson's taxi, and his driver refused to stop, instead choosing to pull past the wreckage of the Mercedes at a slow speed, honking his horn in order to warn the gathering crowd of people.

The flash Anderson reports aligns with the report of Francois Levistre, and the overturned motorbike in front of the Mercedes aligns with reports of various witnesses and the initial reports from the crash scene.

Next: More Witness Testimony


Sunday, May 15, 2011

Conspiracy Theories: The Utter Implausibility of Mainstream Narratives

Much light is made of the Truthers, Birthers, Deathers, and those who believe in such assorted and sundry weirdness as human-reptile hybrids. Lost in the static of mainstream media ridicule is one very troubling realization: the mainstream narrative concerning various catastrophes or historical events is implausible on its face. From the Magic Bullet to the cameras failing along the way to the Pont de L'Alma tunnel to the piloting skills of Hani Hanjour, very little about the prevailing narratives of major historical events like the Kennedy Assassination, the death of Princess Diana, or the tragedy of 9/11 holds up under scrutiny.

Some of this is partly due to those who emerge from the woodwork to contribute their voices to the din. Some conspiracy theorists are, for lack of any kind way to say it, nuts. We have the work of one Ken Adari, who has come up with what he says is photographic proof that Barack Obama is a human-reptile hybrid.

The Soetero Family
Adara would call our attention to the bumpy contours of young Barry Soetero's hands and the darkened markings on his knee as proof that young Barry is a human-reptile hybrid. The origins of the human-reptile hybrid theory go back to the writings of one Zechariah Sitchin, as adapted by David Icke, a former BBC presenter who claimed on live television in 1991 to be the Son of God.

That's right, David Icke went on a show hosted by Terry Wogan, and when asked if the newspaper reports alleging he'd claimed to be the Son of God were true, he said yes.


Icke predicted tremendous natural disasters to come, and years later, in 2006, Terry Wogan would have Icke back on to his show to elucidate his theories that humankind was ruled by a human-reptile hybrid brotherhood called the Babylonian Brotherhood. That interview was opened with Wogan's apology to Icke for his role in the media firestorm of ridicule that followed the first interview back in 1991, after which Icke's entire reputation was decimated in the press. Icke's children were savaged by their classmates, and although this may seem a bit cruel, you have to consider that Icke went on to a career in which he accused everyone from Bob Hope to Kris Kristofferson of being a 12 foot tall reptilian pedophile. The Queen of England, her husband Prince Phillip, and both George Bushes were implicated as well.


The choice Icke made to center his conspiracy theories on 12-foot tall lizards who sacrificed children and drank their blood wound up being his undoing in various countries, because the Jewish groups who'd been dealing with similar conspiracies since the days of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were quick to take umbrage. They accused Icke of being Anti-Semitic. Icke denied the allegations, insisting to no end that he when he said lizards were in control of the world, he literally meant that lizards were in control of the world.

However, let's pause for a moment, not to consider the possibility that Icke's theories might be true, but rather to consider the reality that every year, among the giant sequoias of California, world leaders and the elite meet at the Bohemian Grove, where they gather before a gigantic stone owl and sacrifice a child in effigy to that owl. This ritual parallels the ancient pagan rituals of followers who worshipped a giant owl god named Molech, and those followers sacrificed children to that owl-god. Today's leaders and policy makers gather in the woods of California to re-enact such claptrap in a ritual they call the Cremation of Care.


This is an annual occurrence, attended by the likes of the Bush men, former Presidents Ford, Carter, and Nixon, along with David Gergen and Henry Kissinger. Grown men stand around in the woods in the dead of night at a secret gathering where they re-enact an ancient child sacrifice in great detail, and these grown men are the ones who shape and author our foreign policy, our federal budget, and the regulations that determine what average Americans can do in their day to day lives.

Moreover, there is a homosexual undercurrent at the Bohemian Grove as well, as Richard Nixon so famously noted when he called the Bohemian Grove "the most faggy goddamned thing you can imagine" in a taped conversation with H.R. Haldeman, his chief of staff. Nixon said he wouldn't shake hands with anyone from San Francisco as a result. I'm not making this up, as the following will prove:


Alex Jones, a conspiracy theorist extraordinaire, confronted David Gergen, a political advisor to presidents from Nixon to Clinton, outside of the Republican National Convention, with his knowledge of the Bohemian Grove. At one point in the interview, Jones revealed himself as the party crasher who had taped the Cremation of Care, and asked Gergen about his mocking aside in a Washington Times article in which he said he wouldn't run around naked in the woods like the Republicans who were criticizing his membership in the Bohemian Club.

The article, written by Frank Murray, ran on June 11, 1993, and noted traditions including public outdoor nudity and urination, along with the aforementioned Cremation of Care ritual. When Jones confronted Gergen with the article, and revealed himself as the party crasher who had snuck in to the Grove to videotape the Cremation of Care, Gergen becamse visibly upset and berated Jones as a man who betrayed understandings and engaged in ambush journalism. Amazingly, though he belonged to an organization whose traditions include the re-enactment of a pagan child sacrifice ritual and public nudity and urination, Gergen had the temerity to assail Jones's character and integrity.

It seems as though no one likes to be mocked, but the media has a field day with someone like David Icke while letting the likes of David Gergen, Gerald Ford, Henry Kissinger, and Jimmy Carter off of the hook for their affiliation with the Bohemian Club and its annual shindig. Weirdness is relative to the prestige and position of the individual engaging in the behavior to be classified as weird.

Relative Standards and Media Blackouts

For the purposes of an illustration, I'm going to propose a hypothetical scenario for you to consider. Let's pretend that there's a young man, born into a wealthy New England family, who happens to be an average student with a propensity for wild pranks and sophomoric behavior. His passage into maturity is delayed a bit by his refusal to turn away from childish things, and as a result he develops a problem with alcohol and a bit of an issue with cocaine. This continues into his late 20s.

Along the way, he manages to fail at virtually every professional endeavor he undertakes, bankrupting two companies outright and barely getting out of another company just before it crashes and burns. This young man also has a bit of an issue with his military service, and a possible stint where he went AWOL in the Air National Guard.

However, he meets a nice young lady and marries her, and she seems to be his saving grace. Eventually, he kicks his habit with alcohol and goes on to a significant windfall in business. He parlays his newly found financial stability into a political career, and he manages to become a state governor. This young man seems to be doing well for himself. His family name is well-known in politics, and his national aspirations become apparent when he throws his hat into the ring to become President of the United States of America.

Around this time, however, he is accused by a married woman in his home state of sexual assault. She accuses the presidential candidate of kidnapping her, performing various experiments on her, and raping her. One newspaper writes a story on her allegations, but no other mainstream media outlet devotes so much as a sentence to the allegations, even though the man she is accusing has a history with drugs, alcohol, and failed business ventures. There are even whispers that he impregnated an old girlfriend, a Jewish girl, and his parents paid for the girl to have an abortion, and allegation broken by a pornographer with political interests in 2000 on a talk show.

Now, let's jump back to reality, because in 2000, a woman named Margie Schoedinger from Houston filed a civil lawsuit against George W. Bush alleging that he and others had kidnapped her, performed experiments on her, and sexually assaulted her repeatedly. One newspaper, the Fort Bend Star, ran one story on the allegations, which were sensational. At the time the lawsuit was filed, George W. Bush was already President, but at the time Schoedinger alleged she had been assaulted, he was still a candidate.

At no point did any news outlet pick up the story of the lawsuit. Now, ask yourself: if this were any other candidate, from John Edwards to Gary Hart, would the media have so easily dismissed the allegations contained therein? Moreover, when you consider the fact that the allegations against George W. Bush in regards to his alleged procuring of an abortion for an old girlfriend came from Larry Flynt, you might pause. However, Flynt had a history of getting his allegations right, from Bob Livingston's infidelity to Dan Burton's illegitimate child to Newt Gingrich's girlfriend.

What happened with Flynt's allegations? Well, CNN didn't investigate the allegations, and they scrubbed the transcript of the episode of Crossfire during which Flynt made his accusation. That's the media for you.

What's the point? The point is that the mass media has a documented history of looking the other way and selectively reporting allegations. While John Edwards' affair with Rielle Hunter was newsworthy, a rape allegation and an abortion allegation were not newsworthy items for the media during the Bush campaign. Oliver Stone's film W. made a brief scene out of the allegation. During the scene, George H.W. Bush is seen assuring George W. Bush that he will take care of the girl and the unwanted pregnancy. Consider this: George W. Bush had neither confirmed nor denied Flynt's allegations, as this article on the fact and fiction of W. notes. He never had to, because he was handled with kid gloves by the media where the allegations were concerned.

In the meantime, operatives and groups affiliated with George W. Bush's campaigns hurled all manner of scurrilous accusations at John McCain and John Kerry, ranging from charges of miscegenation in regards to McCain's adopted daughter to forged war records and military honors where Kerry was concerned.  The media covered both of those instances in abundance, the former to condemn and the latter with mixed approaches.  The reality of the matter was that the increased coverage, even though it condemned the allegations as non-credible in McCain's case, only served to disseminate the charge of interracial breeding on the eve of the South Carolina primary election.

With the relative standards and media blackouts thus demonstrated, we can proceed to examine various conspiracy theories and the implausible mainstream narratives that arose as the truth in context.