Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

by **antiaristo** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:09 am

Seamus, I need to corect myself here. I made my comment about the privy council taking control on the basis of this from Wikipedia: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Full meetings of the Privy Council are only held when the reigning Sovereign announces his or her own marriage, or when the monarch dies. In the latter case, the Privy Council—together with the Lords Spiritual, Lords Temporal, the Lord Mayor of London, the Aldermen of the City of London and representatives of Commonwealth nations—makes a proclamation declaring the accession of the new Sovereign. That special meeting of the Privy Council held to proclaim the accession of the new Sovereign and to receive the required statutory oath, is known as an Accession Council.<hr></blockquote> But then I came across this: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>The position of Lord High Steward of England - not to be confused with the Lord Steward, a court functionary - is the first of the Great Officers of State. Although initially the position was largely an honorary one, over time it grew in importance until its holder became one of the most powerful men of the kingdom. From the late 12th century, the office was considered to be bound with the Earldom of Leicester. When the House of Lancaster ascended the throne in 1399, Henry IV made his second son, Thomas of Lancaster, Duke of Clarence, Lord High Steward, but following the latter's death in 1421 the office has generally remained vacant, except at coronations and during the trial of peers, when the Lord High Steward presides. In general, the Lord Chancellor was appointed to act as Lord High Steward in the latter situation. The trial of peers by their peers in the House of Lords was abolished in 1948.<hr></blockquote> It looks to me as though the Lord High Steward was an arbiter between the monarchy and parliament. He presides when the legitimacy of either is at issue (coronation, trial of a lord). Simon de Montford held the position. But the monarchy got rid of the position. So it will be Lord Charles Falconer that will preside. The man that lied to Parliament under another's name. The man that gave us civil mariage in the royal family. ---------------------- While I'm on, let me add these remarks. Charlie has to get through a coronation before the inquest does anything substantive (it was opened then adjourned nearly three years ago). Because of this. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>DIANA'S LETTER: IT WAS CHARLES Jan 6 2004 EXCLUSIVE By Jane Kerr, Royal Reporter PRINCE Charles is the person Princess Diana claimed in a letter wanted to kill her, the Mirror sensationally reveals today. Before she died in a car crash, Diana wrote: "My husband is planning 'an accident' in my car, brake failure and serious head injury...to make the path clear for him to marry." She gave the note to butler Paul Burrell who revealed its existence in the Mirror last year. Charles's name was blanked out. Burrell has been asked to hand the document to the coroner who today opens the inquest into Diana's death. Burrell said: "It has fulfilled its purpose. I wanted to give force to the argument that an inquest must be held."<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=13784399_method=full_siteid=50143_headline=-DIANA%2DS%2DLETTER%2D%2DIT%2DWAS%2DCHARLES-name_page.html">www.mirror.co.uk/news/all..._page.html</a> or click: <<a href="http://shorturl.net/?l=bb>">shorturl.net/?l=bb></a> The link is dead, like all the links that covered this story back in January 2004. It has been scrubbed from history. Not only did she write who it was that planned the "accident"; not only did she predict the method; she told us the reason: to make the path clear for him to marry And of course she was right about that as well, wasn't she? Posrscript The piece on the privy council is taking longer than expected, I've a touch of brain-blockage. Sorry. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antiaristo>antiaristo</A> at: 10/31/06 8:14 am

by **sunny** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:19 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Wasn't Diana from the Stuart bloodline?<hr></blockquote> That's interesting. Care to elaborate? Wasn't there some fairly recent controversy as to the Stuarts being the rightful heirs to the throne?

by **rain** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:15 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Wasn't Diana from the Stuart bloodline?<hr></blockquote> Yes, she was. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Wasn't there some fairly recent controversy as to the Stuarts being the rightful heirs to the throne? <hr></blockquote> are you referring to the claim of Micheal, Prince de jour of Albany ? actually, I remember the moment of Diana and Dodi's murder quite distincly. the opening shot (or was it ritual) of the war on Islam and others.

by **sunny** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:24 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>are you referring to the claim of Micheal, Prince de jour of Albany ?<hr></blockquote> Indeed. A book has been written (I'll see if I can find the review) which posits that this claim of Michael's had something to do with the death of Diana.

by **greencrow0** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:05 pm

Has there been any recent comments by Diana's brother Charles? I remember his eulogy at Diana's funeral very well.....the speech, the setting and the audience was high Shakespearean tragedy.... For those few moments that he spoke, history stood still. gc

by **Seamus OBlimey** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:01 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Wasn't there some fairly recent controversy as to the Stuarts being the rightful heirs to the throne?<hr></blockquote> Speeches by <a href="http://www.graal.co.uk/">Laurence Gardner</a> Sir Laurence Gardner, Kt St Gm., KCD, KT St A., is an internationally known sovereign and chivalric genealogist. He holds the position of Prior of the Celtic Church of the Sacred Kindred of Saint Columba, and is distinguished as Le Chevalier Labhràn de Saint Germain and Preceptor of the Knights Templars of Saint Anthony. Sir Laurence is also Presidential Attaché to the European Council of Princes (a constitutional advisory body established in 1946), and Chancellor of the Imperial and Royal Court of the Dragon Sovereignty. He is formally attached to the Noble Household Guard of the Royal House of Stewart, founded at St Germain-en-Laye in 1692, and is the Jacobite Historiographer Royal by Appointment. <a href="http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/holygrail1.html">The Hidden History of Jesus and the Holy Grail</a> <a href="http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/starfire1.html">STAR FIRE - The Gold of the Gods</a> <a href="http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/ringlords1.html">In the Realm of the Ring Lords</a> Which is the long-winded way to claim that the Stuarts (now Stewarts, St. Clairs, Sinclairs, Spencers etc.) are descended from gods and thus have a divine right to rule. A claim made by many a leader. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Has there been any recent comments by Diana's brother Charles?<hr></blockquote> Last seen at a Violent Femmes gig singing along to "I'm just like my father, But I am much worse.." <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol">

by **sunny** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:26 pm

<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"> Good Lord, Seamus. I Don't care who rules England. Just making the point that the Windsors may be usurpers- but aren't they all, in one way or another?

Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Re: Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Re: Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Re: Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Re: Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Re: Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Re: Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Re: Diana ; Inquest delayed to Ten Years.

Who is online