Unlawful Killing > documentary about the death of Princess Diana

Ashtanga

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
21,818
Points
0
Location
In the heart of Michael... FOREVER!!!
Trailer:

[youtube]V5PFWc8DgFw[/youtube]





Outrage at screening of dying Princess Diana photo: Cannes documentary to show graphic picture for first time

By MICHAEL SEAMARK
Last updated at 9:51 AM on 10th May 2011


A shocking paparazzi photograph of a dying Princess Diana is to be screened for the first time in a documentary about her fatal crash.

Unlawful Killing, which will be shown at Cannes this week, is backed by the actor Keith Allen and Mohammed Fayed, whose son Dodi died with Diana.

The 90-minute film will include a graphic black and white close-up of Diana taken moments after the Mercedes carrying the couple crashed in a Paris underpass.

The distressing image, Diana’s blonde hair and features clearly visible, has never been publicly seen in this country.

It will be shown around the world but not in the UK, prompting Allen to say: ‘Pity, because at a time when the sugar rush of the Royal Wedding has been sending republicans into a diabetic coma, it could act as a welcome antidote.’

Similar pictures shown to the Diana inquest jury had her face heavily pixellated.

News that Allen, father of pop star Lily, is using the full photograph outraged close friends of the late Princess of Wales.

Rosa Monckton, who went on holiday with Diana a few weeks before she died, said: ‘If this is true this is absolutely disgusting.

‘The fact people are trying to make money – which is all that they are doing now – out of her death is quite frankly ... words fail me.’

A spokesman for St James’s Palace declined to comment but royal sources said Diana's sons would be sickened by the news.

One said: ‘They rather hope people would treat this with the contempt it deserves.’

He suggested that William and Harry would not be drawn into commenting for fear of giving Allen the oxygen of publicity.

Sources told the Daily Mail that the princes will never publicly comment about their mother because they view the issue as ‘the most intensely personal and private aspect of their very public lives’.

Allen’s film is due to be screened amid a blaze of publicity at the Cannes Film Festival on Friday and Mr Fayed is reported to be travelling to the south of France to help with the launch.

In 2008, after a six-month inquest which heard evidence from 250 witnesses and cost taxpayers an estimated £12million, a jury concluded that Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed were unlawfully killed as a direct result of grossly negligent driving by drunk chauffeur Henri Paul, who also died in the crash.

The actions of photographers following the car were also cited.

Mr Fayed has accused Prince Philip of masterminding the 1997 crash in which Diana and Dodi died and even suggested that Prince Charles was involved.
He alleged the death plot took place to stop Diana marrying his Muslim son.

During the 2008 Diana inquest, the former Harrods owner described the royals as ‘that Dracula family’.

The photograph of Diana forms part of the trailer to Allen’s documentary on the film’s official website available in the UK.

The website proclaims: ‘Unlawful Killing is the story of the deaths of Princess Diana, Dodi Fayed and their driver Henri Paul.

‘It reveals a cover-up by the British Establishment culminating in a six-month inquest. Keith Allen’s ground-breaking documentary recreates key moments from the inquest and demonstrates how vital evidence of foul play was hidden from public scrutiny, how the royal family were exempted from giving evidence and how journalists, particularly those working for the BBC, systematically misreported the events and in particular, the verdict itself.

‘This is the story of how the world was deceived.’

Allen, in a piece for the Guardian newspaper last weekend, said: ‘My “inquest of the inquest” film contains footage of Diana recalling how the royals wanted her consigned to a mental institution, and the coroner repeatedly questioning the sanity of anyone who wondered if the crash was more than an accident.’

He said he asked every major UK broadcaster to commission a TV documentary about the inquest but they all refused.

He said Unlawful Killing was ‘not about a conspiracy before the crash, but a conspiracy after the crash. A conspiracy organised not by a single arch-fiend, but collectively by the British establishment’.

He said the film was being premiered in Cannes ‘because British lawyers insisted on 87 cuts before any UK release.

'So rather than butcher the film, we’re showing in France, then the U.S., and everywhere except the UK.’

A spokesman for the filmmakers said: ‘The picture has been published in full before, in many parts of the world. We acquired the image from an Italian magazine, which had already published it in full. It is also widely available on the web.

‘We are therefore not publishing anything that the rest of the world has not already seen elsewhere.’
A spokesman for Mr Fayed said: ‘He was not aware that any photograph taken of any occupant of the car was going to be in this film.

‘He is appalled by that and will be taking all necessary steps to make sure it is not in the film.’

article-1385357-0BFAC0FD00000578-582_468x350.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ying-photo-shown-Unlawful-Killing-Cannes.html




Hmmmmmmmmmm I do not know what to think about it. :fear:
 
Wow.
I remember when it happened, I couldn't believe it was true. How upset I was. To this day, I still don't believe we have heard all the truth. And I don't think we will. I'm not saying the royal family did this, by any means. But the 'establishment' covers a lot of territory. I remember the family of the driver, Paul, had 3 autopsies, if memory serves, because they didn't believe the alcohol content in his blood. And what ever happened about that white Fiat that supposedly clipped them and caused the accident?
As for that picture about Diana, totally unnecessary to show this. Just for shock value and money.
 
I want to watch the documentary. I don't know how, LOL, as I'm not going to Cannes film festival.

Princess Diana was a great woman. Obviously not a saint, as many makes her out to be. Still she had many good qualities.
 
Wow.
I still don't believe we have heard all the truth. And I don't think we will. I'm not saying the royal family did this, by any means. But the 'establishment' covers a lot of territory.

I do not believe that family did. BUT maybe someone out (or some people) might be involved.... there could be some kind of conspiracy against Diana for some reason (?)....... and suddenly, unexpectedly... she dies. It's all still strange and confusing to me. I feel there is something more behind it all. But as you said, I do not believe we know the whole truth about it someday.



I want to watch the documentary. I don't know how, LOL, as I'm not going to Cannes film festival.

I also want to watch. Surely (I hope), the documentary will be available on dvd / blu-ray at some moment.
 
"Doctors make the best assassins."
This famous quote was made by social commentator Dick Gregory, and he was so right.

There is a new documentary coming out about the
killing of Princess Diana, and in the documentary
they point out that while she was found alive after the accident, only one doctor was allowed to attend to her, while an ambulance driving deliberately slowly, took 2 hours to get to the nearby hospital.

****Note similarities to Michael Jackson's death including a doctor who takes a lot of time getting emergency help for a patient who is
supposively dying: ****

Click on the link here below and Watch the video from TMZ about the upcoming movie:
http://www.tmz.com/2011/05/02/princ...ddleton-queen-elizabeth-british-royal-family/

Why did it take so long to get Princess Diana to hospital?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/6162121.stm#4<!-- E IANC -->

It took nearly two hours to get Princess Diana from the scene of the accident to La Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, only four miles away.

In France, it is standard procedure to send an ambulance with a fully-equipped team of doctors and nurses to assess the victim's injuries and administer care immediately.

Diana's condition was unstable. She suffered two heart attacks, one while being removed from the wreckage of the car, and another while on the way to hospital.

(Would Princess Diana have been saved if the ambulance had rushed her off to hospital?)

...Diana's ambulance passed five other hospitals along the way, including one reserved for VIPs.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Diana,_Princess_of_Wales
Later in 2004, US TV network CBS showed pictures of the crash scene showing an intact rear side and an intact centre section of the Mercedes, including one of an unbloodied Diana with no outward injuries, crouched on the rear floor of the vehicle with her back to the right passenger seat—the right rear car door is completely opened.

<SUP></SUP>
[video=youtube;V5PFWc8DgFw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5PFWc8DgFw[/video]

On 13 July 2006, the Italian magazine Chi published a photograph showing Diana in her "last moments" despite an unofficial blackout on such photographs being published. The photograph was taken shortly after the crash, and shows the Princess slumped in the back seat while a paramedic attempts to fit an oxygen mask over her face.

Like Princess Diana, Michael Jackson also told others that people were working against him, and wanted him eliminated.
[video=youtube;hnzmk1E6QmE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzmk1E6QmE[/video]

"It is a conspiracy, yea." quote by Michael Jackson
[video=youtube;BwYQtQlGmGo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwYQtQlGmGo&NR=1[/video]

[video=youtube;o2n4MCUH2p0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2n4MCUH2p0[/video]
 
I always felt that one day graphic pictures of Princess Diana would be used. Some papers had wanted to do it right after she died. It's disgusting but not a surprise to me.
 
I always felt that one day graphic pictures of Princess Diana would be used. Some papers had wanted to do it right after she died. It's disgusting but not a surprise to me.

Actually, in the pictures, Princess Diana looks as Beautiful as ever. I guess it was because she, like someone else we know, is an Angel. :cheeky:
 
Unlawful Killing

13 May, 2011 | By Fionnuala Halligan

Whatever the truth behind the deaths of Princess Diana, Dodi Fayed and Henri Paul in Paris&#8217;s Alma tunnel in 1997, one fact is sadly clear: they will never be allowed to rest in peace. Certainly not if Keith Allen, bankrolled by Mohammed Al-Fayed&#8217;s Sphinx Entertainment, has anything to do with it.

Unlawful Killing is a poorly-made hodge-podge of cracker-jack theories fronted by expert witnesses of debatable calibre; it&#8217;s a wail of grievance from a parent still pointing the finger in every direction.Mohammed Al-Fayed lost his son in terrible, questionable circumstances that will never be resolved; a £10 million inquiry didn&#8217;t come up with the answers, and neither will this bizarre documentary.

His pain is there for all to witness as he burns the Harrods Royal Warrants in front of Dodi&#8217;s tomb in Surrey. So is a phone call he makes to Howard Stern in which he sits at a desk in front of a life-sized waxwork - of himself.

UK personality/jobbing actor/Lily Allen&#8217;s dad Keith Allen doesn&#8217;t hesitate to trot the Diana rent-a-quote gang out; Kitty Kelley; Diana&#8217;s astronomer; Tony Curtis; Lauren Booth; Piers Morgan; a doctor who has no qualms in diagnosing Prince Philip as a psychopath along the lines of Fred West based on a grainy photo of him standing beside some Nazi officers. Conspiracy theorists, former M16 agents; someone who claims Phillip slept with Princess Margaret, Princess Alexandra, and once wore a leather jacket while thrusting his hand up somebody&#8217;s skirt.

Allen is an affable sort, but it&#8217;s never clearly explained why he spent six months at the Royal Courts of Justice following the inquest into the deaths. One smells the lure of an Egyptian chequebook coupled with an opportunity to bang on about the Establishment, the &#8220;racist&#8221; Royal Family (&#8220;gangsters in tiaras&#8221;) and their lives of &#8220;unfettered privilege&#8221; at the expense of the UK taxpayer, alongside the &#8220;corrupt and corrosive honours system&#8221;. Fair enough points, but editorially, Allen just can&#8217;t keep this film on a leash.

He divides Unlawful Killing into segments (&#8220;The White Fiat Uno&#8221; etc), but can&#8217;t keep within his paramaters, jetting off with every theory ever presented, credible or otherwise. There is a brief shot of Diana taken inside the car as she lay dying which has never been published in the UK, but it&#8217;s an oddly peaceful image. An undercover reporter in the press area for the duration of the enquiry comes up with the wildly shocking news that journalists are cynical and often lazy.

Technically, Unlawful Killing is a mish-mash, with court-room reconstructions which would struggle to pass muster on a History Channel documentary.

There is no doubt that something was wrong with the short life and death of Diana; Allen is right in that people feel they haven&#8217;t been told the whole truth. He raises some interesting points, but this simply isn&#8217;t rigorous enough. The only case Unlawful Killing convincingly makes is that it&#8217;s time to let Diana go before films like this hijack her entire legacy.
http://www.screendaily.com/reviews/latest-reviews/unlawful-killing/5027474.article



First look: Princess Diana film Unlawful Killing is just unlawfully dull, says Baz Bamigboye


By BAZ BAMIGBOYE IN CANNES

The minute Keith Allen's documentary Unlawful Killing - which purports to be an inquest into the inquest of Princess Diana - was over a friend turned to me and described the picture as 'monumental malicious b*****ks'.
I thought she was being polite.

Keith Allen by his own admission is not a documentary film-maker. He's an actor and a lot of his work has been pretty good. Once upon a time he was in Shallow Grave.

Unlawful Killing goes into often tiresome detail on every conspiracy nuts assertion that Princess Diana was murdered by all manner of folk including the British Secret Services and Prince Philip.

What the film fails to make clear, however, is that it was completely bankrolled to the tune of £2.5 million by Mohamed Al Fayed, father of Dodi Fayed who was Diana's lover and died with him on that awful night in 1997.

It's important to know of Al Fayed's involvement, and this was confirmed by Conor Nolan, a spokesman for Al Fayed's production company Allied Stars.

Al Fayed's viewpoint colours the entire 85 minute film. Several times Allen and Al Fayed keep making the point that Dodi also died in that crash. There's a strong sense through the film that Dodi and Diana died, or were killed, because Dodi was Muslim, he wasn't white, and that the Establishment and the Palace are racist.

There are nasty slurs in the film made about Prince Philip's connections with the Nazi Party in his youth, yet the film fails to make any mention of the Duke of Edinburgh's war service for Britain.

There are other nasty asides made about Philip, even outrageous claims made by writer Noel Botham that the Duke had affairs with Princess Margaret and Princess Alexandra.

Allen also interviews a psychologist, one Oliver James, who describes Philip as being a psychopath and he claims to have heard a story about Philip being at a party where he wore a leather jacket and was dancing to a Rolling Stones song while his hand was up a woman's skirt.

Quite what the point of such extraordinary and controversial character assassination had to do with the death of Diana were beyond me.

The film struck me as the ramblings of a sour old man who misses his son.

Allen shows Al Fayed in a marquee at the bottom of his garden so he could be close to the mausoleum where his son rests, although certainly not in peace.

Al Fayed rants on and on saying the inquest was a whitewash and that the 'British Establishment has gotten away with murder', later adding,' My son fell in love with Diana, they murdered them'.

To be sure, there may well be something murky behind the death of Princess Diana, Dodi and Henri Paul the driver of the car they were in.

But this film doesn't persuade me what that 'something' might have been. We learn nothing of what the 'cover up' of the deaths was.

And, I have to say, a documentary that includes talking heads such as Piers Morgan , Lauren Booth and an almost gaga Tony Curtis offering their supposedly expert advice on the 'Unlawful Killing' of Princess Diana hardly makes a viewer feel that every investigative stone had been uncovered.

In fact hardly anyone in the film makes a reliable witness.

Allen returns again and again to Simone Simons who was Princess Diana's fortune teller and she claims that she was nobbled by the Establishment and that she was present when Nicholas Soames rang Diana and threatened her over her land mines campaign.

Simon claims to have listened into the conversation.

We do hear Diana's voice when Allen uses phone calls that were recorded. Where she talks of 'not going away quietly' and much was made of the letter Diana wrote claiming that she would be killed in a car crash and that the blame would rest with the Palace.

The film ends with Allen filming Al Fayed burning the royal warrants that used to hang outside Harrods until the Palace stripped them from him in the garden close to where his son is buried.

I thought perhaps this film could join the bonfire.

Oh, and the photograph of Diana in the car wreckage ?

You couldn't see a thing.

Unlawful Killing is unlawfully dull.


Martin Gregory, author of books into Diana's death dismissed Unlawful Killing as 'piffle'.

He sat through the inquests into Diana and Dodi Fayed's death and said all that the film exposes 'are Al Fayed's insecurities'.

He added that the supposed documentry was all about 'life on planet Al Fayed'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...lling-Just-unlawfully-dull.html#ixzz1MFwXNKpR


:fear:





CherubimII;3382417 said:
Actually, in the pictures, Princess Diana looks as Beautiful as ever. I guess it was because she, like someone else we know, is an Angel. :cheeky:

:heart:
 
I don't understand why ppl cannot accept accident happens. There always have to be some kind of conspiracy. In MJ case there was nothing more than a reckless doctor injecting him with Propofol as a sleeping aid and in Princess Diana's case, a drunk stupid driver!
 
I always felt that one day graphic pictures of Princess Diana would be used. Some papers had wanted to do it right after she died. It's disgusting but not a surprise to me.

Well since her son is the future King of England...........the papers can never publish such pictures as it could be seen as an act of treason (but I'm not sure what the exact law is)!!!!


Anyway........both Princess Diana and Michael Jackson were murdered...........nothing has felt right about both deaths.......and there are motives for such acts!!!!
 
I don't understand why ppl cannot accept accident happens. There always have to be some kind of conspiracy. In MJ case there was nothing more than a reckless doctor injecting him with Propofol as a sleeping aid and in Princess Diana's case, a drunk stupid driver!


Well, in Diana's case the drunk driver thing really didn't add up. He had a really high blood alcohol level, I think it was 3.2, but if you look at the vid of them leaving to go, he certainly didn't seem to have that high of level to me. I'm sure something was fishy there.
 
Well, in Diana's case the drunk driver thing really didn't add up. He had a really high blood alcohol level, I think it was 3.2, but if you look at the vid of them leaving to go, he certainly didn't seem to have that high of level to me. I'm sure something was fishy there.
yeah thats the one thing that has always struck me.

anyway using the pics is sick. anything for attention.the person who took them is scum
 
Well, in Diana's case the drunk driver thing really didn't add up. He had a really high blood alcohol level, I think it was 3.2, but if you look at the vid of them leaving to go, he certainly didn't seem to have that high of level to me. I'm sure something was fishy there.


And there's also that French policeman who seems to have an answer to everything..............you usually see him on the documentaries about Diana's death...............he is just too confident about his answers!!!!
 
The driver was driving at a high speed. He lost control of the car. He wouldn't kill himself, crashing the car onto the pillar on purpose.
 
FEATURE:

Diana Tragedy Needs Answers

| May 15th, 2011

tweetmeme_style = 'compact';

DIANA2_CROP-1_N3890626_666477.JPG



One of the first men in the world to know of Princess Diana's car crash, Geelong's paparazzi king DARRYN LYONS gives his view on the latest film to examine that night, Unlawful Killing.

THE conspiracy theories surrounding the 1997 death of Princess Diana are to be given fresh life in actor Keith Allen's film Unlawful Killing, which premiered overnight at the Cannes Film Festival.

I was one of the first people in the world to receive photos of the crash - photos I never sold, despite being offered millions of pounds for them. And to all of those who have been asking me no, I did not sell those pictures to the movie. But I can't wait to see the reaction to the film.

Keith, father to pop-star Lily Allen, is expected to be inundated by offers from American, the Far East and Europe. But there is one place the film is never likely to see the light of day - Britain. Lawyers have warned Allen that significant cuts would have to be made for it to ever air in Diana's home country.

He began making the film in October 2007 at the beginning of the six-month inquest into her death and is financed by Harrods owner Mohamed Al Fayed, whose son Dodi, 42, died alongside Diana. But this was not the original plan. Allen says that before he met Al Fayed he was convinced by the media caricature of him as a crazed man, driven mad by his son's death.
After meeting him and digging around, though, he soon changed his mind. Al Fayed has always believed his son and Diana were murdered by the secret service in collusion with Prince Philip, because the pair were in love and the mother of the nation's future king could not marry a Muslim.



What amazed Allen, he says, was that after questioning a raft of educated people they all recalled the inquest verdict was accidental death. In fact, the jury decided it was an unlawful death, and the negligent driving of chauffeur Henri Paul and the following vehicles had killed the pair.

Also wrong were the media reports that these vehicles were paparazzi; in fact, the verdict never mentioned this.

Whatever your view on Diana's and Dodi's deaths, the film certainly gives everyone food for thought, exploring a series of unanswered questions.

Why was Diana's seatbelt faulty? Why was she left in the car for 37 minutes, instead of being rushed to hospital? Why was every camera in the Pont de l'Alma road tunnel broken or off?

In a letter to butler Paul Burrell three years before she died, Diana famously wrote: "My husband is planning an accident in my car - brake failure or serious injury." The film looks into Al Fayed's legal action against then Metropolitan Police Commissioner Paul Condon into allegations he held this letter for three years after Diana's death instead of investigating it. He strongly denies being part of a cover up.

There is also the infamous blood tests taken from driver Henri Paul, who only three days earlier had a strict medical to renew his pilot's licence and had no drink problem at that time. Medical experts term his samples biologically inexplicable but French pathologists refused to attend Diana's inquest. Those samples no longer exist, just like tests taken from Diana to establish if she was pregnant.

Another mystery is that while the inquest agreed there had been a collision with a white Fiat Uno, it was never found. A photographer, James Andanson - then suspected of working with MI6 - owned a white Fiat Uno that he sold just two months after the crash.

In March 2002, he was found in a burnt-out car, shot in the head twice and French authorities claimed it was suicide. As the film says, it's possible to shoot yourself once in the head in a suicide - but not twice.

And where was the Queen's private secretary Sir Robert Fellowes? He said he was on holiday at the time of the crash, but in his autobiography the then prime minister's press secretary, Alistair Campbell, stated he saw him in Balmoral.

These are just some of the many questions covered.
After making the film, Allen, like Fayed, is convinced there was a cover up and I agree. I can't believe this was just a simple case of crash by a drunk driver. There are still too many questions that have gone unanswered about that night.

And despite the coroner never placing any blame on photographers, the paparazzi have been made an easy scapegoat. Adding up all this evidence and raising important questions, there's one thing for sure: Unlawful Killing hits its target.

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2011/05/15/258221_news.html
 
[
Why was Diana's seatbelt faulty? Why was she left in the car for 37 minutes, instead of being rushed to hospital? Why was every camera in the Pont de l'Alma road tunnel broken or off?

In a letter to butler Paul Burrell three years before she died, Diana famously wrote: "My husband is planning an accident in my car - brake failure or serious injury." The film looks into Al Fayed's legal action against then Metropolitan Police Commissioner Paul Condon into allegations he held this letter for three years after Diana's death instead of investigating it. He strongly denies being part of a cover up.

There is also the infamous blood tests taken from driver Henri Paul, who only three days earlier had a strict medical to renew his pilot's licence and had no drink problem at that time. Medical experts term his samples biologically inexplicable but French pathologists refused to attend Diana's inquest. Those samples no longer exist, just like tests taken from Diana to establish if she was pregnant.

Another mystery is that while the inquest agreed there had been a collision with a white Fiat Uno, it was never found. A photographer, James Andanson - then suspected of working with MI6 - owned a white Fiat Uno that he sold just two months after the crash.

In March 2002, he was found in a burnt-out car, shot in the head twice and French authorities claimed it was suicide. As the film says, it's possible to shoot yourself once in the head in a suicide - but not twice.

And where was the Queen's private secretary Sir Robert Fellowes? He said he was on holiday at the time of the crash, but in his autobiography the then prime minister's press secretary, Alistair Campbell, stated he saw him in Balmoral.

These are just some of the many questions covered.
After making the film, Allen, like Fayed, is convinced there was a cover up and I agree. I can't believe this was just a simple case of crash by a drunk driver. There are still too many questions that have gone unanswered about that night.

And despite the coroner never placing any blame on photographers, the paparazzi have been made an easy scapegoat. Adding up all this evidence and raising important questions, there's one thing for sure: Unlawful Killing hits its target.

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2011/05/15/258221_news.html

:fear:
 
Where is this info. coming from now that princess Diana's seat belt was faulty.
 
I remember hearing immediately after the accident, that neither she nor Dodi were wearing seatbelts, that had they been they would have survived and that the bodyguard, Trevor Reese Jones (I think his name is) survived because he was wearing his.

Interesting about the driver's med. exam. I don't know though how a medical exam would determine if he had a drinking problem unless it would be in the blood work, ie., liver enzymes etc. Weren't there were 3 autopsies? Or did the family just have the samples tested by more than one lab? If so, and the samples had been tampered with, it wouldn't matter who tested them. If the samples were taken at different times though, I wonder if the alcohol in the blood would have undergone any degradation in which case the results should have reflected a change maybe?

And once you start reading about that photographer, Andanson, talk about confusing. Depending on what you read he either: shot himself in the head once or twice, committed suicide by burning to death or was assaulted and allowed to burn in the car and the heat caused the hole(s) in his head. Horrible.
 
Exactly, we heard that she & Dodi had not been wearing seat belts & that's why they did not survive. There is an advert on TV or there was until recently which shows the heart travelling when a person is not wearing a seat belt & how it gets "broken" torn. That is what happened to princess Diana.
 
If we are allowed to watch this "Unlawful Killing" documentary, there is a lot we might find out. :yes:
 
Back
Top