External links

Site information

Hearing transcripts

17 March 2008 - Afternoon session

21 (1.30 pm)
22 (Jury present)
23 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes, the next witness is
24 Mr Delbreilh.
25 Can you hear us in Paris?


1 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, we can, sir.
2 MR HOUGH: I do not think the volume is very good from your
3 end. We will do our best.
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Can you hear us now?
5 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Yes, we can hear you, sir. Can
6 you hear us?
7 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: This is better, thank you.
8 MR HOUGH: Could the witness please be sworn or make an
9 affirmation.
11 Questions from MR HOUGH
12 MR HOUGH: Is your name Vincent Delbreilh?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. In 1997, were you a lieutenant in the judicial police in
15 Paris?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And were you involved in the inquiries concerning
18 the deaths of the Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Could I ask you to have in front of you, I hope you have
21 a copy there, a statement, D2249, which is about
22 inquiries you made at pharmacies.
23 THE INTERPRETER: Well, we are not sure. It seems that it
24 reads 2249, but we cannot actually read the 9.
25 MR HOUGH: It should be a statement dated


1 12th September 1997.
2 A. Well, we have one dated 12th September, but it is by
3 Frederic Cuvillier.
4 Q. No, this is a statement by M Delbreilh concerning his
5 inquiries about various pharmacies and it is quite
6 important that he have a copy in front of him, if it is
7 possible.
8 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: We are losing you, Mr Hough, can
9 you still hear us?
10 MR HOUGH: Yes, we can still hear you.
11 A. I recall it, but I have not received it.
12 Q. Can we just give a few moments for those in the room
13 with you to see if they can try to find D2249. If not,
14 we will carry on without it.
15 THE INTERPRETER: We have it.
16 MR HOUGH: Thank you.
17 (Pause).
18 THE INTERPRETER: All right.
19 MR HOUGH: Is that a report you made of inquiries which you
20 undertook at various pharmacies about prescription
21 medications purchased by Henri Paul?
22 A. Yes, it is.
23 Q. And did you date that statement 12th September 1997?
24 A. Indeed.
25 Q. And had you made all the inquiries that day or over


1 a period of time before then?
2 A. I do not remember. Maybe it was the same day or two
3 days before. I wrote that report after I had visited
4 all of the pharmacies concerned.
5 Q. I think that as a result of those inquiries, a document
6 was created which was entitled "Consultations et Soins
7 Pharmaceutiques d'Henri Paul"; do you have that with
8 you? It may just be attached to the statement or it may
9 be separate. Perhaps we can have it on screen anyway --
10 A. It is the document --
11 Q. And if we can show on screen in Paris to help them
12 identify it?
13 THE INTERPRETER: We have copies of prescriptions.
14 MR HOUGH: You are seeing something on a screen now. Do you
15 have a document that looks like that, otherwise I can
16 take you through that on screen?
17 A. Which is made by Mr Gigou?
18 It is a summary table established by Mr Gigou.
19 Q. Okay. Have you seen that document before, Mr Delbreilh?
20 A. Yes, ten years ago.
21 Q. I do not know if it is possible to hand copies of that
22 to the jury. I know copies were being made. I see they
23 are coming. So they will be provided in due course.
25 MR HOUGH: If you have it there in France, we don't need it


1 on the screen in France. Thank you.
2 Now, Mr Delbreilh, going across the top of that
3 document, do you see that the headings are the "Date of
4 prescriptions", and then the next column is "Doctor",
5 and then the next column is "Date of purchase of
6 the medications" and then the next column is
7 the "Medications concerned" and finally, the "Pharmacy".
8 Do you see those?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And the order of the entries is in the order of
11 the purchase of the medications, I think.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, looking at your statement, we have heard evidence
14 that certain medication was found in Henri Paul's
15 apartment and in his office after his death and I think
16 in your statement you refer to the results of those
17 searches.
18 A. No, I did not take part in the searches but following
19 them, that is when I led my investigation concerning
20 the pharmacies.
21 Q. We have heard from those who did take part in
22 the searches but I think in your statement you say
23 it was those searches that led you to start your
24 inquiries.
25 A. Yes, indeed.


1 Q. Now, did you go to pharmacies which were near
2 Henri Paul's home on the Rue des Petits Champs?
3 A. Yes, pharmacies around his home.
4 Q. Did you also go to pharmacies around where he worked,
5 the Ritz Hotel?
6 A. Yes?
7 Q. And can we look in turn at the different pharmacies that
8 you went to? Looking at your statement, is the first
9 pharmacy mentioned one called the
10 Pharmacie des Petits Champs?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And do you record there that the pharmacist knew
13 Henri Paul?
14 A. Well, I can only read what is in the statement, because
15 you know it has been ten years ago. It says that
16 Mr Henri Paul had been a customer of that pharmacy for
17 two or three years.
18 Q. Now, if we can keep the "Consultations" sheet up on the
19 screen for the jury, please, Mr Foley, while we are
20 going through this.
21 Now, did you make checks on the prescription book
22 held at that pharmacy?
23 A. Yes, just like it is written in the statement.
24 Q. We need to hear it from you, from the horse's mouth, as
25 it were, which is why I am asking questions about what


1 you did?
2 A. Okay.
3 Q. Now, did you find in the prescription book that there
4 was no entry for Henri Paul but did you then make
5 further inquiries with the Department of Social
6 Security?
7 A. Yes, I checked in the registry but there was also an
8 investigation led with the Social Security authorities.
9 Q. And did that show that Henri Paul had purchased some
10 medication on 17th January 1997 from this particular
11 pharmacy?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And if we on the consultations document look down to
14 the fourth entry which has "Pharmacie des Petits Champs"
15 in the final column on the right, does that fourth entry
16 contain details of that particular purchase?
17 A. Yes, according to the Social Security office.
18 Q. The medications listed there that M Paul purchased in
19 January 1997 were Oracilline, which is an antibiotic,
20 Nifluril, which is an anti-inflammatory or pain
21 medication and Doliprane, which is a fever medication.
22 In fact, can I put this to you so that we can
23 correct something on this document. Do you see the date
24 of prescription there is 17/1/96?
25 A. Yes.


1 Q. Now, just in order to correct this to get it right, can
2 we have something on screen, please? It is [INQ0044271]
3 Can we please try to have that so that it can be seen
4 clearly.
5 Can we maximise the date, Paris, 12th January, 1997?
6 Now, do you see that we have focused on Paris
7 12th January 1997? Can you see that date there?
8 A. Yes, what is it about?
9 Q. Could we look at the whole document, please, again?
10 This is an English translation of the record of
11 the purchase, the Social Security record which those
12 shows that the prescription was actually written on
13 12th January 1997 and the purchase on 17th January.
14 So if you look at your document, the fourth entry,
15 under date of prescription should read 12th January 1997
16 rather than 17th January 1996. That can be corrected in
17 due course?
18 A. Yes, if you say so, but I am not the one who established
19 that table.
20 Q. No, it is just in order that we have the right entries.
21 MR KEEN: I am sorry to interrupt, sir, but could I just
22 indicate that I appreciate that Mr Delbreilh is here to
23 give evidence on a number of topics. I do not
24 understand the content of the pharmacy investigation to
25 be in any way controversial. It is apparent that


1 the table was not prepared by this witness and that may
2 account for some difficulty on his part in explaining
3 it. I certainly have no objection to the material being
4 read to the jury or them being given the table because
5 as I understand this, this is not controversial.
6 MR HOUGH: The table was going to be provided with them on
7 that helpful indication.
8 MR KEEN: It is just that this rate of progress going
9 through them now --
10 MR HOUGH: I am aware of that. I am not aware if the table
11 has been provided yet. It is coming.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: That would be helpful.
13 MR HOUGH: The jury will have a copy of the table. In order
14 to take them through it, it is just to explain what
15 otherwise, just reading it, would be a document that
16 would be a little difficult to make clear.
17 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We do not want to waste more time
18 than is necessary, because there is nothing in dispute
19 here.
20 MR HOUGH: No.
21 Now, again can we make sure that the table is on
22 screen for the jury please?
23 Moving on to the next pharmacy that you went to,
24 the Pharmacie, 26 Rue des Petits Champs; you did not get
25 any information from that, did you?


1 A. No, I did not.
2 Q. Moving on to the next pharmacy, that was Pharmacie Bavay
3 at number 55, Rue des Petits Champs?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And were there there, if we look over on to your second
6 page, four entries for Henri Paul in the prescription
7 book.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And did all of those four entries relate to purchase of
10 two packs of Prozac on each occasion?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And those entries I think were 26th March, 1997;
13 25th April, 1997; 20th May 1997; and 17th June 1997.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Moving on to the next pharmacy, was that pharmacy Opera
16 on Rue St Roch?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Incidentally for the jury, the Pharmacie Bavay entries
19 are at entry 6, 8 and 10 on the summary sheet but
20 the last one does not appear on the summary sheet at
21 all.
22 Moving on to Pharmacie Opera, 51, Rue St Roch,
23 the prescription book there had one entry for a purchase
24 on 8th August 1996.
25 A. Yes, we cannot see it.


1 Q. It says 11th June 1996. It is in fact 8th August 1996.
2 Again to correct this, can we quickly have the English
3 version on screen? [INQ0044256]
4 It says 11th June 1996; it should say 8th
5 August 1996. We will just be maximising that on screen
6 in a moment. If you can focus, please, on the date,
7 8th August 1996.
8 If you look on screen, you will see the date of this
9 particular purchase, 8th August 1996. And in fact, if
10 you look at the consultations document, the date of
11 purchase cannot be 8th June, as it says, because that is
12 actually before the date of the prescription?
13 A. But if I wrote down 11th June, I do not see why it
14 should not be right.
15 Q. This is an accurate English translation of the document
16 which you procured from the pharmacy and the invoice
17 date was 8th August, not the 11th June. Will you take
18 that from me?
19 Members of the jury, for your note, if you are
20 correcting this, it is the first row along, third
21 column, it should read "8th August" rather than
22 "11th June".
23 Can we move on to the next purchase, is the next
24 purchase 27th November 1996?
25 A. Yes.


1 Q. This is entry 2 on the summary sheet, the second row
2 down. Do we see that that purchase, like the previous
3 one, was three Noctamide, two Tiapridal, and three
4 Aotal.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And in each case, those were packs of those particular
7 medications and the jury here has heard from
8 Professor Forrest that Aotal is a drug which reduces
9 the desire to consume alcohol. Did you know that?
10 A. Maybe I knew at the time, but I do not know any more.
11 Q. And the jury has also heard that Tiapridal is a drug
12 that reduces anxiety and that Noctamide is a sleeping
13 aid.
14 Now, moving on to the next purchase, was there
15 a purchase on 10th April 1997: two Tiapridal, two
16 Noctamide and three Aotal?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And if you look on the second page of the summary table,
19 that is the top on the second page of the summary table.
20 10th April 1997?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And then did you find further entries in
23 the Social Security records for additional purchases
24 made by M Paul at this particular pharmacy?
25 A. No, well actually everything that I discovered at the


1 time in the registry, I wrote down in my report.
2 Q. But you record in your report that you also found three
3 entries in the Social Security records for purchases
4 made by M Paul at this pharmacy. The first one I think
5 was 9th January 1997?
6 A. Yes, as a matter of fact that was discovered in
7 the registry of the Social Security. If the two
8 registries don't match, I am not the faulty party.
9 Q. The first of those is, as I say, 9th January 1997, does
10 that also refer to two packets of Noctamide, two packets
11 of Tiapridal and three packs of Aotal?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. A further entry in that record, 27th February 1997, two
14 Noctamide, two Tiapridal and three Aotal?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And those, for the members of the jury, are respectively
17 the third and the fifth entries on the summary table.
18 And then is the final entry you found dated 20th May
19 1997, two Noctamide, two Tiapridal, three Aotal?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And then, did you also find from M Paul's computer
22 record that he last visited the chemists on
23 15th July 1997?
24 A. Yes, we found out the computer records at the pharmacy
25 was dated 15th July but there were no other


1 explanations.
2 Q. Did that record indicate that the amount spent on that
3 occasion was 579 francs?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. But that obviously does not appear on the summary sheet
6 because you did not have any details of medications?
7 A. Yes, we only have what is in the report.
8 Q. Going down the report, you visited I think
9 the Pharmacie Daloy?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. But found no reference for Henri Paul there?
12 A. That is right.
13 Q. And then the Pharmacie Weber?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Where you found only one reference, for a prescription
16 for something called Stilnox.
17 A. Yes. That is right.
18 Q. Now going through the summary table and looking at
19 the dates of the prescriptions, is this right: Dr Melo
20 had issued two prescriptions for the drugs Noctamide,
21 Tiapridal and Aotal; one in June 1996 and one in
22 November 1996.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Is this right: Henri Paul had used those prescriptions
25 to purchase those medications in the following months?


1 A. Yes.
2 Q. August 1996, November 1996, January 1997, February 1997,
3 April 1997 and May 1997. And is this right, that --
4 A. Well, in August, I do not have it.
5 Q. I know you say that, but that is the first entry which
6 is located in June, but cannot be that point in June
7 because the prescription was written afterwards and
8 the documents do not match up.
9 Does the table also make clear, and did your
10 inquiries also make clear, that Dr Melo had prescribed
11 Prozac just the once, in March 1997?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Does it show that Henri Paul used that prescription to
14 purchase Prozac in March, April and May of 1997, in each
15 of those three months?
16 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Hough, it is plain that there
17 can be two or more purchases on one prescription.
18 MR HOUGH: Clearly.
19 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: But have we any evidence as to
20 how long a prescription lasts?
21 MR HOUGH: There is not any evidence of that.
23 MR HOUGH: Sir, I do not know, was there an answer to
24 the last question?
25 THE INTERPRETER: Yes. The answer was yes.


1 MR HOUGH: Did your inquiries also show that in addition to
2 the entries we have in this table, Henri Paul also made
3 a purchase from one pharmacy in July 1997, but we don't
4 know what precisely he purchased.
5 A. Where can you find this?
6 Q. Well, that was your reference in your report, on the
7 second page, to a purchase for 579 francs. Do you
8 remember that?
9 A. Yes. Yes, all right. Yes.
10 Q. Is this right, finally on this point, Mr Delbreilh: you
11 found no evidence of Henri Paul purchasing something
12 called albendazole or Zentel.
13 A. Everything that I discovered in relation to purchases of
14 medication is in my report, dated 12th September. 1997.
15 Q. Now, what I would next like to do, Mr Delbreilh, is ask
16 you to read to yourself a from a Dr Melo which was taken
17 by one of your colleagues while that is read to this
18 inquest and this jury in English and then you may be
19 asked questions about that.
20 The document is D2242 and I hope it is there with
21 you?
22 A. I am not concerned by this.
23 Q. I appreciate that, but because you dealt with
24 the pharmacy inquiries, we are just going to deal with
25 this at this point.


1 Now, do you recognise that as a statement made by
2 Dr Melo to your colleague, Captain Crosnier?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And I think it deals with the inquiries made of her
5 after your inquiries of the various pharmacies?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And perhaps you could read that quietly to yourself
8 while we read it here in English.
9 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Members of the jury, the reason
10 that Dr Melo's statement is being read to you is that
11 Dr Melo has been contacted, refuses to come and refuses
12 to give any assistance at all and therefore this is
13 the best evidence we can obtain.
14 MR HOUGH: And it is being proved to a French police officer
15 in the investigation.
16 Statement of DR DOMINIQUE MELO (read)
17 MR HOUGH: This is a statement made on 16th September 1997
18 by Dr Dominique Melo, a rural general practitioner. She
19 notes that she is being interviewed under the terms of
20 the Letter Rogatory and then says this:
21 "As I said on the phone to your department, I was
22 a friend and sometime doctor of Henri Paul.
23 "I heard about the death of Lady Di, Mr Al Fayed and
24 the driver of the vehicle on Sunday 31st August on the
25 television news at around 11 o'clock. I did not link it


1 in any way with Henri.
2 "Then, a little later in the day, I heard from my
3 husband, Dominic Melo, from whom I have been separated
4 for seven years, that Henri was the driver of the
5 Mercedes and that he had been chauffeuring the Princess,
6 her boyfriend and a bodyguard as part of his duties at
7 the Ritz.
8 "I was very upset as I was a friend of his.
9 "I met him when we were at high school in Lorient
10 and we had been close for twenty years when Henri went
11 to Paris to join our mutual friend, Claude Garrec.
12 "Henri has always meant a great deal to me but we
13 were just good friends and I always thought of him as
14 one of the family. He has always been close to us: to
15 my husband and to our children. He was very thoughtful
16 a did not forget us, despite our being far away and
17 despite our busy jobs. We felt a need to be in touch
18 and we would see each other fairly regularly, either at
19 his home, at mine or at mutual friends'. This also
20 involved my husband and children, about whom I do not
21 wish to speak in any detail to respect their privacy.
22 "The last time I saw Henri was on a trip to Cadaques
23 in Spain, when he joined us for a few days at the end of
24 July 1997. He had come by plane on a commercial flight
25 and I found him tired and tense. In the course of our


1 conversations, I learned that this was due to the great
2 pressure he was under in his job at the Ritz as he was
3 having to manage the security single-handedly.
4 "Following that, I only spoke to him on the phone
5 twice, on Sunday 27th July following my return from
6 Spain as I had travelled on my own by car and he wanted
7 to check that I had got back safely -- that,
8 incidentally, is an indication of the consideration he
9 showed to those he was fond of -- and he did not mention
10 any particular about his work and around the middle of
11 the August, it was me who called him as I wanted to know
12 what he had been up to and to tell him any news. He
13 told me that he had a lot of work on, and that he could
14 not get any weekends off.
15 "The relationship between Henri and me has always
16 been like that. He was the same with his other friends,
17 Claude Garrec, Dominic Melo and others, whose names
18 I would rather give you at a later stage.
19 "To sum up Henri's personality for you, he was a
20 secretive man who did not discuss his feelings,
21 accepting his responsibilities and dealing with his
22 personal problems on his own. He did not talk about his
23 professional or his private life. He was shy and did
24 not show his feelings, or acted in such a which that
25 only those close to him could interpret his moods. He


1 was timid, and concealed this at times with provocative
2 attitudes about things in life, expressing in words just
3 what he felt at that moment. He was generous in thought
4 and deed and also sensitive, giving presents which were
5 just right for the recipient's personality and not
6 simply to impress. He was intelligent and cultivated
7 without making a show of it, and when he did display
8 these qualities it was done with subtlety, as he was
9 interested in everything: science, international
10 politics, aviation, and people in general.
11 "I could talk to you about Henri for hours as he was
12 a friend that I valued enormously and on whom I could
13 count absolutely and completely.
14 "As for his love life, I do not know a great deal,
15 having only met a girl whose first name was Laurence who
16 was his girlfriend some years ago but whom he had not
17 been seeing for two years I believe. This young woman,
18 who I must have seen four or five times, although
19 without having a private conversation with her, had
20 a daughter called Samantha who meant a great deal to
21 Henri. He was wonderful with her and the split with her
22 mother and to an even greater extent with the child,
23 troubled him. I do not know of him having any other
24 serious relationships and I think, although I am not
25 positive, that he had only short term romances.


1 "Reply to question: he was not a homosexual, he
2 liked women a lot and would have liked to start
3 a family.
4 "That is all I can tell you about Henri's
5 personality, the other points can be dealt with from
6 a medical viewpoint.
7 "About my role as Henri's doctor: This was only, as
8 I have said, occasional, as of roughly a year or a year
9 and a half ago.
10 "I think I am right in saying that my first
11 prescription at that time was issued at his request
12 following a telephone conversation during which he asked
13 me to give him a prescription for Prozac anti-depressant
14 and for Noctamide, a medication prescribed by a Parisian
15 doctor. I do not know the many name of the doctor or
16 the date of the first prescription. When I asked him
17 how this treatment had gone, I got the impression that
18 it had agreed with him and that he had regained some
19 enthusiasm for his work, together with his joie de
20 vivre, although from time to time depressive episodes
21 did continue, together with feelings of extreme solitude
22 and isolation which led him on occasion to drink outside
23 a social context, namely alone at home. That worried
24 him, he was afraid that he was becoming dependent and
25 was anxious about not being able to manage this problem


1 on his own. That is why he consulted me and not
2 a doctor that he did not know.
3 "I recommended that he add two therapeutic drugs to
4 his treatment: Aotal, which causes a dislike of alcohol,
5 the efficacy of which is relative, but I felt that this
6 prescription would reassure Henri. I probably did this
7 because he was a friend of mine and I would not have
8 used this substance in that context with one of my
9 regular patients; and Tiapridal which is a neuroleptic,
10 usually with alcoholic connotations. It is used in
11 large doses for people with massive exogenisation. In
12 Henri's case, I used this molecule in small doses,
13 especially for its side effects. (The neuroleptic is an
14 anti-obsessional which prevents one from dwelling on
15 things) which enabled him to overcome his personal
16 problems and to be effective in his work and to have
17 a regular sleep pattern.
18 "The alcoholic indication of these last two drugs,
19 Aotal and Tiapridal, had the additional effect of
20 reassuring and protecting him. He had the impression
21 that he was receiving preventative treatment. On
22 certain occasions, when Henry was freed from his
23 professional constraints, or when he was on holiday he
24 did not take this medication in order to be able to
25 drink alcohol in reasonable quantities, always in


1 a social context. I had authorised him to do this as
2 Henri did not have the clinical stigmata or
3 the behaviour of a chronic alcoholic. In fact, he led
4 an organised life in Paris, his flat was tidy, he seemed
5 well in himself and well turned out, he was managing to
6 deal with the responsibilities he faced at work and was
7 reliable and did not forget anything.
8 "As regards the prescriptions which I gave him,
9 which were always free of charge and sent by post, three
10 must have been repeated several times, these being
11 the four types of medication I told you about. I think
12 I prescribed them on each occasion.
13 "You tell me that the dates were June 1996,
14 November 1996 and March 1997, and these tie in. You
15 tell me that I only prescribed Prozac from March 1997.
16 That is possible, as he must have had some left from
17 a previous prescription from another doctor.
18 "Reply to question: I never prescribed
19 Tiapride Equilium to Henri as this is not a drug
20 I generally prescribe.
21 "From a pharmacological viewpoint, the consumption
22 of alcohol is not advised with this type of medication.
23 "Reply to question: these drugs reduce the libido
24 and sexual performance.
25 "That is all I can tell you about my medical


1 prescriptions for Henri Paul and I do not have any
2 medical records for him.
3 "Moreover, for your information, I can tell you that
4 as a health professional, I know that the medicals for
5 pilots are very thorough and detailed (testing for signs
6 of exogenisation, palpitation of the liver, a thorough
7 neurological examination) and consequently a doctor
8 authorised to perform such an examination could not
9 overlook symptoms of alcoholic impregnation. Henri had
10 undergone such a medical a week before he died and had
11 within granted his pilot's licence.
12 "In reply to your question: during our holiday
13 together in Cadaques, the last time I saw Henri, he
14 drank like everyone else, but not to excess. On the
15 first evening he was tired and a bit more tipsy than
16 others. I did not see him taking any medication. He
17 appeared normal during those holidays, just like
18 the other times. He usually drank Perrier, cola, beer
19 and pastis. He did not drink much wine.
20 "Reply to question: he drove slowly and carefully.
21 "I have nothing further to tell you about
22 M Henri Paul and can only tell you that i am convinced
23 he would not have drunk alcohol knowing that he might
24 have to drive a car, which leads me to believe that
25 circumstances led him to do so."


1 Do you see, Mr Delbreilh, on your copy of that
2 statement, the signature of Dr Melo?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, I am going to give the opportunity to others to ask
5 questions of you about what we have already dealt with
6 before we deal with another discrete series of things,
7 which is questions from Mr Remy?
8 MR MANSFIELD: No thank you, sir.
9 MR KEEN: No thank you, sir.
10 MR CROXFORD: No questions, sir.
11 MR HOUGH: The next matter to deal with, Mr Delbreilh, are
12 the statements of somebody called Remy, I wonder if they
13 can be handed to you. There are I think three
14 statements from Mr Remy.
15 Statements of MR ALAIN DANIEL MARCEL REMY (read)
16 MR HOUGH: Now, Mr Delbreilh, M Remy was an eye witness who
17 was interviewed in the aftermath of the crash and on two
18 occasions, he was interviewed by you. Do you remember
19 that, having looked at the documents?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. There are three statements, one on 4th September, one on
22 5th September and one on 12th September?
23 A. Yes, bearing in mind that the 12th, I was not the police
24 officer who heard him.
25 Q. No, that was a Mr Cuvillier, but obviously it would be


1 rather cumbersome to have every officer come to prove
2 the statements.
3 Now, Mr Delbreilh, again, can you read those
4 statements to yourself while they are read here in
5 English? And then you may be asked questions about
6 them.
7 A. All right.
8 Q. Now, the first of these is a statement dated
9 4th September 1997. It is in the form of a report by
10 this officer, Mr Delbreilh, and it is the first
11 statement of Alain Daniel Marcel Remy and it says this:
12 "I have come forward because on the night of
13 Saturday 30th August/Sunday 31st August 1997, I was
14 alone in my black Volkswagen Golf vehicle [75
15 registration] driving along the embankment on the right
16 bank of the River Seine coming from the Place de
17 la Concorde and going towards the Maison de la Radio."
18 So that is going west:
19 "On coming out of the tunnel preceding the one at
20 the Alma Bridge [so that is the Alexandre III tunnel]
21 whilst I was driving at a normal speed, my attention was
22 drawn by a dark-coloured vehicle that overtook me on the
23 left-hand side at great speed. I would estimate this as
24 being 140/150 kilometres per hour."
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: That would be 87 to 94 miles per


1 hour, I think.
2 MR HOUGH: "Between 30 and 40 seconds later, when I arrived
3 at the entrance to the tunnel beneath the Alma Bridge,
4 I was flagged down by a person gesticulating vigorously
5 and once I had stopped, I was asked if I had a mobile
6 telephone. To be precise, this person said, 'Quick,
7 quick, have you got a mobile telephone, there's some guy
8 who has had a smash'.
9 "I told the person that I didn't have one and at
10 that moment I saw a vehicle that had crashed at the
11 bottom of the tunnel, a thick cloud of smoke that was
12 coming out of it and people running around in all
13 directions, some of whom had mobile telephones. This is
14 why I did not go to a telephone box.
15 "I then got out of the car and walked around a bit."
16 There is a translator's note that the passage
17 "I walked around a bit" could also mean "I directed
18 traffic for a while":
19 "There I saw that it was seriously damaged and that
20 people were trying to open the doors which seemed to be
21 stuck.
22 "I don't know who these people were, and more
23 specifically, whether or not they were journalists and
24 photographers.
25 "However, I can tell you that these people (I think


1 there were about five of them) were not carrying cameras
2 slung across their shoulders.
3 "At that moment, I saw that people were beginning to
4 congregate around the car and among them were about
5 a dozen photographers, recognisable by their
6 photographic equipment with shoulder straps.
7 "I also noted the presence of five two-wheeled
8 vehicles parked in the tunnel, around the vehicle that
9 had had the accident.
10 "I was initially surprised at their presence and
11 then I concluded that Princess Diana must be involved.
12 "Whilst people were still trying to open the doors
13 of the vehicle, I saw a photographer about five to six
14 metres away from the car taking photographs of it.
15 "He continued to take photographs, although
16 the people had managed to open the doors and were
17 beginning to attend to the injured.
18 "When the police arrived at the scene, he made
19 himself more discreet, stopped taking photographs and
20 left alone on a motorcycle in the direction of the
21 Maison de la Radio.
22 "As regards his motorcycle, I can only say that
23 it was a road bike, lightweight, black and with a black
24 top box at the back.
25 "The photographer was of European appearance, aged


1 about 38, of average height, slightly chubby, curly
2 tousled dark hair with grey streaks. No distinguishing
3 marks that I recall, wearing a denim outfit (trousers
4 and jacket), carrying a camera over his shoulder.
5 I think that I would be able to recognise him.
6 "On their arrival, the police set up a security
7 cordon and the emergency services then arrived.
8 "I did not see any incidents at the scene between
9 various people.
10 "I then went back on to the bridge to get some air
11 and I left after a good hour.
12 "I did not see anything else in particular.
13 "With regard to the other photographers, I can
14 remember a little about one of them who was bearded,
15 with brown hair and stocky. In fact, I cannot really
16 describe the others, but if I am shown the photographs
17 of these people, it is possible that I may be able to
18 recognise them.
19 "I note that you are showing me a photograph of
20 a group of seven individuals numbered from 1 to 7,
21 placed under a reference number.
22 "Amongst these people, I do not recognise
23 the photographer that I saw taking photographs and then
24 leaving by motorbike.
25 "I do not remember having seen these people at


1 the scene, with the possible exception of the individual
2 bearing the number 3 whom I think I saw going to and
3 from the crashed car."
4 And that is Veres:
5 "I should like to inform you that on Sunday 31st
6 August 1997, I sent you a written witness report by post
7 in regard to what I have just related to you and I note
8 that you have still not received this. As I had not
9 heard from you, I therefore came forward and presented
10 myself in your office, particularly as in the meantime
11 my employer, Radio OFM, had asked me to give evidence
12 anonymously in its news bulletins."
13 Then there is a short statement on
14 5th September 1997 also to Vincent Delbreilh. M Remy
15 notes that he has just opinion shown the second line-up
16 photograph, the group of five men and says:
17 "I do not recognise any of these men as the man that
18 I saw on the scene of the accident, Saturday 30th to
19 Sunday 31st December 1997, in the Pont de l'Alma
20 tunnel."
21 And he says he is quite certain about that.
22 Finally, a statement from 12th September 1997 to
23 Lieutenant Cuvillier.
24 Mr Remy is first asked the question:
25 "Question: At exactly what time did you arrive at


1 the scene of the accident?
2 "Answer: I have a quartz clock in my vehicle and
3 I noticed that the minutes column showed the number 35.
4 On the other hand, I cannot tell you if it was 11.35 on
5 30th August or 12.35 am on 31st August.
6 "Question: Are you sure that the vehicle which
7 overtook you at high speed was the one seen crashed
8 a few moments later?
9 "Answer: As I said previously, when I was between
10 the two tunnels (the one before the Alma Bridge and the
11 Alma Bridge tunnel) and I was in the right-hand lane, my
12 vehicle was overtaken by a large top-of-the-range car
13 which was travelling at a very fast speed. I may even
14 say that it was a high powered car. My speed was
15 70 kilometres per hour and I estimate the speed of the
16 big saloon which overtook me at 140 or 150 kilometres
17 per hour. I must tell you that I am not a car
18 specialist which is why I could not give you any details
19 of the make of the car.
20 "On the other hand the noise which came from this
21 vehicle at the moment of overtaking held my attention.
22 It was similar to the roar of an aircraft engine before
23 takeoff.
24 "Question: How long do you estimate the interval
25 separating the overtaking of your car by this vehicle


1 and your arrival at the scene of the accident?
2 "Answer: I could not be too precise but this lapse
3 of time was less than a minute, I am positive of that.
4 That is in any case what makes me say that this
5 top-of-the range vehicle which had overtaken me at full
6 speed could be the one that was found crashed in
7 the seconds that followed.
8 "Question: When this large saloon car overtook you
9 at very high speed, did you see any other vehicles, cars
10 or motorbikes following it closely?
11 "Answer: No. And I think if the vehicle had been
12 pursued in some way, I would have notices inasmuch as
13 I arrived at the scene of the incident very shortly
14 after the overtaking in question.
15 "Question: Is it possible on the other hand that
16 between the overtaking of your car between this large
17 saloon and your arrival at the scene of the accident,
18 another vehicle (car or motorbike) could also have
19 overtaken you?
20 "Answer: Yes, absolutely, however that did not
21 register with me. That means if another vehicle, car or
22 motorbike, had passed me at the same speed, that would
23 have registered with me.
24 "Question: What was your first sight of the
25 incident?


1 "Answer: Just before going under the Alma Bridge
2 I saw a man on foot on the roadway at the entrance to
3 the tunnel signalling me to stop and in the distance,
4 I could see a damaged car from which smoke was coming.
5 "I then parked my vehicle past the exit ramp which
6 is just before the entrance to the tunnel. I will
7 explain, in fact I left the embankments, reversing just
8 to take this exit ramp in order to clear the main road.
9 As a result, my vehicle was parked above the tunnel and
10 I noticed there were already two other vehicles parked
11 which I know nothing about at all.
12 "Before I parked, the lad who had signalled to me
13 came up to my door asking, 'Do you have a mobile, there
14 is a bloke who has had a crash'. I replied that I did
15 not.
16 "In the time I parked and went down under the Alma
17 bridge, I did not notice the presence of this person any
18 more. I have to tell you that I did not particularly
19 look for him afterwards.
20 "When I entered the tunnel, I could very clearly see
21 the crashed car because the roadway was completely
22 clear.
23 "In answer to question: In my direction there were
24 no cars parked between the entrance to the tunnel and
25 the crashed car.


1 "Hesitantly, I approached the vehicle, around which
2 there were already two persons. These were silhouettes
3 of young men but I could not be more precise. The two
4 persons were trying to open the left rear door. I am
5 positive about that.
6 "Question: Among these two persons, did you
7 recognise the man who had asked you for a mobile on
8 arrival at the scene?
9 "Answer: In fact I do not know as I never
10 approached closer than three metres from the vehicle.
11 "Question: Were the two men trying to open the left
12 rear door in possession of cameras?
13 "Answer: As far as I know, no. I am positive about
14 one thing, that is that I did not notice any flashes.
15 However, they were masked by the car. I was on one side
16 of the vehicle (right-hand side) and they were on the
17 other.
18 "Question: Near the vehicle and apart from these
19 two persons, did you notice beyond that (in
20 the direction of Boulogne) [that is to the west] and
21 still in the tunnel, the presence after car parked?
22 "Answer: I could not say, I did not pay attention.
23 "On approaching the accident, I certainly noticed
24 the presence of two occupants inside the crashed car.
25 On the spot, as I had the impression of not being of


1 use, and waiting for the arrival of the rescue services,
2 I returned to the entrance of the tunnel in order to
3 block the access to the tunnel. While turning around
4 and going back I did not notice any car parked between
5 the scene of the accident and the tunnel entrance, on
6 the other hand, I remember passing some two-wheeled
7 vehicles, certainly two of them.
8 "They were a fairly slim, black standard motorcycle,
9 and the other one must have been a scooter. I passed
10 these two-wheeled vehicles. I did not turn round to see
11 if they were stopping at the scene of the accident.
12 Once in position at the entrance to the tunnel the
13 vehicles arriving were diverted to the outside of the
14 embankments by way of the exit ramp previously
15 mentioned.
16 "In answer to question: apart from the two-wheeled
17 vehicles, no vehicle was parked between the entrance to
18 the tunnel and the scene of the accident. In ten
19 minutes, the emergency services arrived. In any case
20 I did not even see them arrive, in my opinion, they must
21 have come from the Maison de la Radio and against
22 the traffic.
23 "From then on, I estimate that there were about 15
24 persons around the crashed car, some of whom had cameras
25 on shoulder straps.


1 "In answer to question: I really do not know who the
2 person was who alerted the emergency services first,
3 I did not worry about that as many people had mobiles.
4 "In answer to question: when I managed the two
5 persons who were trying to open the left rear door those
6 were the ones who had first held my attention when I was
7 actually on the spot. Nevertheless I must say that
8 I may not have been among the very first on the scene
9 since apart from these two men, about 15 persons
10 obviously in a state of panic were grouped within
11 a radius of 10 metres from the car. In fact, my
12 impression was that these people were converging on
13 the spot at the same time, so it is very difficult to
14 say were really the first.
15 "As far as I know these persons were not taking
16 photos, it was afterwards when the emergency services
17 arrived that I noticed the presence of certain persons
18 carrying cameras.
19 "Question: Can you describe the person who asked
20 you for a mobile?
21 "Answer: It was a man about 28, between 1.75 and
22 1.85 metres tall, thin build, brown hair, not wearing a
23 beard, a moustache or glasses, dressed in blue jeans and
24 an identical jacket. If you show me a photo of this
25 person, I would be able to recognise him. It would be


1 impossible for me to recognise the two persons who were
2 busy with the left rear door. They were both young,
3 that is all I can say.
4 "I note that you show me a photograph album
5 comprising thirty photographs. I do not recognise among
6 these photos the man who asked me for a mobile.
7 "You also show me photographs taken by
8 the photographers at the scene and which are arranged in
9 albums of photographs by photographers, namely ... Rat,
10 Darmon, Langevin, Arnal and Veres.
11 "Among these albums, I do not recognise the man who
12 asked me for a mobile.
13 I must say again that at the time of my previous
14 appearance at your service, I was shown a parade of
15 persons behind clear glass and I indicated to you that
16 the man in question was not among them.
17 "In answer to question: I told you previously that
18 there was no car parked between the tunnel entrance and
19 the scene of the accident in the Paris to Boulogne
20 direction, on the other hand, in the other direction,
21 numerous cars were stopping or slowing down.
22 "At the moment I arrived near the crashed car
23 I could not tell you if any vehicles had in fact already
24 stopped on the opposite carriageway.
25 "I only knew it was Princess Diana when


1 the emergency services arrived, but not before. I had
2 the impression that the very first persons who were busy
3 round the vehicle did not know who the injured were."
4 That is the third and final statement of Mr Remy.
5 If there are questions about those statements, they will
6 be asked now.
8 MR MANSFIELD: No thank you.
9 MR KEEN: No thank you.
10 Questions from MR DE LA MARE.
11 MR DE LA MARE: My name is Mr de la Mare and I am going to
12 ask you some very brief questions on behalf of the Ritz.
13 Could you turn to page 12 of the page of plans that
14 you have in front of you. It is a plan that shows
15 the layout from the Alexandre III underpass to the Alma
16 Underpass. I think you can see from it that,
17 Mr Delbreilh, at the far right-hand side, there is an
18 indicating point, Alexandre Tunnel, showing the exit
19 point from the Alexandre III tunnel. Do you see that?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And then, at the right-hand edge of the tunnel, you can
22 see marked the triangle area of grass and the raised
23 wall going down to the entrance of the Alma Tunnel. Do
24 you see that, on the left-hand side?
25 A. Yes.


1 Q. And at the bottom right-hand corner, you can see a scale
2 which I believe is in metres, indicating that
3 the distance between the Alexandre III tunnel and
4 the ramp down to the Alma Tunnel was a distance of
5 approximately 300 metres. Do you see that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. As we understand Mr Remy's evidence, he says he was
8 driving along at approximately, and it must have been
9 12.35, because he remembers the 35 on the quartz of his
10 clock, do you remember that, from his second statement?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Now, we know from the emergency services records that
13 the crash occurred in the tunnel at approximately 12.23.
14 Did you or any of your colleagues ask Mr Remy whether or
15 not he was in the habit of keeping his clock 12 minutes
16 late?
17 A. I do not know, everything that was asked of Mr Remy is
18 in the reports.
19 Q. I well understand, Mr Delbreilh, if you have problems
20 remembering the events of ten years ago. Please be sure
21 to say you don't remember if you don't remember.
22 Obviously we can only work from what is in the records
23 but there is no evidence of him being asked that
24 question.
25 As I understand --


1 A. But, clocks are not always perfectly tuned.
2 Q. Of course. I was simply asking whether the question had
3 been asked.
4 The substance of Mr Remy's evidence, as we are led
5 to believe it from these two statements, is that his
6 car, which was travelling at 70 kilometres per hour was
7 overtaken by a dark car doing approximately twice his
8 speed, that is 140 kilometres per hour. But that
9 Mr Remy did not notice any other pursuing motorcycles or
10 cars doing approximately the same speed. And he said
11 that he would have noticed another vehicle doing that
12 kind of speed. Now, Mr Delbreilh, do you remember
13 whether or not you or one of your colleagues asked him
14 if he recalled seeing that car being pursued by
15 motorcycles or cars in the fashion described by either
16 Mr Hackett, Mr Partouche or Mr Gooroovadoo, who had by
17 that stage given your inquiries witness statements to
18 that effect?
19 A. I do not quite understand your question.
20 Q. Let me rephrase it, Mr Delbreilh.
21 You had witness statements from a number of
22 witnesses: Mr Hackett, Mr Partouche, Mr Gooroovadoo,
23 that gave evidence of a quite different scene, namely of
24 a Mercedes being pursued by vehicles.
25 Did you put to Mr Remy the detail of those


1 statements?
2 A. Well, everything that we asked him is in the reports and
3 I cannot say any more ten years later.
4 Q. Very well. We know from what Mr Remy says that what
5 happened after seeing a dark vehicle was that he
6 continued driving at approximately 70 kilometres per
7 hour until he came to be stopped by a man in the street
8 stopping the passing traffic.
9 His recollection was that that was some 30 to 40
10 seconds after the dark car had passed him. Did you
11 explore with Mr Remy the accuracy of that recollection,
12 because had his car been travelling at the speed he
13 suggested, it would have probably taken him no more than
14 20 seconds, maybe 30 seconds to drive the distance
15 between the Alexandre III tunnel and the beginning of
16 the downslope to the Alma Tunnel.
17 A. I just wrote down what Mr Remy told me concerning
18 another calculation that you may make. I am not aware
19 of such calculation.
20 Q. So you did not make that calculation at the time?
21 A. No.
22 Q. We also know, Mr Delbreilh, from other evidence, that at
23 least three vehicles -- those are the vehicles of
24 Mr Rat, his motorbike; the vehicle in which Mr Arnal and
25 Mr Martinez were travelling; and the vehicle


1 photographed by Mr Arnal and Mr Rat at page 117 of
2 the photographs bundle -- we know that those three
3 vehicles had, by the time Mr Remy's car got there,
4 already gone through the tunnel and Mr Remy himself
5 already recalls that two cars were already parked at the
6 top of the ramp by the time he got there.
7 Did any of that objective evidence call you to ask
8 whether or not Mr Remy was in fact arriving on the scene
9 of an accident that had taken place some time
10 beforehand?
11 A. I do not quite understand your question.
12 Q. Did you consider whether or not the car that overtook
13 Mr Remy was in fact another car, speeding to the scene
14 of the crash?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Would you agree that the time on Mr Remy's clock,
17 the short distance between the tunnels, the parked-up
18 traffic and the number of photographs that were plainly
19 taken in a period before Mr Remy arrived on the scene --
20 as he recalled no photographs having been taken -- are
21 all consistent with the crash having taken place some
22 minutes before his arrival?
23 A. I do not quite understand where you seem to be heading.
24 Q. I am simply asking you, Mr Delbreilh, whether or not you
25 considered that the car that overtook was another car


1 seeking to get to the scene of the crash very quickly,
2 no doubt possibly a paparazzo vehicle told by
3 a colleague of the crash and seeking to get there to
4 take photographs. Did that possibility occur to you?
5 Did you explore it with the witness?
6 A. Well, all the questions I asked of him are written down
7 in my report, so if it is not in there, it means that
8 I did not ask that particular question.
9 MR DE LA MARE: Thank you very much.
10 MR HORWELL: Only two questions following that, sir.
12 Questions from MR HORWELL
13 MR HORWELL: My name is Richard Horwell. I appear on behalf
14 of the Chief of London Police.
15 It has been suggested that the car that Mr Remy saw
16 travelling at a very fast speed could have been the car
17 of a paparazzo. Mr Remy describes this car as "dark in
18 colour, large and top of the range". Did you ever
19 discover that any of the paparazzi had a dark, large,
20 top-of-the-range car?
21 A. Not as far as I can remember.
22 Q. Was it your understanding from what Mr Remy had to say
23 that he in fact arrived at the Alma Tunnel within a very
24 short time of the crash?
25 A. Yes, that is right.


1 MR HORWELL: Thank you.
4 Thank you very much, Mr Delbreilh, for coming and
5 participating in what may seem an unusual procedure to
6 you, and to us sometimes.
7 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you very much,
8 Mr Delbreilh. We are very grateful to you. That will
9 be all.
10 Where does that take us as far as the rest of the
11 proceedings are concerned? That is the end of the
12 videolink, is it?
13 MR BURNETT: Sir, it is. There is a short statement to read
14 from Mr Smith under Rule 37 and then there is some
15 evidence to adduce through Mr Foley of Commandant Mules.
16 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I think we had better have
17 a break at this point.
18 MR BURNETT: It will probably take a quarter of an hour to
19 do it all.
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes. It is still quite a long
21 time for the short hand writers, since half past 1.
22 (3.00 pm)
23 (A short break)
24 (3.14 pm)
25 MR BURNETT: Sir, the next statement is a short statement of


1 Martin Smith dated 12th March 2008. It is in
2 the following terms.
3 Statement of MR MARTIN SMITH (read)
4 "I, Martin Smith, solicitor to the inquests make
5 the following statement.
6 "When Mr Al Fayed gave evidence to these inquests on
7 18th February 2008, counsel to the inquests questioned
8 him about adverse comments made by a judge concerning
9 evidence he had given in another case. Mr Justice Mann
10 had made those comments in his judgment in the case of
11 Fulham Leisure Holdings Limited v Nicholson Graham &
12 Jones ... a judgment handed down on 31st July 2006.
13 "When asked about those comments, Mr Al Fayed said,
14 'But the judgment has been cancelled and, in my appeal,
15 I won the case'. When asked whether he accepted the
16 findings of the judge, he said, 'No, I am not accepting
17 and I appealed this judgment and I won'. Counsel to the
18 inquests pointed out that the appeal concerned
19 a technical point of law and not the findings made about
20 Mr Al Fayed's evidence. Again, Mr Al Fayed replied that
21 he had won the appeal. Counsel to the inquests
22 responded that the judgment had not yet been handed
23 down. That exchange is at pages 114 to 115 of
24 the transcript for 18th February 2008.
25 "The Court of Appeal gave judgment in the Fulham


1 Leisure Holdings case on 28th February 2008. The court
2 dismissed the appeal of Mr Al Fayed's company, Fulham
3 Leisure Holdings, and allowed the cross-appeal of the
4 respondent firm. In short, Mr Al Fayed's company lost
5 the appeal. It is also apparent from the judgment that
6 the appeal did concern a technical point of law, and
7 that Mr Justice Mann's findings about Mr Al Fayed's
8 evidence had not been the subject of the appeal.
9 "I am informed that, when Mr Al Fayed gave evidence,
10 the judgment had been made available in draft to his
11 legal representatives on a confidential basis.
12 Mr Al Fayed was not in a position to know the outcome of
13 the appeal when he gave evidence about the result.
14 "I believe the facts stated in this statement are
15 true."
16 Sir, the next piece of evidence is something that my
17 learned friend Mr Hough will deal with.
19 MR HOUGH: Sir, it is necessary to call Mr Foley to prove
20 some extracts from the evidence of Mr Mules and in my
21 questions, I will explain precisely what is going on.
22 MR THOMAS FOLEY (recalled)
23 Questions from MR HOUGH
24 MR HOUGH: Mr Foley, you are still on oath.
25 A. I understand.


1 Q. Do you recall that Commandant Mules gave evidence to
2 these inquests on 5th February 2008?
3 A. I do recall.
4 Q. And do you recall that there was not sufficient time for
5 some of the interested persons to ask him questions in
6 detail?
7 A. Yes, I do.
8 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: And he is not prepared to come
9 back.
10 MR HOUGH: That was my next point.
11 He was scheduled to come back in the week commencing
12 10th March, so last week I think; yes?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. But he indicated that he would not be attending, very
15 shortly before that.
16 A. That is also correct.
17 Q. And the Metropolitan Police asked on 7th March 2008,
18 when the jury were not here but when procedural matters
19 were being gone through, for certain parts of his
20 evidence to be proved and read to the jury. Is that
21 right?
22 A. They did, yes.
23 Q. And did they, the Metropolitan Police, then give
24 information as to which parts, by emails in succeeding
25 days?


1 A. They did.
2 Q. And did Mr Smith inform all interested persons of those
3 extracts on 12th March 2008, so five days ago?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. I think you have the two documents there. Is the first
6 document a record of information obtained during
7 Operation Paget interview with Jean-Claude Mules?
8 A. It is, yes.
9 Q. I am going to read the first passage which is to be
10 found at the eighth page of that document. This is
11 a passage in the interview which no doubt
12 the Metropolitan Police would have put to Mr Mules, and
13 it says this. It is under the heading "Post
14 mortem/autopsy", and this is primarily related to
15 Henri Paul and Dodi Al Fayed:
16 "Mules was asked to confirm the IML body numbers for
17 Henri Paul and Dodi Al Fayed. He was shown documents.
18 He explained that he had recently been interviewed over
19 this very matter by the Gendarmerie on the instructions
20 of Judge Bellancourt. Mules said that he could confirm
21 the body number for Henri Paul was 2147 and the body
22 number for Dodi Al Fayed was 2146. He accepted that he
23 had made an administrative error on one of these
24 documents and that this again had been because of
25 preloaded templates on their computer system and because


1 of the pressure of work and tiredness.
2 "Mules was asked to assist with other apparent
3 discrepancies in respect of the recording of
4 Henri Paul's height and weight, ie ... "
5 One document saying 73 kilos and 1.72 metres and
6 another saying 76 kilos and 1.67 metres.
7 "Mules explained that as the bodies arrive at
8 the IML they are undressed, washed if dirty, weighed and
9 measured by one of the IML employees. Lecomte also
10 measures the body on the mortuary slab after cutting
11 the achilles tendons in order to obtain the height when
12 the body is fully extended. Mules stated that it is
13 normal for him to make his notes at post-mortem
14 examinations on a scrap of paper that he subsequently
15 uses to makes his statement. Following this he then
16 destroys the scrap of paper. He thinks it likely that
17 he did the same for this autopsy, but could not
18 definitely remember."
19 Is that the first section that the Metropolitan
20 Police have asked to have read?
21 A. It is.
22 Q. Moving on it page 15 of this document, a second entitled
23 "Brian Anderson", and I think this reads as follows:
24 "Mules was shown the documents."
25 These are documents about Mr Anderson:


1 "Mules said that he had a recollection of Anderson's
2 evidence. He said that he recalled Anderson's evidence
3 because he, Mules, was good friends with Bruno
4 Sylvestre, the Paris head of ABC News. He said he
5 recalled Sylvestre dropping the videotapes of this
6 witness off to him in person. He recalled watching
7 the video immediately with Monteil and the other
8 officers working on the inquiry. He recalled making
9 the summary from the tape of what Anderson claimed to
10 have seen.
11 "Mules was asked if he considered Anderson's account
12 on the video to be truthful and credible. Mules said
13 that based on what he had seen, he did. Mules said that
14 to the best of his knowledge, Anderson never presented
15 his taxi receipt as he claimed and was not interviewed
16 by them. Bruno Sylvestre said he would try to get his
17 contact telephone number and he was subsequently
18 provided with his contact number. Mules says that as
19 far as he could recall, an American journalist from
20 ABC News telephoned Anderson to tell him to contact
21 the Brigade Criminelle or the judge when he was next in
22 Paris. Mules said that it was he who had instructed and
23 delegated Bruno Sylvestre to do this on their behalf
24 because of the language barrier. Mules said that he
25 could not recall if he was eventually interviewed or


1 not.
2 "Mules was told that Anderson had been traced and
3 interviewed by Operation Paget in America and that he
4 claimed to have been interviewed at the Brigade
5 Criminelle headquarters and that he had handed over his
6 taxi receipt as proof of his journey. Mules said that
7 they had not interviewed him and had never been given
8 this receipt. He said that Anderson may have been
9 interviewed by the judge, although he did not know this
10 to be the case, but as far as he was concerned Anderson
11 was not interviewed by the Brigade Criminelle.
12 "Mules was asked whether the following could have
13 happened. Anderson was interviewed by the
14 Brigade Criminelle as he claimed and confirmed to them
15 what he claimed to have seen in his ABC interview. For
16 whatever reason his evidence was thought unreliable or
17 not credible and therefore his statement was not
18 included in the dossier. Mules said that this was not
19 possible and that if he claimed to have seen what he
20 said to ABC News, then his statement would have been
21 included within the dossier.
22 "Anderson's recollection of events as he had told
23 Operation Paget was explained to Mules in full.
24 "Mules explained that the Brigade Criminelle would
25 not go to collect a witness with four officers as


1 Anderson claims. Mules said that they do not interview
2 witnesses over three-day periods. He said that
3 a witness can technically be placed under 'garde a vue'
4 in order to protect important information while they
5 make necessary enquiries, however this is never more
6 than a period of 48 hours.
7 "Mules said that if Eric Gigou had been present when
8 a statement had been taken from this witness confirming
9 what he had told ABC News then this information was
10 clearly relevant and would have been included in
11 the dossier. Mules said that Anderson may well have got
12 Gigou's name if Gigou had left a message at the hotel
13 for him.
14 "Mules was told of the 'file note' within the unused
15 material that was viewed by Operation Paget at
16 Brigade Criminelle headquarters which appeared to
17 suggest that Gigou received a call from Anderson on
18 2nd September 1997. Mules said that if Gigou had
19 thought Anderson's evidence was pertinent, then Gigou
20 would have completed a 'proces-verbal' [which is
21 a witness statement I think] and not a 'file note'.
22 "Mules said that if Anderson had been seen by
23 officers as he claimed and that this process had been
24 done in the presence of an interpreter, then this whole
25 process would have been typed up at the time the


1 interview took place by the Brigade officer. At the end
2 of such a 'proces-verbal', the interpreter would read
3 the statement back and everyone present would sign."
4 Does that appear as part of that document?
5 A. It does, yes.
6 Q. Then, is the second document one numbered OD36,
7 a translation of an interview on 12th February 2004 with
8 Martine Monteil and Jean-Claude Mules?
9 A. It is, yes.
10 Q. If we move to the third page, the section which
11 the Metropolitan Police has asked to be read I think
12 begins on the fifth line. This is [INQ0057677 - read out in court].
13 The interviewer asks:
14 "Were there any cameras on the approach to or inside
15 the tunnel?"
16 And Martine Monteil gives the answer in the presence
17 of M Mules:
18 "We also worked on that subject. There were no
19 cameras inside the tunnel. There was a CCTV camera
20 facing the Place de la Concorde/Alma direction. It is a
21 static camera that does not record the images but
22 transmits them in real time to traffic HQ at
23 the Prefecture of Police. We have questioned officers
24 responsible for viewing those images on their screens
25 that night, and they did not notice anything out of the


1 ordinary.
2 "Question: Where there any speed cameras in
3 the vicinity of the tunnel as some people have claimed?
4 "Answer: There were no speed cameras in the area.
5 I am quite positive about that."
6 Is that a section appearing in that record of
7 interview?
8 A. It is.
9 MR HOUGH: Thank you very much. I would not imagine there
10 will be other questions but there may be.
11 MR MANSFIELD: No thank you.
12 MR KEEN: No, sir.
13 MR CROXFORD: Last chance but no, sir.
14 MR HOUGH: I think that is as far as we can get today.
15 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Well, we have made quite good
16 progress today.
17 MR PHILLIPS: Sir, may I say a word?
19 MR PHILLIPS: I am referring to the statement of
20 Mr Martin Smith which was read just now by
21 Mr Ian Burnett.
22 I was present in court when Mr Al Fayed gave his
23 evidence and I was struck by it. It now turns out that
24 it was completely untrue and I would like to know how it
25 came about that this pack of lies was not corrected


1 sooner.
3 MR MANSFIELD: Well, sir, I was not in a position since
4 I was not involved in that case. There have been
5 enquiries made, as you know, up until last Friday.
6 I was not aware of the upshot of those. There was
7 a question of an embargo and so forth.
8 I will obviously take instructions and give a full
9 explanation if required but, certainly, I am not at the
10 moment in possession of the relevant material.
11 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Hopefully by tomorrow you
12 might be.
13 MR MANSFIELD: Yes, certainly.
15 Half past 9 then, tomorrow, members of the jury.
16 (3.30 pm)
17 (The hearing was adjourned until 9.30 am
18 on Tuesday, 18th March 2008)


4 MR CLAUDE ROULET (recalled) ...................... 3
6 Questions from MR BURNETT ................. 3
8 Questions from MR MANSFIELD ............... 11
10 Questions from MR KEEN .................... 19
12 Further questions from MR BURNETT ......... 30
14 MR JEAN-FRANCOIS MUSA (recalled) ................. 31
16 Questions from MR HOUGH ................... 31
18 MR THOMAS FOLEY (recalled) ....................... 36
20 Questions from MR HOUGH ................... 36
22 MR MICHAEL RONALD FAUX (affirmed) ................ 38
24 Questions from MR HILLIARD ................ 38


1 Questions from MR MANSFIELD ............... 66
3 Questions from MR HORWELL ................. 75
5 Further questions from MR HILLIARD ........ 98
7 Statement of MR MARTIN SMITH (read) .............. 100
9 MR VINCENT DELBREILH (affirmed) .................. 104
11 Questions from MR HOUGH ................... 104
13 Statement of DR DOMINIQUE MELO ................... 119
14 (read)
16 Statements of MR ALAIN DANIEL MARCEL ............. 127
17 REMY (read)
19 Questions from MR DE LA MARE. ............. 140
21 Questions from MR HORWELL ................. 145
23 Statement of MR MARTIN SMITH (read) .............. 147
25 MR THOMAS FOLEY (recalled) ...................... 148


2 Questions from MR HOUGH ................... 148

<< Back