Diana, Princess of Wales: Did MI6 Kill the Princess?

Conspiracy Theories. Photo Credit: stevecadman. C.C.License
Conspiracy Theories
The major conspiracy theories so far…
 More Info
Your Condolences. Photo Credit: Dave Heuts. CC License.
Messages sent to LondonNet after The Princess’s death…
 More Info
Diana's London
Diana’s London
Key London places in Diana’s all too brief life…

 More Info

Prince Charles.
Diana’s Lovers
The men that shook the English throne…

 More Info

Diana, Princess of Wales: Did MI6 Kill Her?

Princess's Diana Memorial in Hyde Park. Copyright © LondonNet Ltd

Following Diana’s sudden death in Paris, August 31, 1997 many doubts have surrounded the official story of the paparazzi chasing a drunk driver at speed toward an inevitable and tragic accident. Below you will find an examination of the evidence surrounding the number one conspiracy theory-MI6 killed Diana…

The Two Main Theories

a) One or more rogue "cells" in the British secret service construct and carry out a plot to kill Diana.

b) An official campaign by MI6 to assasinate Diana, sanctioned by elements of the establishment.

The Possible Motives

a) The rogue elements in MI5 (National security) or MI6 (International security) decide that Di is a threat to the throne, and therefore the stability of the state. They take her out.

b) With similar motives to the possible rogue elements, the official campaign is driven by a fear of Diana’s possible to conversion to Islam (Dodi being a Muslim) and the implication on the Church and State were the two Princes, William and Harry, to follow their mother’s lead.

The Evidence

Circumstantial it maybe, but put together is it capable of raising sufficient doubt that this was an accident?
Below are some of the questions and doubts that are raised by the investigation so far

The rapid disposal of the bodies of Diana and Dodi. Diana had no post mortem prior to burial in Althorp. Victims of sudden death require a post mortem by law in the UK.

The missing white Fiat Uno: With such a large-scale investigation by French authorities could only secret agents have evaded the police’s net around Paris? We know the car hit the Mercedes used by Di and Dodi, thanks to traceable paint marks on the Benz. Witnesses refer to the car lurching around the road at varying speeds as both it and the Merc entered the tunnel of death.

Henri Paul, driver of the Limo. The mis-information surrounding this key figure is enormous. First he was said to be driving at up to 120 mph, recent reports by professional crash investigators suggest 60 mph, even less on impact.
Was he really drunk? It is accepted that he had two Ricard drinks at the Ritz, but no other evidence has emerged to support this claim, beyond questionable results from a blood test from his corpse. Why questionable? Because it is common for the alcohol level to rise in bodies after death regardless of consumption. The test also showed a very high level of carbon monoxide (20 per cent) in his blood. Experts say this would have incapacitated him before he set off on his fatal journey, and yet the hotel’s video evidence shows him walking around and talking normally. An alcoholic? Well , as a pilot, he passed a rigorous health check two days before the accident. His liver showed no signs of abuse on post-mortem.
Then there is the question of the multiple bank accounts Paul held, with balances showing income far in excess of his 20 000 UKP salary as acting head of security at the Ritz. Some friends have suggested he was a long term "sleeper" agent for a secret service agency, almost certainly French intelligence.

Trevor Rees Jones (Fayed bodyguard)- The only survivor. One time member of Her Majesty’s armed forces, rumours suggest he may have been a "sleeper" agent for MI5 or MI6, particularly as the establishment were keen to keep tabs on Mohammed Al Fayed. Why was he the only person in the car to wear a safety-belt?

Explosion, followed by Bang– Immediately after the crash news was broadcast, witnesses appeared on US TV saying that they heard an explosion or bang before they heard the car crash. Was this a gunshot, or a bomb?

White Light– Other witnesses describe an extremely bright white light, much stronger than a photographer’s flashbulb, illuminating the tunnel before the crash sounds. Powerful anti-personnel flash-guns are available to private citizens for as little as 250 UKP. The security forces have access to much stronger tools. All of which are capable of blinding a victim for several minutes – easily enough to cause a fatal crash. Crucially there would be no physical evidence left for investigators.

James Hewitt– Former lover of Diana claims he was warned on several occasions by elements of the security forces and a member of the royal family to stop seeing the Princess or his health would suffer! Hewitt has been exposed previously as being very willing to exploit a situation for his own ends, as in the publication of a sleazy book about Diana to which he contributed.

Paparazzi– Initially blamed for the crash, most witnesses seem to agree that the bikes were not close enough to the Mercedes in the tunnel to have actually interfered with its progress.

NB These are just a selection of matters which cause concern for investigators. Many other points are raised by the "accident" but for reasons of space are not dealt with here.


There are many questions that arise out of this incident. The most plausible explanation still appears to be a tragic accident – Paul who was driving to some degree under the influence of alcohol, tried to accelerate away from the pursuing photographers, lost control going into the tunnel (after the slight curve in the road, and maybe as the Uno impeded his progress) and crashed into the tunnel’s thirteenth pillar.

This maybe the most plausible explanation, however, we feel that without dramatic new evidence, such as the Uno and driver turning up, this will never be certain.

While there remains doubt as to whether it was an accident it is reasonable to question what the possible alternatives are. The most plausible of these has to involve members of the UK establishment and secret service as few others had anything to lose from Diana and Dodi’s relationship. To keep such a plot secret we believe it would have to be the work of a small, isolated cell working under its own auspices within the system.

Former agents have told of a plot to destabilise the then Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson in the Seventies. Wilson did indeed resign from office, shocking political commentators at the time. We know that our intelligence service keeps records on Peace campaigners and Union officials for the "threat" of being radicals.

If the service really does operate as efficiently as James Bond films lead us to believe, which we doubt very strongly, then there would be nothing to stop them orchestrating Diana’s death AND making it appear to be an accident.

But as yet there is clearly more evidence to support an accident than a secret plot. For us though, the jury is still out.