The Panorama Interview: November 20, 1995


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
sophie25 said:
I'm amazed he had to persuade her as she had been very open about most of it before.
Click to expand...
it does not matter. he told outrageous lies, slandering Tiggy LB and P Charles, he faked documents, he behaved so badly that he problaby never will work again. he lied about the queen and Prince Edward. does that mean nothing nowadays?
 
sophie25 said:
Apart from admitting the Hewitt affair there was nothing in Panorama that she hadn't told Andrew Morton or Peter Settelen so I don't understand what the big deal is. There is an insinuation that she wouldn't have said the things she did without Bashir persuading her but she already had so I don't think she needed much persuading by him. The Settelen tapes are still on YouTube and they are even more detailed than Morton's book and Panorama put together.
Click to expand...
The point was that other people like Tiggy, The Queen and Edward were talked about for no necessary reason. Saying that Edward was “ill”, the Queen or mother was to die soon and that Tiggy was having an affair with Charles is slanderous and without merit. The big deal was that other people being brought into this mess for no logical reason.

Denville said:
it does not matter. he told outrageous lies, slandering Tiggy LB and P Charles, he faked documents, he behaved so badly that he problaby never will work again. he lied about the queen and Prince Edward. does that mean nothing nowadays?
Click to expand...
People forget that people other than Charles and Diana were being talked about in the interview and the nasty things said about those other people.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
it doesn't matter who was lied about, the fact was that the man lied and he told big lies. he wasn't just saying something small about people. He didn't just say soemthing trivial like " I've found out that Charles dyes his hair. He he claimed that Edward was ill, that the queen was very ill, that Charles was in love with Tiggy... he faked documents, to make sure that his deceits stuck.
 
SirGyamfi1 said:
People forget that people other than Charles and Diana were being talked about in the interview and the nasty things said about those other people.
Click to expand...

Who else did she speak about?
 
Camilla was the main one. Everyone was left with the impression that Charles and Camilla had never broken off their relationship and that that meant that Charles's marriage to Diana had never stood a chance. That wasn't quite true.

I don't think Diana needed that much persuading: I got the impression that she wanted to have her say. It'd be interesting to know whether any of her friends and family knew that she was doing the interview, and whether they tried to stop her, but it's all water under the bridge now. However, that doesn't take away the fact that Martin Bashir made up a lot of lies, and caused a lot of hurt to Tiggy Pettifer, who had nothing to do with any of what had happened.

Had Diana not been in such a bad place mentally, maybe she'd have been suspicious about what Bashir was saying, but, again, it's all water under the bridge now.
 
Alison H said:
Camilla was the main one. Everyone was left with the impression that Charles and Camilla had never broken off their relationship and that that meant that Charles's marriage to Diana had never stood a chance. That wasn't quite true.

I don't think Diana needed that much persuading: I got the impression that she wanted to have her say. It'd be interesting to know whether any of her friends and family knew that she was doing the interview, and whether they tried to stop her, but it's all water under the bridge now. However, that doesn't take away the fact that Martin Bashir made up a lot of lies, and caused a lot of hurt to Tiggy Pettifer, who had nothing to do with any of what had happened.

Had Diana not been in such a bad place mentally, maybe she'd have been suspicious about what Bashir was saying, but, again, it's all water under the bridge now.
Click to expand...

No I meant other than those she had already spoken about before Panorama. She had spoken about Camilla prior to the interview so that wasn't new. Also no one knows the timeline of the Charles and Camilla affair, Charles appears absolutely besotted with Camilla to this day so perhaps Diana was right in believing that her marriage never stood a chance.
 
sophie25 said:
I'm amazed he had to persuade her as she had been very open about most of it before.
Click to expand...

IMO she hadn't been open about it before as she always denied any involvement with Andrew Morton's book.

I think I am correct in saying that one of the courtiers had asked her outright and she denied any association with him. I don't think anybody believed her but that isn't the point they couldn't prove a connection as they had been really clever in how it was handled. The interview was different she actually said the words.
She referred to Hewitt, Camilla, even inferred Charles was not fit to be king.
Inferred the palace didn't want her,

The effect on her sons must have been awful.

Alison H said:
Camilla was the main one. Everyone was left with the impression that Charles and Camilla had never broken off their relationship and that that meant that Charles's marriage to Diana had never stood a chance. That wasn't quite true.

I don't think Diana needed that much persuading: I got the impression that she wanted to have her say. It'd be interesting to know whether any of her friends and family knew that she was doing the interview, and whether they tried to stop her, but it's all water under the bridge now. However, that doesn't take away the fact that Martin Bashir made up a lot of lies, and caused a lot of hurt to Tiggy Pettifer, who had nothing to do with any of what had happened.

Had Diana not been in such a bad place mentally, maybe she'd have been suspicious about what Bashir was saying, but, again, it's all water under the bridge now.
Click to expand...

Lord Spencer had been aware that Bashir wanted the interview he had been the original go between but he told Diana not to get involved as he was suspicious of him. Even Paul Burrell was not aware, she had given him time off when the interview was recorded, did her Private secretary not resign as a result of it as he had been in the dark.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hallo girl said:
IMO she hadn't been open about it before as she always denied any involvement with Andrew Morton's book.

I think I am correct in saying that one of the courtiers had asked her outright and she denied any association with him. I don't think anybody believed her but that isn't the point they couldn't prove a connection as they had been really clever in how it was handled. The interview was different she actually said the words.
She referred to Hewitt, Camilla, even inferred Charles was not fit to be king.
Inferred the palace didn't want her,

The effect on her sons must have been awful.
Click to expand...

The effect on her sons of their parents divorce must have been too. She clearly felt she had been used by the royal family and was angry and hurt so I think she was quite right to speak out. One gets the impression that Charles would have been content to remain married to her forever whilst keeping Camilla on the side if she had been willing to live like that.
 
sophie25 said:
The effect on her sons of their parents divorce must have been too. She clearly felt she had been used by the royal family and was angry and hurt so I think she was quite right to speak out. One gets the impression that Charles would have been content to remain married to her forever whilst keeping Camilla on the side if she had been willing to live like that.
Click to expand...

You are probably correct with regards Charles and Camilla, I am not saying she was right or wrong to do it, she was hurt and angry but those poor boys went through so much with the unhappy marriage, the tapes, the interview, the books, then of course their poor mothers death.
 
Hallo girl said:
You are probably correct with regards Charles and Camilla, I am not saying she was right or wrong to do it, she was hurt and angry but those poor boys went through so much with the unhappy marriage, the tapes, the interview, the books, then of course their poor mothers death.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, children always suffer in these kind of situations, but I still think she was right to do Panorama and the Morton book as the public had no idea what was going on in that marriage, it was a huge shock when it all came out. Camilla should have backed off no matter how much Charles wanted her around as he was a married man and indeed she was also a married woman. Diana confronted her and asked her to do just that but she refused telling Diana she should have been happy with her children and the love of the public.
 
Denville said:
it doesn't matter who was lied about, the fact was that the man lied and he told big lies. he wasn't just saying something small about people. He didn't just say soemthing trivial like " I've found out that Charles dyes his hair. He he claimed that Edward was ill, that the queen was very ill, that Charles was in love with Tiggy... he faked documents, to make sure that his deceits stuck.
Click to expand...
I mentioned some of those things, that was what I was addressing.

sophie25 said:
Who else did she speak about?
Click to expand...
She mentioned Edward, the Queen and the Queen mother

sophie25 said:
Absolutely, children always suffer in these kind of situations, but I still think she was right to do Panorama and the Morton book as the public had no idea what was going on in that marriage, it was a huge shock when it all came out. Camilla should have backed off no matter how much Charles wanted her around as he was a married man and indeed she was also a married woman. Diana confronted her and asked her to do just that but she refused telling Diana she should have been happy with her children and the love of the public.
Click to expand...
In all honesty, it truly did not need to be told. What good did it do? It helped no one, not even Diana.

sophie25 said:
Absolutely, children always suffer in these kind of situations, but I still think she was right to do Panorama and the Morton book as the public had no idea what was going on in that marriage, it was a huge shock when it all came out. Camilla should have backed off no matter how much Charles wanted her around as he was a married man and indeed she was also a married woman. Diana confronted her and asked her to do just that but she refused telling Diana she should have been happy with her children and the love of the public.
Click to expand...
I don’t think we should start blame game about affairs especially Diana had her part to play with married men. What makes it right to air dirty laundry?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SirGyamfi1 said:
In all honesty, it truly did not need to be told. What good did it do? It helped no one, not even Diana.
Click to expand...

This is so true, it hastened the divorce, she lost trust in her security, staff etc.

It is the sliding doors syndrome, what if, a different path may have been followed.
 
Hallo girl said:
This is so true, it hastened the divorce, she lost trust in her security, staff etc.

It is the sliding doors syndrome, what if, a different path may have been followed.
Click to expand...

she had by then given up her security staff, but I agree it caused an even bigger rift between Diana and hte RF and I think people in general whom she was already suspicous of.
 
Hallo girl said:
This is so true, it hastened the divorce, she lost trust in her security, staff etc.

It is the sliding doors syndrome, what if, a different path may have been followed.
Click to expand...
And she pretty much was isolated because of that. I really wonder why people think that the BRF should have been helping her. She was briefing against them with journalists and she was self-destructive in a number of ways.
 
One of the things that bothered me about the Bashir scandal was that Diana was in a state of mind where she felt she could not trust anyone even some of her closest friends. When I think about those times she was lonely at KP and dealing with the knowledge of Prince Charles and Camilla, she could not turn to her friends for support. I distrust media here in the U.S. and in the U.K. as well and at the head of the list is Martin Bashir. We closely monitor the royal family through these forums, but there are millions of people in the world that believed Bashir and will never know of this scandal. I don't feel its water under the bridge and some things that are wrong must be righted...even if it was over 25 years ago.


In case you need to know:


"What did Bashir do to Princess Diana?"




"A report last year by a retired senior judge found Bashir used “deceitful behavior” to get the interview, including showing Diana's brother fake bank statements that falsely suggested members of Diana's inner circle were being paid to spy on her. Judge John Dyson said the BBC obscured Bashir's misconduct for 25 years."
 
Bashir also led Diana to believe that her much loved eldest son was recording their conversations and spying on her via his wristwatch.

What a loathesome contemptible creature Bashir is.

It is the revelation of how that fragile paranoid woman was tricked and manipulated by Bashir that leads me to absolve her of any blame or responsibility for her subsequent behavior.

RIP Diana.
 
Last edited:
sophie25 said:
No she didn't, have you actually seen it.
Click to expand...
She actually did and someone on this thread has mentioned it. She said that Edward was ill, the Queen mother was dying. That was what was said
 
SirGyamfi1 said:
She actually did and someone on this thread has mentioned it. She said that Edward was ill, the Queen mother was dying. That was what was said
Click to expand...

Diana didn't say this but Bashir told her these things.
 
sophie25 said:
Absolutely, children always suffer in these kind of situations, but I still think she was right to do Panorama and the Morton book as the public had no idea what was going on in that marriage, it was a huge shock when it all came out. Camilla should have backed off no matter how much Charles wanted her around as he was a married man and indeed she was also a married woman. Diana confronted her and asked her to do just that but she refused telling Diana she should have been happy with her children and the love of the public.
Click to expand...



I am no fan of Prince Charles, but if one looks at the situation from his point of view, it makes no sense for him to give up Camilla. Although Diana was suffering deeply, she was not able to stop having affairs with other men. It’s not fair to expect him to give up his affair when she was still playing around. I think if she was able to stop seeing other men and tried to build him up emotionally, he would have returned to her. She is the mother of his children and is a very beautiful and charming woman.
 
i dont think so. I think that the simple fact was that the pair of them didn't get on.. and in time, they both took other lovers as companions because they were not happy together, had litlte in common and found other people more fun, more compatible and giving them more happiness. Charles had never been all that much in love with diana and once he started to get fed up with her and returned to Camilla, he was finished with the marriage.
 
Denville said:
i dont think so. I think that the simple fact was that the pair of them didn't get on.. and in time, they both took other lovers as companions because they were not happy together, had litlte in common and found other people more fun, more compatible and giving them more happiness. Charles had never been all that much in love with diana and once he started to get fed up with her and returned to Camilla, he was finished with the marriage.
Click to expand...



They don’t have to be madly in love, but if they could have respected each other and had a sense of duty to the marriage it could have worked. Camilla would have had a tougher time getting his commitment. Weren’t there other women besides Camilla that were involved with Charles.

The worse thing to happen to Diana was the divorce. She was in the wilderness alone without a clearly defined role.

Unfortunately the Morton book and Panorama interview made divorce inevitable. Getting involved with the sleazy Fayed family would not have happened if she was still an official member of the royal family. Poor girl couldn’t see that Fayed was using her.
 
Binny2 said:
They don’t have to be madly in love, but if they could have respected each other and had a sense of duty to the marriage it could have worked. Camilla would have had a tougher time getting his commitment. Weren’t there other women besides Camilla that were involved with Charles.

The worse thing to happen to Diana was the divorce. She was in the wilderness alone without a clearly defined role.

Unfortunately the Morton book and Panorama interview made divorce inevitable. Getting involved with the sleazy Fayed family would not have happened if she was still an official member of the royal family. Poor girl couldn’t see that Fayed was using her.
Click to expand...
Charles was only with Camilla during that time, compared to Diana who was seeing multiple people. Those people he dated were long before he married Diana. I’m sure they could have divorced peacefully and quietly, but the way both Charles and Diana handled the situation was bad.
 
SirGyamfi1 said:
Charles was only with Camilla during that time, compared to Diana who was seeing multiple people. Those people he dated were long before he married Diana. I’m sure they could have divorced peacefully and quietly, but the way both Charles and Diana handled the situation was bad.
Click to expand...



Wasn’t there a woman named Lady Kanga he was seeing at the same time as Camilla? Diana was having flings with many men during her marriage as well. That’s why I always found her protests disingenuous. She wasn’t serious about saving her marriage. Her main goal was to destroy Charles by any means necessary b/c of her generalized unhappiness . It was all about revenge. It’s sad because she was a dazzling princess. IMO there was nothing Charles or the royal family could have done to appease her.
 
Binny2 said:
Wasn’t there a woman named Lady Kanga he was seeing at the same time as Camilla? Diana was having flings with many men during her marriage as well. That’s why I always found her protests disingenuous. She wasn’t serious about saving her marriage. Her main goal was to destroy Charles by any means necessary b/c of her generalized unhappiness . It was all about revenge. It’s sad because she was a dazzling princess. IMO there was nothing Charles or the royal family could have done to appease her.
Click to expand...
As I said the women Charles dated were long before Diana, Kanga which is actually her nickname and name of her business that she used to own and she died the year Diana died, but she died of an illness. Kanga was a girlfriend of his long before he ever got married and the relationship failed because of media intrusion and Camilla’s constant presence. I agree with you that Diana wanted revenge and I’m confused by people who justify her cheating. But of course that doesn’t exempt Charles for his mess.
 
Last edited:
Binny2 said:
They don’t have to be madly in love, but if they could have respected each other and had a sense of duty to the marriage it could have worked. Camilla would have had a tougher time getting his commitment. Weren’t there other women besides Camilla that were involved with Charles.

The worse thing to happen to Diana was the divorce. She was in the wilderness alone without a clearly defined role.

Unfortunately the Morton book and Panorama interview made divorce inevitable. Getting involved with the sleazy Fayed family would not have happened if she was still an official member of the royal family. Poor girl couldn’t see that Fayed was using her.
Click to expand...

Well, to clear ONE of your points up, Mohamed Al-Fayed was a longstanding friend of Diana's late father - nothing do with the royal family - though Diana did meet him more than once through that connection. I agree that her decision to accept the invitation to holiday with him was a mistake though, especially obviously the second time.
 
At this stage of the game, I am appalled at the number of people who fail to do their homework and don't even bother to read this thread and it's references in their entirety.

Innocent women are being defamed because someone just read an article, a book or a post. the BBC has had to pay damages to Mark Killick, a BBC Producer who was sacked after raising concerns about Martin Bashir’s 1995 interview with the Princess of Wales, they also had to apologise ‘unreservedly’ to Patrick Jephson over the way Martin Bashir obtained 1995 Panorama interview.

The latest payment of damages is to Tiggy Legge-Bourke a former Nanny who as a result of Bashir's information to Diana, was accused of not only being one of Charles's mistresses but one who got an abortion. Now vindicated, she cannot shake the scandal nor the pain Diana caused her while shredding her reputation.

You cannot unsay or unmake false accusations, malicious gossip and such, but you can educate yourself. It is, after all, a story of love, scandal, hurt, rejection, accusations etc. all of which fell on their children's heads. Those "children" are now adults, married with children of their own and bare the scars of those days. Do we really need yet another go-round?
 
Roderick said:
Well, to clear ONE of your points up, Mohamed Al-Fayed was a longstanding friend of Diana's late father - nothing do with the royal family - though Diana did meet him more than once through that connection. I agree that her decision to accept the invitation to holiday with him was a mistake though, especially obviously the second time.
Click to expand...



I recall that before Diana became involved with the Al-Fayeds, he was found guilty of bribing members of Parliament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Misskitty
Question about Queen Camilla
Replies
6
Views
1K
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
Kenneth Michael
Creating A Fictional Branch of the Spencer Family for a TV Character
Replies
8
Views
980
Toledo
Toledo
Somebody
Earning a living as a non-full time royal
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
Silverpot
Silverpot
Blog Real
King Magnus II (1130-1161) and Queen Birgitta Haraldsdotter
Replies
0
Views
269
Blog Real
Blog Real
W
Princess Margaret and the Royals
Replies
12
Views
2K
87SaminB
8

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom