I don't think you can compare Princess Diana to just any unknown person dying . For many people, she was an inspiration. , iconic and it sounds corny but loved . I am appalled at the comments on this thread , so much sarcasm and nastiness .
I fail to comprehend how she could be, 'loved ' - Diana, the real person, was not known by the masses.
She was a Celeb, a figment of the media ; unrealistically 'idolised ' by many.......
She was attractive but flawed & had many affairs, showing a human side - but an inspiration and an icon - that I do not understand
Charles has proved to be an excellent father, in very difficult circumstances. His boys seem to adore him - but, after all these years, he receives no credit at all !!
Diana encouraged the press to follow her every move to try and outshine the rest of the Royal family - and was a victim of her own vanity in the end - the paparazzi took more than she actually ever intended.
She and Dodi got into a car driven by a drunk chauffeur who lost control of a powerful car whilst trying to evade the following photographers, and neither took the precaution of wearing their seatbelts - end of. They could have stayed in the hotel, but they chose to leave with him, they could have put on their seatbelts as the only survivor did - but it was an unfortunate chain of events with tragic consequences.
Notice now how the media don't pursue the Royals as much these days - they aren't encouraged to do so other than at public events - and that's the way it should be - they as entitled to their private lives as much as any of the rest of us, and to do their ordinary activities without having a camera showed in their faces.
.... She was attractive but flawed & had many affairs, showing a human side - but an inspiration and an icon - that I do not understand
Charles has proved to be an excellent father, in very difficult circumstances. His boys seem to adore him - but, after all these years, he receives no credit at all !!
How many affairs did she have more the marriage broke down? I must admit that I am always sceptical about some of the 'affairs' later, it always seemed many who knew her jumped on the bandwagon to sell their story to the tabloids. By the nature of affairs, normally only two people can know what happened but there is a lot of evidence of Charlie's affair with his long term mistress well before the marriage - I remember reading something in a book written before the marriage that did not make sense at the time.
There are plenty of cases of the children of terrible fathers who been maltreated but still 'adore' their father. They are hardly likely to criticise him.
Diana encouraged the press to follow her every move to try and outshine the rest of the Royal family - and was a victim of her own vanity in the end - the paparazzi took more than she actually ever intended.
She and Dodi got into a car driven by a drunk chauffeur who lost control of a powerful car whilst trying to evade the following photographers, and neither took the precaution of wearing their seatbelts - end of. They could have stayed in the hotel, but they chose to leave with him, they could have put on their seatbelts as the only survivor did - but it was an unfortunate chain of events with tragic consequences.
Notice now how the media don't pursue the Royals as much these days - they aren't encouraged to do so other than at public events - and that's the way it should be - they as entitled to their private lives as much as any of the rest of us, and to do their ordinary activities without having a camera showed in their faces.
I have known alcoholics who have drunk steadily and heavily but you would be completely unaware of it so there is probably no reason they would know the chauffeur was drunk. I don't think it was apparent on the CCTV at the time.
Unfortunately not wearing seat-belts seems quite common with VIPs in chauffeur driven vehicles. She was not the first member of the Royal family to be seen not wearing a seat-belt.
How many affairs did she have more the marriage broke down? I must admit that I am always sceptical about some of the 'affairs' later, it always seemed many who knew her jumped on the bandwagon to sell their story to the tabloids. By the nature of affairs, normally only two people can know what happened but there is a lot of evidence of Charlie's affair with his long term mistress well before the marriage - I remember reading something in a book written before the marriage that did not make sense at the time.
There are plenty of cases of the children of terrible fathers who been maltreated but still 'adore' their father. They are hardly likely to criticise him.
Charles may have been guilty of being a terrible husband by some but I don't think he could ever be accused of being a terrible Father. They are hardly children are they...two grown men.
I have known alcoholics who have drunk steadily and heavily but you would be completely unaware of it so there is probably no reason they would know the chauffeur was drunk. I don't think it was apparent on the CCTV at the time.
Unfortunately not wearing seat-belts seems quite common with VIPs in chauffeur driven vehicles. She was not the first member of the Royal family to be seen not wearing a seat-belt.
The car was doing nearly 70mph in the centre of Paris though (over twice the legal limit). If I was a passenger in such a car, I'd be very alarmed that it was going at such a speed in the middle of the city (paparazzi or no paparazzi).
I have known alcoholics who have drunk steadily and heavily but you would be completely unaware of it so there is probably no reason they would know the chauffeur was drunk. I don't think it was apparent on the CCTV at the time.
Unfortunately not wearing seat-belts seems quite common with VIPs in chauffeur driven vehicles. She was not the first member of the Royal family to be seen not wearing a seat-belt.
There have been a host of conspiracy theories put forward about Diana's death.
Alleged to have been involved have been agencies like MI5, the SAS, Le Deuxieme Bureau, you name it, maybe even Mossad.
I have no idea if any or none were involved, and to absolutely frank I don't care who, if anyone at all, was possibly involved.
However, I am not convinced in the slightest that Henri Paul, the chauffeur, was so inebriated that the crash was ultimately his fault.
His blood alcohol was said to be either twice over the legal limit, or at least very high.
How do we know for an absolute certainty that it was HIS blood that was measured for alcohol?
With everyone trying to cover their asses, he was the obvious patsy if the authorities wished to put one up.
I'm not putting this forward because of any French connection, I just doubt that his alleged level of intoxication was true.
I've never understood all the conspiracy theories surrounding her death. Driving a huge, powerful car at over 70mph, having consumed any alcohol at all with passengers not wearing seat belts is a recipe for disaster. Road traffic accidents kill people every day, why not these fools?
Perhaps on the anniversary, it is the biggest-selling single of all time with 33 million copies sold worldwide including nearly 5 million in the UK, the only record ever to go Diamond.
That explains why every charity shop I visit seems to have a copy or two.
There have been a host of conspiracy theories put forward about Diana's death.
Alleged to have been involved have been agencies like MI5, the SAS, Le Deuxieme Bureau, you name it, maybe even Mossad.
I have no idea if any or none were involved, and to absolutely frank I don't care who, if anyone at all, was possibly involved.
However, I am not convinced in the slightest that Henri Paul, the chauffeur, was so inebriated that the crash was ultimately his fault.
His blood alcohol was said to be either twice over the legal limit, or at least very high.
How do we know for an absolute certainty that it was HIS blood that was measured for alcohol?
With everyone trying to cover their asses, he was the obvious patsy if the authorities wished to put one up.
I'm not putting this forward because of any French connection, I just doubt that his alleged level of intoxication was true.
I COPIED AND PASTED THIS TODAY, IT'S FROM SOMETHING CALLED DIANA'S DEATH BLOG.
IT CAME UP WHEN I GOOGLED DIANA'S DEATH AND MOSSAD.
I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT IT'S TRUE, I'M JUST PASSING IT ON.
Mossad
It is alleged that Mossad, the much vaunted Israeli intelligence agency was responsible for snatching the Mercedes Benz S280 that was involved in the crash, for the sole purpose of rigging it up for the crash. There're also whispers that Henri Paul was an asset of theirs, allegations that Mossad have never bothered to refute. (Note though that silence in this business does not necessarily symbolize guilt because quite often it's a case of damned if you do…damned if you don't! So in this particular case if Mossad had denied Henri Paul as being an informant of theirs there was sure to be a chorus of voices claiming such a denial was tacit admission to the fact!)
Whether it was MI6 or Mossad who snatched the Mercedes a few weeks before the crash is a moot point at this juncture, however strong circumstantial evidence suggests that the car was tampered with so that it could be remote controlled when the time was necessary and that a small explosive device was installed which would be triggered at the right time (the detonation of that device might be the explosion that several witnesses claim to have heard immediately after observing a blinding flash (strobe light?) just before the Mercedes slammed into the 13th pillar.
Why Would Israel Be Interested In Diana?
Israel had every reason to be concerned about Princess Diana for the very simple reason she was set to marry Dodi Fayed who so happened to be an Egyptian and a Muslim no less! Furthermore Diana was increasingly becoming a voice to be reckoned with in international politics and had in fact been nominated for a Nobel Prize for her campaign to abolish land mines.
The Israelis naturally harbored fears that Princess Diana would meddle in Middle Eastern politics in much the same way that she did with the land mines campaign (which by the way angered certain factions in "democratic" western nations that on the one hand condemn the violence of wars in third world regions like Africa whilst on the other hand, do their best to stoke such conflicts so they can sell their arms! (America is the biggest arms producer in the world! Those arms are produced for profit not altruistic reasons, so they need wars to fuel the sale of those arms! There's an interesting film about that subject starring Nicholas Cage entitled "Lord of War.")
It is very likely that Princess Diana egged on by Dodi Fayed could have brought a shift in perspective and focus on the plight of the Palestinians, spotlighting a harsh, cruel existence ironically reminiscent of the Nazi camps; a reality that is little reported by the much of the mainstream western media and something that Israel very much did not want the world to know! (which may explain why they so often "accidentally" shoot reporters and fire on U.N. troops).
I adored Diana. She was just a couple of years younger than me. And I was just 21 when she came on the scene. Young enough to be completely smitten by her. And to want to read every word and look at every picture ever printed.
I was actually awake and heard the first reports on the radio about the accident. I got up and put the telly on and spent almost the whole day crying intermittently. I was devastated. I never went into London during that time, just watched it all on TV and in the papers.
In retrospect, yes, it was all completely over the top. And also with hindsight, it's clear that she was very damaged and caused a lot of problems for a lot of people. But I don't believe that came out of nowhere. Her family and the one she married into had a lot to answer for. But I do think the Windsors, at least, have learned from it.
As to The Queen. I do think it was right that she stayed at Balmoral with the boys. But it probably would have helped if she had at least made some sort of statement, much earlier than she did. I may be mis-remembering but I don't think she said anything until that video in front of the window overlooking QV's statue. I think that was one of the reasons folks thought she just didn't care.
In retrospect, yes, it was all completely over the top. And also with hindsight, it's clear that she was very damaged and caused a lot of problems for a lot of people. But I don't believe that came out of nowhere. Her family and the one she married into had a lot to answer for. But I do think the Windsors, at least, have learned from it.
I blame those two old women, The QM and Diana's grandma, who apparently engineered that marriage.
What a lot of people won't appreciate is that when Chas was young, he was expected to marry ideally someone royal, or failing that a member of the nobility. The idea of him marrying a commoner would just not have been on the table. I think it's obvious that he should have married Camilla when they were young, but TPTB wouldn't have approved - she was a commoner, albeit upper class, and had been around the block a bit. She wouldn't have been acceptable back in the 60s/70s when the old guard were running the show. It's very sad that Chas didn't fight for it, but I think both he and Camilla knew that it wasn't on, and so she married someone else.
Things are very different now of course. William has married his love, a commoner who's not even upper class. His Dad understood. I'm very glad that Chas and Camilla have eventually got their happiness.
The music played at the funeral though was wonderful, no doubt about that. Could well have done without that awful song by Elton, I thought it was dreadful.
I agree, I thought it was terribly bad form to recycle a song that had been written for someone else. He should have written something new. It was disrespectful to both Marilyn and Diana to steal Marilyn's song.
I've never understood all the conspiracy theories surrounding her death. Driving a huge, powerful car at over 70mph, having consumed any alcohol at all with passengers not wearing seat belts is a recipe for disaster. Road traffic accidents kill people every day, why not these fools?
In the middle of a big city too, it's not as if they were doing 70mph on the motorway.....that's the type of speed a police squad car would be doing in hot pursuit of a bunch of armed robbers. I can't understand how Dodi or Diana didn't ask Paul to slow down considerably : I'd be shouting that at a driver myself if he was doing 70mph on a city street in a car in which I was a passenger in.
What has always rankled with me was the call from London at the time that the Queen should come south and be 'with her people'....actually she was, just not with Londoners.
How many affairs did she have more the marriage broke down? I must admit that I am always sceptical about some of the 'affairs' later, it always seemed many who knew her jumped on the bandwagon to sell their story to the tabloids. By the nature of affairs, normally only two people can know what happened but there is a lot of evidence of Charlie's affair with his long term mistress well before the marriage - I remember reading something in a book written before the marriage that did not make sense at the time.
There are plenty of cases of the children of terrible fathers who been maltreated but still 'adore' their father. They are hardly likely to criticise him.
Both Diana's affairs & that of Charles with Camilla have been well documented.
None of us knew what went on behind closed doors ! At the time, all the blame was put on Charles - Diana could do no wrong.
I well remember the hysteria following her death. I have never seen anything like it & probably never will again.
It was considered that she was, ' One of us' - which, of course, she wasn't !!
The entire week was an all-time low point regarding the behaviour of the British people towards a woman who decided to put her grandchildren first - like any grandmother would do in such circumstances - and stay and comfort her grandsons following the loss of their mother. I thought the howling, wailing masses were appalling in demanding the Queen 'show herself' at such a time, as if the faux-hysteria of the masses mattered MORE than what those two kids were experiencing. It is the one time when the Queen showed just how devoted she is to her family and she was right to stay in seclusion with those two boys.
I disagree. Of course she should have been there for her grandchildren but to take a few minutes away to address the nation is absolutely not a big request to make.
In any other walk of life, of course this wouldn't be an issue but as the reigning monarch it is not unreasonable in circumstances such as those.
Interestingly Diana died before about an hour or so before it was officially announced, the media knew this but were asked to keep it embargoed until Buckingham Palace were ready to release the news. If you watch the news clips now you can tell that the reporters and presenters are aware that she's dead.
I'm sure in the future the whole thing will be of great interest to social historians.
Nothing "interesting" about that - official announcements don't usually happen at the same instant as the event.
If you ever see the footage of Dermot Murgnahan breaking the news or hear his talking head interviews about it you'll be well aware he didn't know it until he said it.
Diana was loved, no adored by the Britisah public, hence the outpouring of grief when she was killed
In her short life she changed the royal family for ever
And they were downright shocked, everyone was.
I wasn't really keen on Diana although I am a Royalist. I thought she was 2D and was bored of her being in the news all the time but nobody thought that when they woke up that morning they'd find out she'd died.
The mood created itself, a kind of mass hysteria did take over but so what? If people aren't human then we're doomed. All these infantile moaners judging response to the untimely death of someone who did them no harm strike me as sociopathic.
In the middle of a big city too, it's not as if they were doing 70mph on the motorway.....that's the type of speed a police squad car would be doing in hot pursuit of a bunch of armed robbers. I can't understand how Dodi or Diana didn't ask Paul to slow down considerably : I'd be shouting that at a driver myself if he was doing 70mph on a city street in a car in which I was a passenger in.
I never could understand the need to flee from the paparazzi. Why not just come out of the front door of the hotel, pause, smile and wave? Most of them would have gone off happily with their pictures, sure one or two might have trailed them to their destination to get a couple more, but so what? Diana had been flaunting herself at the paps all week.
I never could understand the need to flee from the paparazzi. Why not just come out of the front door of the hotel, pause, smile and wave? Most of them would have gone off happily with their pictures, sure one or two might have trailed them to their destination to get a couple more, but so what? Diana had been flaunting herself at the paps all week.
The whole episode was weird and hard to fathom. They could have stayed at the hotel for the night and not left at all. Bombing through the streets of Paris at 70mph (over twice the speed limit) was insane and asking for trouble.....it's like something a bunch of joyriders would do.
The whole episode was weird and hard to fathom. They could have stayed at the hotel for the night and not left at all. Bombing through the streets of Paris at 70mph (over twice the speed limit) was insane and asking for trouble.....it's like something a bunch of joyriders would do.
Exactly. And the route they took made little sense to me. To get to the Fayed apartment, they should have left the expressway before entering the tunnel, and gone up the Ave Georges V. Or just gone directly up the Champs Elysées, though I suppose they wanted to avoid stopping at too many lights.
In any case, a few photos wouldn't have killed them ......
I agree, I thought it was terribly bad form to recycle a song that had been written for someone else. He should have written something new. It was disrespectful to both Marilyn and Diana to steal Marilyn's song.
Yes, it would have been so much more individual to write something new
Comments
I fail to comprehend how she could be, 'loved ' - Diana, the real person, was not known by the masses.
She was a Celeb, a figment of the media ; unrealistically 'idolised ' by many.......
She was attractive but flawed & had many affairs, showing a human side - but an inspiration and an icon - that I do not understand
Charles has proved to be an excellent father, in very difficult circumstances. His boys seem to adore him - but, after all these years, he receives no credit at all !!
She and Dodi got into a car driven by a drunk chauffeur who lost control of a powerful car whilst trying to evade the following photographers, and neither took the precaution of wearing their seatbelts - end of. They could have stayed in the hotel, but they chose to leave with him, they could have put on their seatbelts as the only survivor did - but it was an unfortunate chain of events with tragic consequences.
Notice now how the media don't pursue the Royals as much these days - they aren't encouraged to do so other than at public events - and that's the way it should be - they as entitled to their private lives as much as any of the rest of us, and to do their ordinary activities without having a camera showed in their faces.
How many affairs did she have more the marriage broke down? I must admit that I am always sceptical about some of the 'affairs' later, it always seemed many who knew her jumped on the bandwagon to sell their story to the tabloids. By the nature of affairs, normally only two people can know what happened but there is a lot of evidence of Charlie's affair with his long term mistress well before the marriage - I remember reading something in a book written before the marriage that did not make sense at the time.
There are plenty of cases of the children of terrible fathers who been maltreated but still 'adore' their father. They are hardly likely to criticise him.
I have known alcoholics who have drunk steadily and heavily but you would be completely unaware of it so there is probably no reason they would know the chauffeur was drunk. I don't think it was apparent on the CCTV at the time.
Unfortunately not wearing seat-belts seems quite common with VIPs in chauffeur driven vehicles. She was not the first member of the Royal family to be seen not wearing a seat-belt.
Charles may have been guilty of being a terrible husband by some but I don't think he could ever be accused of being a terrible Father. They are hardly children are they...two grown men.
The car was doing nearly 70mph in the centre of Paris though (over twice the legal limit). If I was a passenger in such a car, I'd be very alarmed that it was going at such a speed in the middle of the city (paparazzi or no paparazzi).
There have been a host of conspiracy theories put forward about Diana's death.
Alleged to have been involved have been agencies like MI5, the SAS, Le Deuxieme Bureau, you name it, maybe even Mossad.
I have no idea if any or none were involved, and to absolutely frank I don't care who, if anyone at all, was possibly involved.
However, I am not convinced in the slightest that Henri Paul, the chauffeur, was so inebriated that the crash was ultimately his fault.
His blood alcohol was said to be either twice over the legal limit, or at least very high.
How do we know for an absolute certainty that it was HIS blood that was measured for alcohol?
With everyone trying to cover their asses, he was the obvious patsy if the authorities wished to put one up.
I'm not putting this forward because of any French connection, I just doubt that his alleged level of intoxication was true.
That explains why every charity shop I visit seems to have a copy or two.
Mossad???? That's new to me.
I COPIED AND PASTED THIS TODAY, IT'S FROM SOMETHING CALLED DIANA'S DEATH BLOG.
IT CAME UP WHEN I GOOGLED DIANA'S DEATH AND MOSSAD.
I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT IT'S TRUE, I'M JUST PASSING IT ON.
Mossad
It is alleged that Mossad, the much vaunted Israeli intelligence agency was responsible for snatching the Mercedes Benz S280 that was involved in the crash, for the sole purpose of rigging it up for the crash. There're also whispers that Henri Paul was an asset of theirs, allegations that Mossad have never bothered to refute. (Note though that silence in this business does not necessarily symbolize guilt because quite often it's a case of damned if you do…damned if you don't! So in this particular case if Mossad had denied Henri Paul as being an informant of theirs there was sure to be a chorus of voices claiming such a denial was tacit admission to the fact!)
Whether it was MI6 or Mossad who snatched the Mercedes a few weeks before the crash is a moot point at this juncture, however strong circumstantial evidence suggests that the car was tampered with so that it could be remote controlled when the time was necessary and that a small explosive device was installed which would be triggered at the right time (the detonation of that device might be the explosion that several witnesses claim to have heard immediately after observing a blinding flash (strobe light?) just before the Mercedes slammed into the 13th pillar.
Why Would Israel Be Interested In Diana?
Israel had every reason to be concerned about Princess Diana for the very simple reason she was set to marry Dodi Fayed who so happened to be an Egyptian and a Muslim no less! Furthermore Diana was increasingly becoming a voice to be reckoned with in international politics and had in fact been nominated for a Nobel Prize for her campaign to abolish land mines.
The Israelis naturally harbored fears that Princess Diana would meddle in Middle Eastern politics in much the same way that she did with the land mines campaign (which by the way angered certain factions in "democratic" western nations that on the one hand condemn the violence of wars in third world regions like Africa whilst on the other hand, do their best to stoke such conflicts so they can sell their arms! (America is the biggest arms producer in the world! Those arms are produced for profit not altruistic reasons, so they need wars to fuel the sale of those arms! There's an interesting film about that subject starring Nicholas Cage entitled "Lord of War.")
It is very likely that Princess Diana egged on by Dodi Fayed could have brought a shift in perspective and focus on the plight of the Palestinians, spotlighting a harsh, cruel existence ironically reminiscent of the Nazi camps; a reality that is little reported by the much of the mainstream western media and something that Israel very much did not want the world to know! (which may explain why they so often "accidentally" shoot reporters and fire on U.N. troops).
I was actually awake and heard the first reports on the radio about the accident. I got up and put the telly on and spent almost the whole day crying intermittently. I was devastated. I never went into London during that time, just watched it all on TV and in the papers.
In retrospect, yes, it was all completely over the top. And also with hindsight, it's clear that she was very damaged and caused a lot of problems for a lot of people. But I don't believe that came out of nowhere. Her family and the one she married into had a lot to answer for. But I do think the Windsors, at least, have learned from it.
As to The Queen. I do think it was right that she stayed at Balmoral with the boys. But it probably would have helped if she had at least made some sort of statement, much earlier than she did. I may be mis-remembering but I don't think she said anything until that video in front of the window overlooking QV's statue. I think that was one of the reasons folks thought she just didn't care.
I blame those two old women, The QM and Diana's grandma, who apparently engineered that marriage.
What a lot of people won't appreciate is that when Chas was young, he was expected to marry ideally someone royal, or failing that a member of the nobility. The idea of him marrying a commoner would just not have been on the table. I think it's obvious that he should have married Camilla when they were young, but TPTB wouldn't have approved - she was a commoner, albeit upper class, and had been around the block a bit. She wouldn't have been acceptable back in the 60s/70s when the old guard were running the show. It's very sad that Chas didn't fight for it, but I think both he and Camilla knew that it wasn't on, and so she married someone else.
Things are very different now of course. William has married his love, a commoner who's not even upper class. His Dad understood. I'm very glad that Chas and Camilla have eventually got their happiness.
I agree, I thought it was terribly bad form to recycle a song that had been written for someone else. He should have written something new. It was disrespectful to both Marilyn and Diana to steal Marilyn's song.
In the middle of a big city too, it's not as if they were doing 70mph on the motorway.....that's the type of speed a police squad car would be doing in hot pursuit of a bunch of armed robbers. I can't understand how Dodi or Diana didn't ask Paul to slow down considerably : I'd be shouting that at a driver myself if he was doing 70mph on a city street in a car in which I was a passenger in.
Both Diana's affairs & that of Charles with Camilla have been well documented.
None of us knew what went on behind closed doors ! At the time, all the blame was put on Charles - Diana could do no wrong.
I well remember the hysteria following her death. I have never seen anything like it & probably never will again.
It was considered that she was, ' One of us' - which, of course, she wasn't !!
I disagree. Of course she should have been there for her grandchildren but to take a few minutes away to address the nation is absolutely not a big request to make.
In any other walk of life, of course this wouldn't be an issue but as the reigning monarch it is not unreasonable in circumstances such as those.
Nothing "interesting" about that - official announcements don't usually happen at the same instant as the event.
If you ever see the footage of Dermot Murgnahan breaking the news or hear his talking head interviews about it you'll be well aware he didn't know it until he said it.
And they were downright shocked, everyone was.
I wasn't really keen on Diana although I am a Royalist. I thought she was 2D and was bored of her being in the news all the time but nobody thought that when they woke up that morning they'd find out she'd died.
The mood created itself, a kind of mass hysteria did take over but so what? If people aren't human then we're doomed. All these infantile moaners judging response to the untimely death of someone who did them no harm strike me as sociopathic.
I never could understand the need to flee from the paparazzi. Why not just come out of the front door of the hotel, pause, smile and wave? Most of them would have gone off happily with their pictures, sure one or two might have trailed them to their destination to get a couple more, but so what? Diana had been flaunting herself at the paps all week.
The whole episode was weird and hard to fathom. They could have stayed at the hotel for the night and not left at all. Bombing through the streets of Paris at 70mph (over twice the speed limit) was insane and asking for trouble.....it's like something a bunch of joyriders would do.
Exactly. And the route they took made little sense to me. To get to the Fayed apartment, they should have left the expressway before entering the tunnel, and gone up the Ave Georges V. Or just gone directly up the Champs Elysées, though I suppose they wanted to avoid stopping at too many lights.
In any case, a few photos wouldn't have killed them ......
Yes, it would have been so much more individual to write something new