Diana’s photographers

Indeed, one could not escape the feeling last week that the paparazzi were just easy scapegoats, found to explain- away the death of one of the most media-savvy celebrities the British, or indeed the world, had ever seen.

The jury also determined that the French driver of the Princess’ car, Henri Paul, was responsible for Diana’s death because of reckless driving. Unacceptably high levels of alcohol were found in his blood stream. A two-year French investigation into the crash in the Alma tunnel in Paris had similarly placed the blame solely on his reckless driving. That inquiry cleared the photographers tailing Diana on the night of August 31, 1997.

Those photographers refused to give evidence at the British inquest, and the coroner could not compel them to testify. But of course, that did not stop the jury from declaring the photographers at fault in absentia for the entire world to see.

True, the paparazzi would have contributed to the blighted events of August 31, but did they really unlawfully kill Princess Diana? There was no evidence that the photographers, who were tailing the speeding car, were close to it leading up to the crash.

Not much has been made of a fundamental finding by the same British jury last week: that Diana and Dodi Al Fayed might not have died if they were wearing seatbelts, which is mandatory under the laws of this country. Unlike the unlawful killing verdict (which was by majority nine to two), the jurors unanimously agreed that the fact that the couple were not wearing seatbelts was a determining factor in the deaths. The French inquiry had similarly found.

The photographers, who were just doing their jobs and who have a role and function in a free press, were blamed for the easily preventable death of a woman synonymous with modern celebrity. It was perhaps a fitting end to a story (more tragedy than fairy-tale) of a woman who throughout her life cultured a close relationship with the very media that would be with her until her last moment of consciousness.

In many ways celebrity was thrust upon Diana from an early age. And while this was certainly daunting, she soon learnt, like more seasoned celebrities do, to use the media to suit her own objectives.

Without the photographers trailing her we would never have seen those unforgettable pictures of her back in April 1987, holding the hand of a man on his deathbed with AIDS. As former US President Bill Clinton noted, with those pictures, “she showed the world that people with AIDS deserve no isolation, but compassion and kindness. It helped change the world’s opinion, and gave hope to people with AIDS.”

When things began to fall apart, or rather when she could no longer take the steady decay of her marriage, Diana turned to Martin Bashir and, in an exclusive television interview, gave us one of the most calculated pieces of public revenge ever seen, coyly discussing details of the infidelities on her part and the part of Prince Charles in their marriage, and casting herself as an outsider in the royal family when she, a Spencer, was probably more royal than the royals themselves.

One person who didn’t blame the photographers last week was Mohammed Al Fayed, Dodi’s father. But that was only because, to date, he still believes in an elaborate conspiracy to kill Diana because she planned a marriage with his son.