Topless and Nude Royal Photos

Bulimia can be triggered by stresses such as Diana face in her marriage.

Once more you had been claiming I am an uninformed layperson so are you claiming to be more then a layperson or not in the area of mental health?

The paparazzi were pursuing her car, which is why the driver was speeding as he entered the tunnel,

Your limited knowledge and understanding of the situation led you to draw a somewhat inaccurate conclusion in that instance too, because you omitted so much of the larger picture.

more likely it is his superior to yours understanding of personal responsibility and the proper separation between individuals which is the cause of your lack of agreement.

Princess Diana Killed By Reckless Driver And Paparazzi, Rules Jury
ROBERT BARR 04/ 7/08

LONDON — A coroner's jury returned the most serious verdict within its power Monday, ruling that Princess Diana and her boyfriend were unlawfully killed because their driver and pursuing paparazzi were reckless _ behavior tantamount to manslaughter.

Criminal charges were unlikely, however, because the incident happened in France outside the jurisdiction of British authorities.

Rejecting claims by the father of Diana's boyfriend, Dodi Fayed, that the couple were murdered, the jury concluded after six months of testimony they were victims of reckless speed by their drinking chauffeur and the pack of photographers chasing after them in Paris in 1997.

"The verdict is unlawful killing, grossly negligent driving of the following vehicles and of the Mercedes" carrying the couple, the jury foreman announced.

That was the verdict of nine of the 11 jurors. There was no indication why there were two dissenters.

All 11 agreed that the car slamming head-on into a concrete pillar rather than striking the wall on the other side was a key factor in their deaths. The jury also faulted Diana and Fayed for not buckling their seat belts.

But jurors laid the heaviest blame on the couple's driver, Henri Paul, who had been drinking shortly before the high-speed crash that killed all three in a Paris underpass on Aug. 31, 1997, and on the paparazzi following them...

John Stevens, the former chief of London's Metropolitan Police, said the verdicts vindicated the force's two-year investigation.

"What they have said, of course, is that the deaths were caused by Henri Paul and also by the paparazzi," Stevens said. "If you read the report, you will see that's exactly what we said"....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/07/princes-diana-killed-by-r_n_95426.html

I understand personal responsibility just fine. And the paparazzi were found to be responsible for Diana's death.

Evidence must be solely for the purpose of answering these questions and no other evidence is admitted.[7] It is not for the inquest to ascertain "how the deceased died" or "in what broad circumstances", but "how the deceased came by his death", a more limited question.[7] Moreover, it is not the purpose of the inquest to determine, or appear to determine, criminal or civil liability, to apportion guilt or attribute blame.[9] For example, where a prisoner hanged himself in a cell, he came by his death by hanging and it was not the role of the inquest to enquire into the broader circumstances such as the alleged neglect of the prison authorities that might have contributed to his state of mind or given him the opportunity.[7]

you seem to not not know what you are talking about...yet again.

John Stevens, the former chief of London's Metropolitan Police, said the verdicts vindicated the force's two-year investigation.

"What they have said, of course, is that the deaths were caused by Henri Paul and also by the paparazzi," Stevens said. "If you read the report, you will see that's exactly what we said"....

In other words, the driver of her car, and the paparazzi following/pursuing in their cars, were so reckless and negligent in their driving that they caused Diana's death--they were responsible for her death.

The French investigation is clear: The crash was an accident, and not the fault of the photographers or foreign intelligence agents. Instead, it was the fault of Henri Paul, the driver of Diana's car, who was impaired by alcohol and prescription drugs.

Paul, who was driving at nearly twice the speed limit, nicked a Fiat Uno, lost control of the car and smashed into a pillar.

Sorry the stress to triggered such events are not limited to childhood see the other posting of mine concerning bulimia being triggered by such factors as relationship break ups.

As opposed to someone who digs up a two month old thread so he can try to be controversial. Wow! What a winner you are.

Quote:

I don't blame Prince William for not wanting his wife subjected to the same sort of relentless and invasive paparazzi pursuit that his mother had to live, and die, with.

Diana would have amounted to nothing with out the paparazzi. Like Hollywood stars and wantabies the Royals have no choice but to make their peace with being constant targets of the photogs. The Royals no longer serve any purpose other than to feed celebrity culture.

Diana's great mistake was putting herself under the care of the Fayeds who had neither the competency nor the will to deal with the paparazzi...THAT is what got her into the pursuit, and her reckless driver (chosen by and I believe employed by the Fayeds) got her to dead.

Dug up? I didn't even look at the date.

Wilso wrote:

Dug up? I didn't even look at the date.

Sure you didn't.