Hearing transcripts

11 February 2008 - Morning session

1 Monday, 11th February 2008
2 (10.00 am)
3 (Jury present)
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Burnett, before we begin, two
5 matters: first of all, on Thursday, I was informed by
6 a member of the court staff that Ms Witty, who was
7 sitting immediately opposite the jury, had been spoken
8 to about inappropriate behaviour while Sergeant Easton
9 was giving evidence. I was later told that a message
10 had been received that some members of the jury had also
11 noticed this and that they found her behaviour
12 disrespectful and distracting.
13 I understand Ms Witty has been spoken to on
14 a previous occasion by the court staff. I did not
15 myself notice anything last Thursday, but some members
16 of the jury, who have a direct line of sight, plainly
17 did. It is important that all observers who are in
18 court, wherever their allegiances may lie, sit quietly
19 during the evidence of witnesses without displaying
20 their feelings. I trust that this general warning will
21 be sufficient.
22 The other matter is that I think it is accepted by
23 the interested persons that the statement of
24 Susan Le Jeune d'Allegeershecque of the Foreign and
25 Commonwealth Office should be read to the jury as it is

1

1 unlikely to be disputed. Her evidence relates to staff
2 movements in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and
3 I give notice that it is intended to read her evidence
4 shortly. Any objections, of course, will be dealt with
5 in the usual way.
6 MR BURNETT: Yes, sir. I am aware of the fact that
7 the possibility of reading it was notified in an email
8 perhaps a week or more ago, and if it is convenient, it
9 might be sensible to read that statement after
10 the evidence of Lord Jay, who we are expecting later
11 today.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you.
13 So I call next, Mr Benson.
14 MR STUART HOWARD BENSON (sworn)
15 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Do you prefer to sit or stand?
16 A. I prefer to sit, if that is convenient.
17 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Certainly.
18 Questions from MR BURNETT
19 MR BURNETT: Now, is your full name Stuart Howard Benson?
20 A. It is.
21 Q. Mr Benson, did you make a short statement dated
22 27th July 2006 to Metropolitan Police officers dealing
23 with one or two matters that might be of assistance to
24 these inquests?
25 A. I did.

2

1 Q. Do you have a copy of it in front of you?
2 A. Right here.
3 Q. Before we come to that statement, can I ask you some
4 questions by way of background?
5 Is it right that you are general counsel and legal
6 adviser to Mr Mohamed Al Fayed?
7 A. That is the nearest description I can give. I am not
8 actually employed by him or by Harrods. I do other work
9 and have other clients and other businesses, but that is
10 effectively the role that I perform.
11 Q. And that is a role that you have performed since 1996,
12 I believe.
13 A. It is about 1996, yes.
14 Q. Prior to that, you were in private practice with two
15 large solicitors' practices --
16 A. And whilst with one of those firms, Harrods and
17 Mr Mohamed Al Fayed were clients of mine at that time.
18 Q. In that connection, what is the general nature of the
19 relationship that you have had with Mr Al Fayed for
20 the last dozen years?
21 A. Well, I have an office at Harrods --
22 Q. And an email address, I think.
23 A. I do actually, specifically for the purpose of these
24 inquests, not previously. And as a general rule, I tend
25 to visit Harrods mid-afternoon and have two or

3

1 three hours there, and I have dealt with a number of the
2 issues over the years that he has had to deal with or
3 face going back to, to an extent, the Tiny Rowland and
4 the whole House of Fraser/Harrods battle and events
5 since then.
6 Q. I do not think the jury have heard anything about that
7 so far, but that was a rather notorious battle between
8 Mr Al Fayed and Mr Rowland over the takeover of House of
9 Fraser.
10 A. It was indeed. It was a takeover and it led on to many
11 sub-battles and side battles and other issues which have
12 continued to rumble on.
13 Q. And a Department of Trade and Industry investigation
14 into the takeover?
15 A. Indeed.
16 Q. I am right in thinking, aren't I, that you also
17 represented Mr Al Fayed before the Standards and
18 Privileges Committee investigation chaired by
19 Sir Gordon Downey into the cash for questions affair?
20 A. Indeed, yes.
21 Q. That was in 1997. You have also acted for Mr Al Fayed
22 in making at least one complaint to the Press Complaints
23 Commission connected with events surrounding the death
24 of the Princess and his son?
25 A. If you say so. I must say I had forgotten that, but

4

1 it is quite distinctly possible.
2 Q. It was a complaint concerning the Evening Standard, but
3 we don't need to go into the details.
4 Is it right also that you have been fairly
5 intimately concerned, over the last ten years, in
6 Mr Al Fayed's investigation into the circumstances
7 surrounding the death of his son?
8 A. Yes, I have.
9 Q. In that connection, for example, you have attended
10 meetings with the Metropolitan Police, Operation Paget?
11 A. Yes, we used to probably meet with them about once
12 a month, or two of their senior officers about once
13 a month. I attended meetings with Lord Stevens and also
14 attended meetings with the Coroner or at least one of
15 the, dare I say, former coroners.
16 Q. Yes, you attended a number of meetings with Mr Burgess,
17 who is the Surrey coroner and the Royal Coroner, who had
18 conduct of both of these inquests until about 20 months
19 ago.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. In addition to being a solicitor and undertaking the
22 activities that you have described, is it right that you
23 also provide business management advice?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Is that through a firm known as Rhodes Benson

5

1 Management?
2 A. That is a long time ago, when I was in partnership or in
3 business with the former managing partner of Dibb Lupton
4 whose name was Rhodes. He went to South Africa and so
5 we disbanded that business, but I provided under
6 the umbrella of a company called Prose, in conjunction
7 with two or three other loosely-called partners.
8 Q. You also, I understand, have connections with businesses
9 that Mr Al Fayed owns or at least has a controlling
10 stake in; is that right?
11 A. I am a director of Fulham or the Fulham group of
12 companies. I am, dare I say, a West Ham fan, so it is
13 a slightly strange position.
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: It must make life very difficult.
15 A. It does when they are playing each other.
16 MR BURNETT: It may be that you can bring some independent
17 perspective to the quality of the football at Fulham.
18 I am not going to ask you about that, but is your
19 directorship of Fulham Leisure Holdings Limited?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. That is the company that owns the football club, is that
22 right?
23 A. Yes, that is the holding company.
24 Q. Now, of course, in these inquests you don't represent
25 Mr Al Fayed, but you do represent the family and estate

6

1 of Henri Paul.
2 A. Indeed.
3 Q. When did that start? Was that after the inquests were
4 up and running last year?
5 A. It was after the inquests were opened because they were
6 opened in 2004, if I remember rightly, but before these
7 hearings actually started. The background to that is
8 that although I had been intimately involved on behalf
9 of Mr Al Fayed up until that time, it was clear that
10 the support he would need for the inquests would need
11 a substantial firm, and I am only a part-time and sole
12 practitioner so I could not give the resources that he
13 would need. But through their French lawyer,
14 the parents of Henri Paul were concerned to have at
15 least some representation, and given my familiarity with
16 the dossier and the documents, that was the decision
17 that was taken, that I would act as -- not directly for
18 them, but I act as agent for their French lawyer.
19 Q. I see. As a result of being one of Mr Al Fayed's
20 lawyers, you had access to the dossier presumably
21 throughout the period of the French investigation as he
22 was a civil party to those proceedings?
23 A. Yes, yes.
24 Q. So you were intimately familiar with its content?
25 A. Sorry, with the French --

7

1 Q. The French dossier.
2 A. Not in the early stages because of the way the system
3 works in France. He had his own French legal team.
4 Obviously I had liaison with them, but for the early
5 years I had no access to the dossier as such, no visits
6 to the French judge. That was all dealt with through
7 French lawyers and an English -- well, now an English
8 QC.
9 Q. Did you not have access to the dossier through
10 Mr Al Fayed?
11 A. No, not in the early years, other than the very
12 occasional document which we were allowed to have, but
13 the early years, the dossier was kept by the French
14 judge and I received written reports, detailed reports,
15 on the French dossier from -- I say now a QC called
16 Hodge Malek.
17 Q. All of that was confidential, presumably?
18 A. Well, most of it was. There were exceptions in terms of
19 things like the material -- Professor Vanezis, for
20 example, had the autopsy report on Henri Paul, but the
21 actual dossier itself we were not allowed to have. But
22 we were -- as I say we had Hodge Malek preparing notes
23 and we were allowed to have those notes and use those
24 notes as our guidance on what was happening and what the
25 issues were and so forth.

8

1 Q. Certainly by 2003 I infer you had it, is that right,
2 because you said this to Mr Burgess at a meeting in
3 connection with the French documents:
4 "I expect that you will get the basic traffic report
5 and measurement of skid marks, but there was no
6 preservation of the crash scene for any length of time
7 so there are issues regarding the quality of that part
8 of it. But certainly we have had an opportunity to look
9 at files, although I have to say we still labour under
10 the restrictions that exist, which is if we were to
11 disclose copies of the documents, I would get arrested
12 on my next holiday to France."
13 Do you remember saying that?
14 A. Yes, as I say a large part of the dossier -- not
15 the entirety, but the majority of the dossier was
16 originally kept on the French file. Then Hodge Malek
17 had a set in his safe and I think I eventually was
18 allowed to have the full release of it at around 2003.
19 Up until then, I was able to use and rely on all of the
20 notes that Hodge Malek was making.
21 Q. Did you provide copies of the documents from the dossier
22 to an American journalist called Gerald Posner in 1999?
23 A. Well, he certainly came to my offices and, from memory,
24 he was allowed access to Hodge Malek's notes, plus
25 I think the documents which Peter Vanezis,

9

1 Professor Vanezis, had received; from me, nothing else,
2 because, as I say, I did not have the main dossier at
3 that stage.
4 Q. Can I just read to you what he says in a statement and
5 tell me if he is right.
6 "I also gained access to the Henri Paul autopsy
7 report, the on-scene accident reports, initial hospital
8 admission and hospital treatment reports, about 40 to
9 50 pages in total. I believe that these were copies of
10 documents from the official French dossier, but they
11 were not provided to me through official channels.
12 These were provided to me by Stuart Benson in London,
13 acting as solicitor on behalf of Mohamed Al Fayed."
14 A. Well, one or two, if they were attached to or part of
15 what Professor Vanezis had, he certainly had, and he had
16 copies of notes that Hodge Malek provided. But the rest
17 of it, I have to say I find it impossible to think he
18 got it from me because, as I say, I did not have copies
19 in 1999. They were either with the French dossier or
20 with Mr Malek.
21 Q. He goes on to say that he made summaries of all of
22 the documents that he had been given. In fact his
23 document is 51 typed pages and it includes summaries,
24 including dates, of all the French statements from
25 witnesses.

10

1 A. Well, as I say, what he was allowed access to on which
2 there was no restriction, which I checked out with the
3 French authorities through lawyers there, was the
4 Hodge Malek notes which Operation Paget had also seen
5 and they were very detailed.
6 Q. Yes, he summarises those in addition, Mr Benson. You
7 have seen his summary, I expect, haven't you?
8 A. What, Gerald Posner's? I have seen the summary and he
9 certainly had access to Hodge Malek's very detailed
10 notes, which probably ran to two or three volumes in
11 the end. But, as I say, he would not, from me, have got
12 dossier material other than to the very limited extent
13 that I have described because, as I say, I did not have
14 copies at that time.
15 Q. That means he must have got them from somewhere else and
16 he is wrong in his statement.
17 A. Well, I am afraid I would have to disagree with him in
18 terms of the extent that he describes as I simply did
19 not have any.
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Where else could he have got them
21 from? Do you have any ideas?
22 A. After he saw me first, he went out regularly to France.
23 He also, I think, saw a number of the other lawyers
24 involved. I think he saw Trevor Rees' lawyer, maybe
25 the French lawyer. I think he was -- well, he spent

11

1 most of his time out in France, and out in France there
2 were certainly a lot of copies that seemed to be
3 floating around. The paparazzi lawyers were undoubtedly
4 releasing copies because information regularly appeared
5 in the press.
6 So the short answer is I do not know. After he
7 first saw me and went through the Hodge Malek notes, he
8 then went to France and I think he spent a couple of
9 weeks there, and I have no idea who he saw and what
10 access he got. But, as I say, he certainly could not
11 have got the extent he describes from me because I was
12 not given any.
13 Q. You have explained to the jury the close professional
14 and business relationship that you have with
15 Mr Al Fayed. Have you given evidence in any other
16 proceedings concerning matters that affect Mr Al Fayed's
17 financial position?
18 A. In other proceedings? There have been two claims, two
19 sets of proceedings relating to Fulham, so not
20 Mr Al Fayed as such. I cannot recall giving evidence in
21 any other proceedings personally relating to him.
22 Q. So it is evidence in connection with Fulham Football
23 Club which Mr Al Fayed and his family trusts own?
24 A. Which they obviously ultimately have control of.
25 Q. In that connection, did either of the judges concerned

12

1 make any observations or findings about the reliability
2 of your evidence?
3 A. In -- not in the first set of proceedings. In
4 the second set of proceedings, yes, the judge did,
5 although, rather bizarrely, he upheld exactly what we
6 were saying in terms of evidence at the end of the day.
7 But I fear to say that he clearly did not like or
8 approve of Mr Al Fayed and therefore everyone around
9 Mr Al Fayed, I fear to say, was tarred with the same
10 brush in his eyes.
11 Q. Was this the case of Fulham Leisure Holdings v Nicholson
12 Graham before Mr Justice Mann in the Chancery Division
13 about 18 months ago?
14 A. Yes, in which we alleged negligence. I was merely
15 a witness in that and the judge did find that there had
16 been negligence, exactly in line with what my evidence
17 was.
18 Q. But he makes some observations about the reliability of
19 your evidence and particularly in the context of your
20 closeness to Mr Al Fayed, didn't he?
21 A. Yes, he took the view that if I was close to
22 Mr Al Fayed, then my evidence must, by definition, be
23 inaccurate.
24 Q. Can I ask you to confirm three short passages?
25 The judge described your legal background and your

13

1 business relationship and he said this, didn't he, about
2 you?
3 "I think he has a very cavalier attitude to
4 documents and to the generation or keeping of
5 contemporaneous documents. At one point he said that it
6 was quite possible that he had taken no notes whatsoever
7 of the share acquisition transaction and I think he has
8 been rather cavalier in relation to disclosure of
9 documents for the purposes of this action. In the light
10 of that, I shall be very cautious about accepting his
11 evidence on details of matters that occurred many years
12 ago."
13 That was one of the judge's findings.
14 A. You have the quote. It was something along those lines,
15 yes.
16 Q. Let me provide you with a copy so that there is no
17 misunderstanding. (Handed).
18 That was paragraph 42 of the judgment. In
19 paragraph 44, Mr Benson, having recited some
20 discrepancies, the judge said this about you, didn't he?
21 A. Sorry, which paragraph again?
22 Q. Paragraph 44:
23 "It causes me to be very careful about relying on
24 any of his evidence, even about the big picture of this
25 matter. He was also a cagey witness who was reluctant

14

1 to give evidence that he calculated might be against
2 the Al Fayed case, yet capable of exaggeration if that
3 case required it, as is demonstrated by a description of
4 himself in correspondence as being aghast at one stage
5 of the negotiations, which in my view was plainly an
6 overstatement made deliberately for effect. All in all,
7 therefore, Mr Benson's evidence was evidence that
8 I approach with great caution."
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. That was another finding. Then, last, at paragraph 227,
11 the judge is discussing, isn't he, some evidence that
12 was withdrawn, and again talking about your evidence:
13 "It seems to me to have been a significant
14 misrepresentation of the position repeated in the
15 particulars of claim. I find it hard to believe that
16 Mr Benson's retraction was not caused by his having had
17 the email drawn to his attention. I think that there is
18 an element of deliberate overstatement of the case here
19 which causes me to approach the remainder of the version
20 of Holdings' case on the buyout with great care."
21 So those are the conclusions that the judge reached
22 in that case.
23 A. That is what he said. Needless to say I disagree with
24 him strongly, but that is his findings.
25 Q. Can I go back then to the events of the summer of 1997

15

1 and the period leading up to it?
2 Now you have told us that you joined Mr Al Fayed in
3 the general counsel capacity in 1996.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You had known Mr Al Fayed Senior before then?
6 A. Yes, indeed.
7 Q. When did you first come to meet or talk to Dodi?
8 A. Probably in about 1995 or 1996. I think my overall
9 relationship with Mr Al Fayed and Harrods and his other
10 companies probably goes back to about 1994, but I do not
11 remember meeting Dodi in the first year or two. But
12 certainly end of 1995/1996 would be my guess. He would
13 occasionally drop into the offices at the time I was
14 around and come and sit with me and talk to me on odd
15 occasions about things that mattered to him.
16 Q. So, at that stage, was the relationship one of lawyer
17 and client; in other words, he spoke to you about
18 matters which were potentially of legal interest?
19 A. It was a mix. Sometimes he would just drop in for
20 a social chat. If I was around, he would pop in for
21 a coffee and talk about anything.
22 There were one or two things. I seem to recall one
23 about a car he owned that had legal -- someone else had
24 claimed ownership or it had been stolen at some time
25 before Dodi owned it and I think he talked to me about

16

1 that. So one or two-odd things like that he would come
2 and ask my, if you like, legal advice on.
3 Q. In your statement, you describe -- and we shall come to
4 it -- a telephone call that you received from Dodi on
5 29th August 1997 --
6 A. Indeed.
7 Q. -- when you believed that he was on the Jonikal.
8 A. Indeed.
9 Q. But the context of your few sentences in the statement
10 suggest that you had spoken to him on a number of
11 occasions during the course of August. Is that right?
12 A. Yes. At this stage it would be difficult to remember
13 a precise number, but my guess would be five or six
14 times.
15 Q. During those conversations, you tell us that he referred
16 to Princess Diana as "my friend".
17 A. Not if he was with me. This was only if there was
18 a telephone conversation.
19 Q. I see. So you met him during August as well, did you?
20 A. Yes, I think there was probably -- I say August, it
21 could have been starting from end of July. I cannot
22 remember the exact timeframe, but I think there were
23 probably one or two occasions when he was actually in
24 the -- in Harrods at the time I was around and would
25 drop in and see me and one or two occasions when it was

17

1 would be by telephone.
2 Q. What was the purpose of the discussions at the end of
3 July and through August? We will come to the last one.
4 What was the purpose of the earlier discussions?
5 A. Principally that as there was more and more media
6 attention focusing on the relationship, there was
7 a great deal of reportage, some about Diana, and she
8 should not be holidaying with the Fayed family, but
9 a lot was very personal to Dodi. Increasingly there
10 were all kinds of press reports appearing, describing
11 him in more and more extreme tones: a playboy right
12 through to a regular coke user. It was all kinds of
13 allegations being made about him and his lifestyle and
14 his behaviour which, of course, needless to say,
15 concerned him and upset him greatly.
16 Q. So he was talking to you about possible legal action,
17 was he?
18 A. It was "Is there anything we can do about it? Why can't
19 I do something about it?"
20 Q. Presumably all of that was discussed with his father by
21 you and --
22 A. Not by me. I work on the basis that if a different
23 member of the family talks to me, that is a matter
24 between me and then.
25 Q. Would there be attendance notes, records of this, as

18

1 a solicitor?
2 A. I sit in Harrods and people just drop in and see me.
3 Q. I see. In the course of that summer, August in
4 particular, there was a very notorious threatened legal
5 action against Dodi, wasn't there?
6 A. Sorry?
7 Q. In August, a legal action was threatened against Dodi.
8 A. Are you talking about Kelly Fisher?
9 Q. Yes.
10 A. Indeed.
11 Q. Did you have anything to do with that?
12 A. A little to do with that. That was principally in
13 the States, so my discussions with him were peripheral
14 and I think the lawyer who was principally involved in
15 that was an American lawyer by the name of Fred Gaines,
16 and I think I probably had one or two conversations
17 about what was happening in that context. But that was
18 clearly being reported here, but mostly the action, as
19 far as I know, was out in the States.
20 Q. But it was something that Dodi presumably talked to you
21 about --
22 A. Oh yes, yes, yes.
23 Q. -- to seek your advice, and no doubt you took some
24 interest in what was going on.
25 A. Oh yes. Well, it was part of the overall picture that

19

1 was being painted of him.
2 Q. Any other legal issues that you can remember? I do not
3 want obviously any advice that you gave to Dodi because
4 that is privileged, but issues that were discussed over
5 the summer?
6 A. Are you talking about round about this time?
7 Q. Yes, in August.
8 A. No, it was all principally around the same theme, as far
9 as I recall.
10 Q. Had you been involved at all in the purchase of
11 the house in Malibu earlier that year?
12 A. No, I knew nothing about that.
13 Q. That was off your radar altogether?
14 A. Absolutely, yes.
15 Q. So, again, dealt with by US lawyers presumably?
16 A. Indeed.
17 Q. Coming forward then to Friday 29th August, you tell us
18 in the statement about a telephone call you received
19 from Dodi. Can you remember where you were when you
20 received it?
21 A. I almost certainly was in Harrods, and I think, for that
22 reason -- the call came through in the afternoon, mid to
23 late afternoon, and I would have recalled being in
24 the office that I have or share at Harrods.
25 Q. How long did the call last? Are you able to remember

20

1 that?
2 A. It was very brief, a minute ...
3 Q. What was the nature of what he said to you?
4 A. It was singularly short and pretty much the exact words
5 were, "Can't really talk over the telephone, but my
6 friend and I have very exciting news. Are you around on
7 Monday to have lunch as it will mean lots of issues to
8 talk about, to discuss?" Something along those lines.
9 That was almost the full extent of it.
10 Q. He did not tell you what he had in mind?
11 A. No precise words used.
12 Q. No words at all to explain what he had in mind?
13 A. No.
14 Q. So you, like others, no doubt might speculate?
15 A. Well, I would say more than speculate. I was absolutely
16 in no doubt -- went home that evening, and said, "I have
17 had this call from Dodi and I am pretty sure he is
18 getting engaged".
19 Q. Why did you come to that conclusion?
20 A. The nature of -- it was ... it is the combination of
21 words used, tone of voice. I suppose if I can put it in
22 this context, one of my many grown-up sons phoned me
23 November just gone, just returned from holiday with his
24 girlfriend -- phoned me the day afterwards, I asked him
25 about the holiday and he said to me something along

21

1 the lines of, "Anyway, guess what we have decided to
2 do?" I immediately said "Congratulations". It is one
3 of those -- I suppose we could be living in a parallel
4 universe where they were thinking about redecorating
5 their house and I am assuming they were getting engaged.
6 It was the same kind of conversation. I cannot put it
7 any higher or lower than that. It was a sense from
8 the tone of voice, the words used. It clearly was not
9 a business discussion. It was clearly something he
10 didn't feel he could talk about on the phone. That was
11 my reaction to what he said.
12 Q. Had you been in discussions with Dodi or his father
13 about their providing assistance to the Princess with
14 any of her charitable work?
15 A. No.
16 Q. It is a matter for the jury, but we have heard evidence
17 about the possibility of funding hospice work --
18 A. Indeed.
19 Q. -- and also becoming involved in the landmines campaign,
20 but that was not something that Dodi Al Fayed or
21 Mr Al Fayed Senior --
22 A. I have absolutely no recollection. I can't say never,
23 it just doesn't -- it certainly does not ring any bells
24 with me at all.
25 Q. Now you also mention, as you have told the jury, that

22

1 "lunch on Monday" was suggested. That would just be
2 with Dodi, would it?
3 A. That was my impression, yes.
4 Q. If you formed the impression that you have described to
5 us, this would have been momentous potential news, would
6 it not?
7 A. That is why I assumed he wanted to talk to me because...
8 Q. Did you share that with anybody?
9 A. Just my partner, Fiona, when I got home.
10 Q. This was obvious to you, was it, from the outset? In
11 other words it was not a thought that came to your mind
12 days or weeks later?
13 A. No, no. That was an immediate thought and the only
14 person, as I say, I shared it with was Fiona when I got
15 home that evening. But that was the clear thought in my
16 mind.
17 Q. So when it became apparent that a ring had been
18 purchased from Repossi or at least a delivery had been
19 made that weekend, was it obvious to you immediately
20 that that was likely to be an engagement ring?
21 A. It fitted. In that sense clearly I am guessing with
22 everybody else, but certainly, when I heard about it, it
23 fitted with my own thought about the conversation.
24 Q. So what was your reaction the following Friday when
25 Mr Cole, at the press conference, about which the jury

23

1 have heard, indicated that nobody knew what the ring was
2 for?
3 A. Well, I did not discuss with Mr Cole what he was going
4 to say in advance, and certainly when he said it,
5 it was -- a number of thoughts went through my mind.
6 One is that it may have been a deliberate decision to
7 keep the relationship confidential. Another was, well,
8 although I have my own clear view, it is only my view
9 and I have heard no words that I can definitely gainsay
10 and say, "No, I know absolutely differently". So,
11 it was -- words were already out there and there was
12 nothing for me to do because I could not say to anyone,
13 "No, I have specifically heard the words 'We are getting
14 engaged'".
15 Q. But you must have had a conversation with Michael Cole
16 and passed on the nature of what you had -- an
17 "inference" perhaps puts it too high, but what you had
18 speculated --
19 A. Do you mean before the press conference?
20 Q. No, after the press conference.
21 A. Oh, I am sure in due course, absolutely. I cannot
22 remember the first time I would have had a detailed
23 conversation with Mr Cole, but in due course -- I have
24 not made any secret about those words or about
25 the conversation since the time of the crash.

24

1 Q. Well, similarly, Mr Cole made a formal complaint to
2 the Press Complaints Commission about an article some
3 time later in The Telegraph which had referred to
4 engagement as a possibility. Do you remember that?
5 A. I have seen the letter he sent.
6 Q. So you could not possibly have spoken to him before
7 then, could you?
8 A. Quite possibly not.
9 Q. Did you speak to Mr Al Fayed about it?
10 A. Well, eventually. Again, I cannot remember when because
11 those first few -- certainly the first few weeks he was
12 rarely around, and obviously, when he was around, it was
13 not a time for detailed conversations. He was a very
14 emotional man and, as I say, I saw him very little in
15 the few weeks after the crash.
16 Q. It also, I think, from your evidence, crossed your mind
17 that what Mr Cole had said might have been a deliberate
18 misrepresentation of the facts to keep something
19 quiet --
20 A. It occurred to me as a possibility that this was
21 something that was intended to be kept private.
22 Q. Now you have explained in your statement that in that
23 discussion on 29th August, Dodi referred to
24 Princess Diana as "my friend".
25 A. Indeed.

25

1 Q. If I have understood your statement and your evidence
2 correctly, that was not the first time he had done so.
3 A. No, I think -- as I say, I would not like to say it was
4 more than one other telephone conversation, but there
5 certainly had been, at some stage, a telephone call
6 where he had used the same words.
7 Q. What you actually said in your statement was this:
8 "I should explain on those occasions, when he spoke
9 to me on the telephone and Princess Diana was referred
10 to by him, he would not use her name but would always
11 refer to her as 'my friend'."
12 I had rather taken from that that there must have
13 been quite a number of conversations otherwise you would
14 not use the word "always".
15 A. I have given the wrong impression. That was not
16 intended to give the wrong impression. As I say the
17 probability is that with the conversation that occurred
18 on the 29th, there were probably two other conversations
19 in terms of telephone conversations.
20 Q. Can I ask you then to explain the next sentence? This
21 is what you said:
22 "Very early on he explained to me that the reason
23 for this was because Princess Diana had told him that
24 her telephone calls were regularly listened in to by
25 security services. She had told him that, because of

26

1 his relationship with her, his calls would also be
2 monitored."
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. So again I am afraid I got the impression from that
5 sentence that there must have been rather a lot of
6 telephone calls between you and Dodi.
7 A. No, no. As best I can recall, we had actually had
8 a face-to-face discussion about the concerns about being
9 monitored and the reason this use of "my friend" came up
10 is that -- if I may take a moment or two to explain
11 the context of the conversation. I was, back in
12 the 1980s, involved in representing clients in a very
13 high-profile matter called the "Iraqi Supergun Affair",
14 where I had been told that -- it was very political --
15 some people in court may recall it -- involving sale of
16 pipes to Iraq which were alleged to be potentially
17 a massive 152-metre gun, and the company that
18 manufactured them that I represented had six of its
19 directors arrested.
20 Subsequently no charges were ever pursued and some
21 of you may know that it led to a major public inquiry
22 resulting in some government ministers, as I recall,
23 having to resign. But certainly during the course of
24 that investigation, I was told by, from memory, a very
25 senior police officer that my own telephone was being,

27

1 shall we say, monitored, and the way it was described to
2 me at the time was that monitoring is not someone
3 listening all the time. It is done by key words. So,
4 in other words, it is listened to if certain key words
5 are triggered. So, on that occasion, if I had used
6 the words "Iraqi Supergun", that would have triggered
7 the listening.
8 Q. Pausing there for a moment, can you remember who the
9 senior police officer was?
10 A. No idea. It was 20/25 years ago. It was someone who
11 was involved in that particular case. The reason he
12 told me is that -- because they did not seem to approve
13 of Customs & Excise, who were the people driving it.
14 Q. We are going back a very long way and that was an
15 investigation and possible prosecution involves weapons
16 going to a foreign state engaged in a war at the time.
17 So, just going forward a bit, you have explained what
18 Dodi said to you.
19 A. Yes, and the context -- the reason I mention that is
20 simply because I remember telling him that story and him
21 saying that that is why, in his conversations, he tends
22 to -- or was using -- if you like avoiding key words
23 like "Princess Diana".
24 Q. We have heard evidence from two people of suggestions
25 that Mr Al Fayed bugged his own calls and yacht.

28

1 Obviously you remember Kelly Fisher mentioned that in
2 her call to Dodi and my recollection is that Dodi did
3 not deny that. Similarly we heard that the Princess had
4 mentioned that to her sister, Lady Sarah McCorquodale.
5 Presumably you simply do not know one way or the other
6 on that?
7 A. I know absolutely nothing, although I have to say
8 I would be extraordinarily surprised if it were true,
9 but I cannot sit here and say "yes" or "no".
10 Q. You also, in your statement, give a description of some
11 offices of yours being burgled in the summer of 2003,
12 and those were in Frederick Close in London W2. I am
13 bound to say that I cannot quite place that in my own
14 mind. Whereabouts is that?
15 A. Very close to what was then the Football Association
16 headquarters --
17 Q. I cannot place that either.
18 A. -- although that was entirely coincidental. It is about
19 200 yards from Marble Arch, just north of Hyde Park.
20 Q. Was anything taken at all?
21 A. No, it was a bizarre break-in in the sense that
22 the building was, I think, on four floors, two wings on
23 each floor, each wing with its own separate door, and
24 I arrived one day to find that my particular door, which
25 was on the third floor, had been -- the little glass

29

1 pane had been smashed in. Someone had come into
2 the three or four offices that were in that wing;
3 clearly things like computers had been moved, but not
4 taken. The only thing that had disappeared -- there was
5 nothing of huge value, but there were a couple of quite
6 expensive pens and other odds and ends which were -- if
7 someone was after easy money could have taken, but none
8 of that had disappeared. Computers had been moved and
9 I think one briefcase had been taken which was actually
10 found dumped, fully intact, with nothing missing, in
11 a garden a few hundred yards away.
12 Q. What had been in it?
13 A. It was actually one of my colleague's in that office and
14 it had nothing other than a few personal papers.
15 I think it had his chequebook. As I say, it remained
16 intact. The oddity was that ours was the only wing
17 which had been broken into. Although they were all
18 identical and had exactly the same locking mechanisms,
19 ours was the only one that was broken into in that way.
20 Q. At one of your meetings with the previous coroner,
21 Mr Burgess, you mentioned that your offices had been
22 broken into and Mr Macnamara then said "... and all his
23 records stolen". Is that not right?
24 A. No. I have to say -- certainly I had no records stolen
25 at all.

30

1 Q. So that was a mistake on Mr Macnamara's part. I see.
2 What did you use these offices for?
3 A. Well, partly some of my legal work, but mostly it was my
4 consultancy.
5 Q. Your business consultancy?
6 A. Business consultancy.
7 Q. So this was not the office in which all the paperwork
8 concerning the crash in Paris was kept? That was all at
9 Harrods, presumably?
10 A. All kept at Harrods. I do not keep any papers
11 elsewhere.
12 Q. So this was your business advisory practice?
13 A. My business office where I -- and obviously, these days,
14 when one says that one keeps no papers there, I did not,
15 but of course my computer was there and therefore there
16 would be all the email and documentary traffic would be
17 on my computer.
18 Q. You tell us in your statement that shortly after that
19 had happened, you met a number of police officers,
20 including a very senior police officer, at the offices
21 in connection with something that concerned Mr Al Fayed
22 but has nothing to do with these inquests.
23 A. Not directly related to these proceedings, but ...
24 Q. What was that about then?
25 A. It was -- as far as I recall, it was arranged by

31

1 Mr Al Fayed and Mr Macnamara and it did relate to --
2 it was linked to these proceedings in the sense that, if
3 I recall correctly, Lord Stevens had been conducting an
4 investigation into aspects of security services and
5 Northern Ireland and the activities of security
6 services, and Mr Al Fayed took the view that some of his
7 experiences since the crash would be of interest to
8 Lord Stevens in the context of a similar pattern of
9 behaviour, so had, I think, suggested that a meeting
10 might be useful. I was asked to go along and offered my
11 offices as the venue for it. So, if I remember rightly,
12 it was a Commander Cox and two colleagues who came along
13 to those offices.
14 Q. You record one of those officers, unnamed, as suggesting
15 that you should be more concerned about what had been
16 put in your office rather than --
17 A. Yes. It was bizarre. It was almost small talk, I
18 think, while coffee was being made for us and
19 the officers talked about what a nice position it was
20 for the offices, and I, almost as a passing-time
21 interesting anecdote, told them about the break-in
22 which, as I recall, had happened only a month or two,
23 maybe three months, earlier.
24 As far as I was concerned, I was not expecting any
25 action, I was just telling them an interesting little

32

1 experience, to which one of them -- not Commander Cox,
2 but one of his other colleagues, who, from memory, was
3 a detective superintendent or chief superintendent,
4 immediately said to me, "It is not what they took you
5 should be worried about, it is what they have put into
6 your room that you should be concerned about".
7 Q. You obviously took them to be referring to a bug.
8 A. I did.
9 Q. Did you have a look for one?
10 A. I did.
11 Q. And you did not find one?
12 A. I did not, but I was due to move out of those offices
13 soon so I was not unduly concerned, but I did not take
14 it any further.
15 Q. You also mention in your statement that you have
16 "friends and contacts" who have been at a high level
17 within the security services, who have told you that
18 there is no doubt whatsoever that Princess Diana's
19 movements and her telephone calls would have been
20 constantly monitored.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. How many friends?
23 A. Well, it was one in particular who is a friend, and one
24 is -- that particularly told me that is -- I am not sure
25 of his exact position. He is actually a journalist who

33

1 I know has very -- well, I am told and I believe -- has
2 very close contacts within security services.
3 Q. Let's take it in stages. You mention "friends", plural
4 and then "contacts", plural, that "who been at high
5 level within the security services". So that must mean
6 at least two friends or more, plus at least two contacts
7 or more, all of whom have been at a high level within
8 the security services.
9 A. I think, to be fair, it should be "friend" in
10 the singular and "contacts" in the plural.
11 Q. Right. Has any of them been, to your knowledge, in the
12 security services?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Which one?
15 A. The friend.
16 Q. No, no. Which security service?
17 A. I think it would be -- my guess would be MI5.
18 Q. Your guess?
19 A. Well, I have never had the details. I know it was one
20 of the two. I know he was out in Paris.
21 Q. So just to take this slowly. Friends, although you say
22 "friends" in the plural in this statement, there is in
23 fact only one.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Then why did you say "friends" in the plural?

34

1 A. I think I actually probably -- just my mistake in not
2 checking the statement absolutely perfectly when
3 I signed it. It should have been "friend and contacts".
4 Q. You obviously know who that friend is.
5 A. I do indeed.
6 Q. You would have no objection in writing down the name and
7 passing it to the Coroner?
8 A. Not at all.
9 Q. So I would be grateful if you would do that. If we can
10 have some paper? (Handed)
11 Before that is handed up, hang on to the piece of
12 paper and if you could write "friend" next to that.
13 Then I would like to see if I have understood what you
14 say about your "contacts", in the plural.
15 The contacts who you refer to, who have been at
16 a high level within the security services, how many of
17 those are we talking about?
18 A. There is -- well, one is a contact who is, as far as
19 I am told, well connected within security services.
20 Q. So it would be inaccurate to describe him as having been
21 at a "high level" within those services?
22 A. Yes, I cannot describe him, but he in turn --
23 Q. Again, why do we find that in your statement, Mr Benson?
24 A. Sorry?
25 Q. Let me just read it again:

35

1 "I also have friends and contacts [you say in
2 the statement] whom I am not prepared to name, but have
3 been at high level within the security services."
4 So we have dealt with the friend. Now we are
5 dealing with the contact, and you are talking about
6 the first of them, but I think you are telling us that
7 contrary to what was in your statement, that contact has
8 not been in the security services but has, himself,
9 contacts within it. Is this how it works?
10 A. No. The particular person whose name I will write down
11 is a journalist and documentary-maker who, from all my
12 dealings with him, going back over 30 years, has,
13 I believe, high-level contacts. At one meeting, going
14 back some time, he introduced me to someone who he told
15 me had been at high level within one of the security
16 services.
17 Q. So is that the second person within the word "contacts",
18 plural?
19 A. The "contacts" is actually a contact who is well
20 connected, to be exact, and he, in turn, introduced me
21 to someone who I understood to be senior level in one of
22 the services.
23 Q. Why did you describe both of the contacts as having been
24 at a high level within the security services when you
25 are now telling us that one of them is a journalist?

36

1 A. I think it was a -- again me perhaps slightly
2 misdescribing the exact relationship. It was a contact
3 who had been at a high level and a friend who was
4 connected with high level.
5 Q. So this journalist whose name you have written down
6 I think --
7 A. I have not written the journalist's name down.
8 Q. Could you write the journalist's name down and write
9 "journalist" next to it, please? The journalist
10 introduced you to somebody else who represented himself
11 as a -- what, as a serving member of one of the
12 agencies?
13 A. Whether then a serving member, I cannot remember.
14 Q. Can you remember his name?
15 A. I am afraid I cannot at the time. It was a long time
16 ago. This was in the early stages that I met this --
17 Q. Where did this meeting take place? Can you remember
18 that?
19 A. I have a feeling it was a hotel bar.
20 Q. When? Can you locate the year, even?
21 A. I would have -- again, guessing, but I would have
22 thought probably about 1999, something of that sort.
23 Q. I see. Well, I wonder now if that bit of paper could be
24 passed to the Coroner for safe-keeping.
25 MR BURNETT: Thank you very much, Mr Benson. Those are my

37

1 questions.
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Just a moment.
3 Is there any reason why this should not be passed
4 round to counsel to see?
5 A. Not as far as I am concerned.
6 MR BURNETT: Sir, can I enter one cautionary word at the
7 moment? If there is a name of somebody Mr Benson is
8 suggesting is a member of the security service on there,
9 we may just need to think about the handling of that.
10 A. If it helps, it is not an "is", it is a "was". I do not
11 know whether that makes any material difference.
12 MR BURNETT: Sir can we deal with that at the break between
13 counsel?
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes. Very well. In
15 the meantime, that document will be held on the court
16 file, please, and with an identification.
17 There is one matter I would like you to clear up,
18 Mr Benson, if you can: this conversation that took place
19 with Dodi on Friday the 29th, when you said that he told
20 you that he had some very exciting news and
21 the suggestion was meeting on Monday for lunch --
22 A. Indeed.
23 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: -- and you said that you were
24 pretty sure that he was getting engaged. Well, now, it
25 takes two people to be engaged, and what I am anxious to

38

1 ascertain from you is whether your impression was that
2 he and Diana were already engaged at that point, in
3 other words, they had an agreement to marry, or whether
4 the position was that it was his intention to ask her to
5 marry him later that night and he was confidently
6 expecting a positive answer.
7 A. Well, all I can say is that my view would be the former
8 because my clear recollection is "We have very exciting
9 news", so -- this is interpretational, of course, but --
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes.
11 A. -- I cannot imagine that those words would be used in
12 the context of "I am hoping that we will have very
13 exciting news", but that is my interpretation.
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: In other words, there was already
15 an engagement, but it was a matter of being made public
16 later?
17 A. Yes, I mean I -- obviously I have been sitting in court
18 a lot and I do not go along with any suggestion that
19 Monday was going to be an announcement day because
20 obviously he was going to be talking to me on Monday, so
21 I did not interpret it in terms of, "We are rushing back
22 to make an announcement", but I interpreted the "We have
23 very exciting news" as meaning they had come to
24 a decision and, over the next period of time, they would
25 be wanting -- well, certainly in Dodi's case he would be

39

1 wanting to talk to me about implications and issues
2 which would arise, which again I interpreted would be
3 very heavy media publicity and no doubt a lot of attacks
4 upon him of the previous sort and increased.
5 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Because if he was not actually
6 engaged at the point that the telephone call was made
7 and then he got a negative answer later in the evening,
8 it would have been rather embarrassing for him on Monday
9 at lunchtime.
10 A. I am sure we would have had a very nice lunch, but it
11 would have lost its purpose.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes, Mr Mansfield.
13 Questions from MR MANSFIELD
14 MR MANSFIELD: Thank you. Good morning. Obviously I do not
15 need to introduce myself to you.
16 A. No.
17 MR MANSFIELD: I only have one area I just want to cover
18 with you briefly. It may be remembered that
19 the inquests were formally opened, not by this learned
20 Coroner, but an earlier one, on a date in January 2004.
21 So that is a dividing date. Now, before that date, had
22 there been meetings with the two coroners, up until
23 the time that one of them died and then with the one
24 coroner, between yourself, Mohamed Al Fayed and
25 the coroners, do you remember? That is before

40

1 January 2004.
2 A. I have lost track of timescale. I think the meetings
3 really started after the opening. Indeed I think we had
4 a meeting with him immediately he knew it opened at
5 Westminster. Whether or not we had already or I had
6 already met him previously, I would need to be reminded.
7 I am sorry, I have lost the precise --
8 Q. I really don't want to take time. I thought it was
9 going to be an easier question than that. We do have
10 documents relating to the previous period, 2003. There
11 is one in the dividers we have on 11th November 2003,
12 where there was a meeting at which you attended with
13 the Coroner Michael Burgess. So the question I wanted
14 to come to --
15 A. And I think there may have been two meetings, if
16 I remember.
17 Q. Were there any meetings in that period with any police
18 officers said to be investigating anything?
19 A. So before the --
20 Q. Before the inquests opened.
21 A. Again, not that I recall. I do not recall meeting any
22 police officers prior to then.
23 Q. After January 2004, there was an announcement of
24 Lord Stevens' investigation or inquiry. What was your
25 understanding at that point of his inquiry, his

41

1 investigation?
2 A. Of Lord Stevens' inquiry?
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. Just so that I can be exact, at the time when it was
5 first announced by Mr Burgess?
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. I think I will probably have to deal with that in two
8 stages. First of all there was my reaction to
9 the actual announcement by Mr Burgess when he first
10 announced it in Westminster Hall, as far as I recall;
11 and, then, as were the first actual face-to-face meeting
12 and clear impression from Mr Burgess, both from
13 the words he used at Westminster Hall and subsequently
14 was that he had asked Scotland Yard or -- and in due
15 course, Lord Stevens, to carry out an investigation on
16 his behalf. So my impression was that this was a full
17 investigation for the purpose of the Coroner and for
18 the purpose of the inquests.
19 Q. Now, in the light of that, were there, in fact, regular
20 meetings between 2004 and the report being published in
21 2006?
22 A. Indeed, yes.
23 Q. In fact, just to give the jury some idea, how regular
24 were they? Every Monday? Every few weeks?
25 A. Sometimes even more than a month. I would think there

42

1 was probably no period where -- longer than two months
2 passed by. It could even be a fortnight. On average
3 though, I think they probably worked out once a month.
4 Q. Was there, at these meetings, an exchange of information
5 between yourself, on behalf of Mohamed Al Fayed and
6 others, as it turned out later, and the police on their
7 behalf?
8 A. Sorry, was there ...?
9 Q. Exchange of information.
10 A. You mean as an ongoing dialogue?
11 Q. Yes.
12 A. Oh yes. That was the purpose of the meetings.
13 Q. Finally this: at any time before this report was
14 published, were you ever told anything about the Mishcon
15 note?
16 A. No.
17 MR MANSFIELD: Thank you.
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Weekes?
19 MR WEEKES: No, thank you, sir.
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Croxford?
21 MR CROXFORD: No, thank you, sir.
22 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Horwell?
23 Questions from MR HORWELL
24 MR HORWELL: I have only a few questions, Mr Benson. You
25 have been associated with Mr Al Fayed for how long now

43

1 approximately?
2 A. What are we now, 2008, so about 14/15/16 years. 14 to
3 16, I would think.
4 Q. Having been his general counsel, as you have described
5 it, you are now the agent acting on behalf of the Paul
6 family?
7 A. Indeed.
8 Q. Their lawyers both in France and here are being funded
9 by Mr Al Fayed, are they?
10 A. No.
11 Q. By the Ritz?
12 A. By the Ritz.
13 Q. Thank you. The telephone call that you say you had with
14 Dodi on Friday 29th August, it must have soon been
15 obvious to you that their engagement was critical to
16 the conspiracy allegation.
17 A. Well, certainly -- I will put it slightly differently.
18 I would not say "critical". It certainly gave a motive
19 or a possible motive.
20 Q. We are going to hear, Mr Benson, that they were murdered
21 to stop them marrying.
22 A. Well, that is a suggestion. I am just saying it
23 doesn't -- if you ask my personal view, I do not think
24 it is necessarily critical.
25 Q. To Mr Al Fayed it is a critical part of the conspiracy

44

1 allegation, isn't it?
2 A. Well Mr Al Fayed's beliefs go wider than that.
3 Q. Of course they do and we will be hearing about them in
4 due course. But if we could please just concentrate on
5 this one part which I suggest is critical, as you must
6 know, to Mr Al Fayed's suggestions: their engagement.
7 A. To his suggestion? I am not going to be pushed into --
8 I think there are a number of possibilities I have heard
9 which could be critical, apart from --
10 Q. I am asking you about one.
11 A. But one -- it is an important plank.
12 Q. Therefore you must have known that it may well be in
13 issue as to whether or not this call ever took place?
14 A. Indeed.
15 Q. The call was from Dodi to you?
16 A. Indeed.
17 Q. That call could only have been realistically on his
18 mobile or from a phone on the Jonikal?
19 A. I assume there would have been satellite phones. I have
20 no idea whether it would have been a mobile or
21 a satellite.
22 Q. Have you ever obtained any data to establish that this
23 call took place?
24 A. I personally have not. I believe investigations were
25 made of his mobile.

45

1 Q. Do you know of anyone --
2 A. No.
3 Q. -- who has any data to establish that this call took
4 place?
5 A. No.
6 Q. As to the call itself, you have just said that it was an
7 important part of the call that it was said by Dodi that
8 "We have very exciting news". You have your statement
9 in front of you, do you?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. "He told me that he had very exciting news regarding him
12 and his friend."
13 A. Yes. Sorry, the context was that it was about him and
14 his friend together. So he told me, but the clear
15 wording or implication was that it was "about the two of
16 us" and I am fairly certain it was "We have very
17 exciting news".
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Well, my note was "My friend and
19 I have very exciting news".
20 A. Sorry, it is very difficult after ten years to get
21 the precise wording. That is the difficulty of trying
22 to recount it now. The very clear implication that
23 I got from the conversation was it was news about him
24 and his friend. I cannot remember whether it was done
25 by "My friend and I have very exciting news", "We" or

46

1 something along those lines.
2 MR HORWELL: In matters of love and matrimony, Mr Benson,
3 the lawyer is not normally the first person that
4 the groom contacts, is it?
5 A. I am not assuming I would necessarily be the first
6 person, but I can understand in this context, bearing in
7 mind the conversations I had been having with Dodi, why
8 he would be concerned to see me.
9 Q. This morning you have said, "I was absolutely in no
10 doubt ..." as to what was behind the call. I know that
11 Mr Burnett has asked you about this already, but it is
12 not unimportant.
13 On Friday 5th September we have Mr Cole saying this:
14 "We did not leak the news of the ring which Dodi
15 gave to the Princess only hours before their deaths.
16 What that ring meant we shall probably never know, and
17 if the planet lasts for another 1,000 years, people will
18 still wonder about its significance."
19 You must have been astonished when you read that
20 press statement from Harrods.
21 A. I think it is very easy after this timescale to focus on
22 one particular issue and think that that is what I must
23 have had my attention immediately drawn to and been
24 astonished by.
25 Please bear in mind that at that time it was an

47

1 absolutely horrific, stressful time, with a huge amount
2 going on. I had just been out to Paris, to sort of help
3 start the investigation process. There were a mass of
4 things going through my mind and that I was focusing on
5 and, frankly, at that stage, that was not -- I do not
6 recall it leaping out of the page as being the most
7 important thing that I had read. But I mean certainly
8 it registered with me. I am not trying to understate
9 it.
10 Q. How long had you been in Paris carrying out
11 investigations?
12 A. As far as I recall, I went either Monday and Tuesday or
13 Tuesday and Wednesday, I think.
14 Q. And you went with Mr Macnamara?
15 A. I did go with Mr Macnamara.
16 Q. You soon discovered, in Paris, that Henri Paul had had
17 two Ricards at the Bar Vendome.
18 A. I am not sure that it was discovered on that occasion.
19 Q. We heard that Mr Klein called for the invoice, the bill.
20 Didn't you discover, during the course of that week,
21 that Henri Paul had had two Ricards at the Bar Vendome?
22 A. I am afraid, at this stage, I cannot now say whether
23 it was that week or the following week. There were
24 a number of trips in those early weeks.
25 It is possible. I am not saying it is not. I just

48

1 really cannot recall. What I do remember on that first
2 occasion was seeing all these CCTV footage because
3 we put got all that put together.
4 Q. You would have seen from the CCTV footage that
5 Henri Paul went into the Bar Vendome.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did you not speak to Mr Cole about this press statement
8 and put him right, that the world did not have to wait
9 for another 1,000 years --
10 A. I do not recall having any conversation --
11 Q. You could correct the statement immediately.
12 A. I do not think I had any conversation with Mr Cole
13 before that press conference, as far as I remember.
14 Q. What about afterwards?
15 A. I would hesitate now to say when I had a first
16 conversation of any detail with Mr Cole. There would
17 certainly have come a point where I would have told him
18 about my conversation, but when that was I could not now
19 say.
20 Q. You did not think it was important to correct that
21 misstatement in the press release?
22 A. Not particularly, no.
23 Q. The evidence that you have given about the bugging of
24 telephones, the name that appears on that note, the
25 person that you guessed had worked for MI5 -- I do not

49

1 want to see the note and I do not want to see
2 the name -- but you say this person has now left
3 the employ of the security services. When did you last
4 speak to him?
5 A. Generally or on this subject?
6 Q. Generally.
7 A. I speak to him every week.
8 Q. He is a close friend?
9 A. Yes, yes.
10 Q. When did you last speak to him about this particular
11 subject?
12 A. Do you mean again in general terms about the inquests or
13 specifically --
14 Q. You must have realised somebody was going to ask you to
15 name this individual.
16 A. On this specific, I have not mentioned this to him for
17 a year.
18 Q. But, Mr Benson, you must have realised somebody was
19 going to ask you to identify this person.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Have you discussed this fact with him, that inevitably
22 you would be asked to identify him and that you would do
23 so?
24 A. Well, a long time ago. I told him that his name might
25 come up. I have not discussed it with him, as I say,

50

1 since for a long time.
2 Q. What was his reaction to that?
3 A. My feeling is that he probably wished he had never said
4 anything, but beyond that, no other reaction.
5 Q. So he confirmed to you again, did he, that he had told
6 you that Diana's telephone had been monitored?
7 A. No, no -- sorry, I hope that is not the impression.
8 What he was talking to me about was not "I know for
9 a fact that that her telephone was being monitored", but
10 that he would -- bearing in mind his general knowledge
11 of behaviour, he would find it inconceivable that it was
12 not.
13 Q. I know that Mr Burnett has taken you over this sentence
14 a number of times, Mr Benson, but it is a very short
15 statement that you provided to Paget, isn't it?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Two pages of typescript. Anyone would know
18 the importance of accuracy; you, as a lawyer, would know
19 it more than most, wouldn't you? I am going to return
20 to that sentence:
21 "I also have friends ..."
22 That is a mistake?
23 A. I have said it is a friend.
24 Q. So it should read:
25 "I also have a friend ..."

51

1 It continues.
2 "... and contacts ..."
3 Essentially it is one contact, isn't it?
4 A. It is one contact who introduced me --
5 Q. He might have introduced you to somebody else, but it is
6 only one contact. So it should be "I also have a friend
7 and a contact ..."
8 The statement continues:
9 "... who I am not prepared to name but have been at
10 high level within the security services ..."
11 That is a mistake? Only your friend has been --
12 A. Well, the other person that I was introduced to, my
13 impression was also someone fairly senior.
14 Q. Well, Mr Benson, "I also have friends and contacts who
15 have been at high level within the security services".
16 That indicates that they had worked --
17 A. Yes, as I say --
18 MR HORWELL: This is a journalist, I had thought.
19 A. No, the journalist --
20 Q. Is the contact.
21 A. Is the contact, who in turn --
22 Q. So the contact that you had, had not worked for
23 the security services?
24 A. He, in turn, introduced me and I met, with him, someone
25 else who I was led to believe had been.

52

1 Q. Yes, but the contact, Mr Benson, had not been at a high
2 level within the security service.
3 A. If you take the journalist as the initial contact.
4 Q. He is your contact, isn't he?
5 A. Yes, he's the contact.
6 Q. We have covered this already, Mr Benson. So that part
7 of the statement is inaccurate.
8 "... who have told me that there is no doubt
9 whatsoever that both Princess Diana's movements and her
10 telephone calls would have been constantly monitored."
11 "... who have told me that there is no doubt
12 whatsoever ..."
13 You now say that what you had intended to write in
14 the statement is that they believed that her phone would
15 have been monitored. Is that right?
16 A. Well, what I -- I cannot say after this length of time,
17 but I suspect and believe that the kind of words they
18 used to me is that -- would have involved the words "no
19 doubt". I think it was along the lines of "there can be
20 no doubt" or "I am in no doubt".
21 Q. We will wait and see what this individual says when he
22 has been contacted.
23 Are you saying that this individual was telling you
24 that from his own knowledge he knew that Diana's phone
25 was being monitored or was this speculation on his

53

1 behalf? There is an important distinction, as I am sure
2 you are aware.
3 A. Indeed. My belief is that it probably is more
4 speculation because I do not see any reason why either
5 of them would have had absolutely direct knowledge,
6 although I am sure that both of them used words along
7 the words of "no doubt" or "I am in no doubt" or "there
8 can be no doubt" or something along those lines.
9 Q. But based on speculation and not evidence is your
10 understanding?
11 A. That is my understanding, yes.
12 Q. Do you not think that you should have put that into
13 the statement that you gave to Operation Paget? It
14 would have been fairer, wouldn't it, Mr Benson?
15 A. Absolutely.
16 Q. It would have been more accurate, to put it another way?
17 A. Yes.
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Do you think it is unfair to
19 describe your statement as gilding the lily a bit?
20 A. I do not see in this context. Please bear in mind that
21 I was not in any way -- and I hope Operation Paget would
22 confirm this -- I have never had any conversation with
23 them ever giving an impression that I know that they
24 were being monitored, bugged, whatever term one wants to
25 use.

54

1 All I was explaining there is the context of my
2 belief when Dodi told me that he and Princess Diana
3 believed they were being monitored. I was giving the
4 context in exactly the same way as I had to Paget, that
5 I had no reason to disbelieve or be surprised when they
6 made that comment.
7 As I say, throughout all my meetings with
8 Operation Paget, I have never sought to gild the lily or
9 oversuggest. It has always been along the lines of just
10 that that is why I believe what Dodi told me was
11 understandable.
12 MR HORWELL: You see, from just that one sentence that we
13 have been examining, one bears in the mind those words
14 in the judgment of Mr Justice Mann:
15 "... reluctant to give evidence that he calculated
16 might be against the Al Fayed case, yet capable of
17 exaggeration if that case required it."
18 The burglary: you know that Commander Cox has
19 indicated that his comment to the effect that you should
20 be more concerned about what might have been left behind
21 was in the context of possibly journalists having bugged
22 your office.
23 A. That may be what he says now. That was not the
24 impression that was given at the time.
25 Q. Now, this event, this conversation, was in the summer of

55

1 2003. That is with a --
2 A. It was certainly in 2003. Whether it was May, June
3 or --
4 Q. I am not interested in the date. It is the year that is
5 more important. You have indicated in your statement
6 that the meeting with Commander Cox was 1st July 2003.
7 You say that you had understood him to be saying that
8 this was the security services and you no doubt must
9 have believed from the start that the security services
10 had entered your office. Is that right?
11 A. No, it had not actually occurred to me until --
12 Q. Commander Cox put that thought in your mind?
13 A. Yes. Yes.
14 Q. So from 1st July 2003, you believed that there had been
15 a real possibility that the security services had
16 entered your office to place a bug?
17 A. I thought it was a possibility in the light of what they
18 had said.
19 Q. Of course, bugging again is an important part of
20 Mr Al Fayed's suggestions, and therefore, if what you
21 tell us is the truth, Mr Benson, there was a possibility
22 that you could have discovered a security services bug
23 in your office.
24 A. No, I do not think I would have done. He raised it as
25 a possibility. I had a look around, could not see any

56

1 evidence for that, but I think, as I say, I was about to
2 leave the offices at -- very shortly after; end of story
3 as far as I was concerned.
4 Q. But, Mr Benson, if there is any truth in this story and
5 the inference that you place on it, if you had thought
6 that there was a possibility of the security services
7 having bugged your office, whether you were leaving
8 the next day or the next week, surely you would have had
9 that office swept?
10 A. It did not occur to me at all at that time.
11 Q. Does it occur to you now?
12 A. I very much doubt whether I would have found anything
13 anyway.
14 Q. Make the effort, Mr Benson. If there is any truth in
15 this at all, that there is a possibly that your office
16 could have been bugged by the security service, have it
17 swept? Money is not an object, is it?
18 A. Not particularly in the context of Mr Al Fayed.
19 Q. No. Have it swept professionally to find this bug?
20 That is not a thought that occurred to you?
21 A. It did not and I do not seek to put any blame on him,
22 far from it. But I had the director of security sitting
23 in in that meeting with me and it was not a thought or
24 recommendation from him either; nor did Commander Cox's
25 team suggest it should happen.

57

1 MR HORWELL: Thank you, sir.
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: The phone call that you had from
3 Dodi on Friday the 29th, can you remember whether you
4 ever mentioned it to Mr Mohamed Al Fayed and, if so, at
5 what point you mentioned it to him?
6 A. Certainly not at that time, sir. I am sure at some
7 point within some weeks, some weeks later, but I could
8 not put a timescale on when that was. As I say, I was
9 having very few conversations with Mr Al Fayed at that
10 time simply because of the situation.
11 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: So you have no recollection of
12 mentioning it to him at any particular time?
13 A. I cannot put a date or particular occasion on it, no.
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: And you have no particular
15 recollection of what the conversation was when you did
16 mention it, if you did?
17 A. With Mr Al Fayed?
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes.
19 A. No. I think it was in the context of him -- or is
20 likely to have been in the context of him talking to me
21 or me and others about his beliefs, and I would, at that
22 time, I am sure have mentioned the conversation. But
23 I think until then -- when that was, as I say, my guess
24 would be several weeks. I just don't remember having
25 much of a conversation with him on any particular

58

1 subject in those first few weeks.
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: But it would have been very
3 interesting information for him to have at a very early
4 stage, wouldn't it?
5 A. He already believed it, so in a sense my information was
6 not doing anything other than -- just "Well I already
7 know". I think I have to put it in a somewhat minor
8 context, that it was merely ticking a box of, well,
9 I know that already, so ...
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Burnett?
11 MR BURNETT: Nothing further, thank you, sir.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you very much, Mr Benson.
13 A. Pleasure.
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We will break off now for our
15 morning break and then we have Ms McKenzie.
16 (11.32 am)
17 (A short break)
18
19 (11.47 am)
20 (Jury present)
21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I call next Karen McKenzie.
22 MS KAREN JANE MACKENZIE (sworn)
23 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Would you prefer to sit down?
24 A. Sir, please.
25 Questions from MR HOUGH

59

1 MR HOUGH: Is your full name Karen Jane McKenzie?
2 A. It is, but I want to clarify something. "McKenzie" is
3 actually the name I use at work, but I am married and my
4 surname is Molloy.
5 Q. Thank you. My name is Jonathan Hough and I will be
6 asking you questions first on behalf of the Coroner.
7 I think, in 1997, you were housekeeper at the Al Fayed
8 family residence at 60 Park Lane; is that right?
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. In that capacity, you were responsible for a number of
11 domestic staff?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Do you still have that post?
14 A. I do.
15 Q. I think you gave a witness statement to British police
16 officers in March of 2004.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Do you have a copy of that statement with you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. It might be helpful if you have it in front of you.
21 In a few moments I am going to ask you about
22 a conversation you had with Trevor Rees-Jones, now
23 called Trevor Rees. Just before we get to the detail of
24 that, I think that you first gave your account of that
25 conversation to an author called Patricia Cornwell in

60

1 the summer of 2003; is that right?
2 A. That is right.
3 Q. That, I think, was when she was at 60 Park Lane with an
4 American television crew, filming a programme.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Before that occasion, in the summer of 2003, had you
7 given any previous interview, either official or
8 unofficial or to your employer or to anybody else,
9 giving your account of this conversation?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Since that time, other than a comment to Ms Cornwell and
12 the statement to the British police, have you given any
13 other interview or statement to anybody?
14 A. No. Can I just clarify a little bit? Not a statement
15 or interview, but I have given -- I have not mentioned
16 that particular point, but I have given other interviews
17 or -- like for film crew or somebody that I have had to
18 show around the apartment or something like that, but
19 that has not come up.
20 Q. I have been asking specifically about your conversation
21 with Trevor Rees and whether you have mentioned that in
22 other statements.
23 A. No.
24 Q. Is it right to say that you have not?
25 A. Yes.

61

1 Q. Am I right also to say that before the summer of 2003,
2 you had not mentioned this conversation to Mr Al Fayed
3 or anybody else in his organisation?
4 A. No, I have not mentioned it at all.
5 Q. Before the crash in August of 1997, how well did you
6 know Trevor Rees-Jones?
7 A. Sufficiently well because I used to see him on a work
8 basis. He was one of quite a number of security. He
9 was one of Dodi's security so I used to come into
10 contact with him more closely than with others that
11 I did not maybe see very often. We had short
12 conversations at various times when our paths crossed.
13 He was not a good friend or anything like that. He was
14 a work colleague.
15 Q. I think we have heard that he had been a security guard
16 specifically for Dodi for about a year. So is that
17 the period of time over which you had got to know him
18 perhaps a little better than the other security staff?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. But is it fair to say that this was in terms of knowing
21 somebody for casual conversation, rather than being
22 a friend?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Now, after the crash, we have already heard from
25 Trevor Rees-Jones that he spent some time staying at

62

1 60 Park Lane, where you were based working, and I think
2 you say in your statement that he arrived there about
3 six weeks after the crash.
4 A. As far as I can recollect because time just is --
5 I cannot put it into proper -- I do not know if it was
6 six weeks or a bit longer. He was up and walking, so
7 I guess -- I do not know if it is six weeks to recover
8 or longer than that, but it was after the accident.
9 Q. We all understand.
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Can you hear all right, members
11 of the jury?
12 MR HOUGH: I am sorry, we have had to ask quite a lot of
13 witnesses to keep their voices up. The microphones
14 don't really amplify.
15 Now, while Trevor Rees-Jones was at Park Lane,
16 I believe his condition improved over a period of time.
17 A. Definitely. When I saw Trevor first, it was soon
18 after -- I do not know how many days after he was back
19 in the UK and he was at Park Lane, I cannot remember at
20 all, but at the point I saw him first he was
21 just horrend -- I am sorry, that sounds so -- just
22 looked so terrible because he was half -- like
23 a skeleton really. He was just all mangled up and he
24 just looked awful. Yes, he looked awful. That is
25 the only way I can say it.

63

1 It was -- I was very shocked when I saw him first
2 because all I could think was, like, "Oh my goodness, he
3 just looks so terrible and I have to pretend you don't
4 look terrible but you really look terrible", and all
5 these things I could feel were going through my -- on my
6 face. I tried to make out that he was okay, so I went
7 and kissed him on both cheeks and at the same time I was
8 thinking, "Oh my God, I cannot believe I have just done
9 that" because he was just -- yes -- initially he was --
10 sorry, I am garbling. It was bad at the beginning, and
11 when I saw him a couple of months later, he was vastly
12 improved because he had put on weight, he had obviously
13 had work done and he -- yes, cut a long story short,
14 there was a change in his ...
15 Q. Can you say roughly -- and don't worry if you cannot --
16 how long he stayed at Park Lane?
17 A. Again, I am not -- I cannot be sure on this, but I would
18 have thought six weeks/a couple of months because there
19 was quite a big difference in how he was.
20 Q. Over the time that he was there, roughly how many times
21 would you say that you spoke to him, either over
22 the whole period or every week or however you want to
23 describe it?
24 A. No. The only two recollections I have is that first
25 time I saw him, which was fairly recent after he had

64

1 come back into the country, and then when I had my last
2 conversation with him. I had conversations with him
3 before, when he was waiting for Dodi and Diana to go out
4 or whatever, but between him -- between the crash and
5 now, that is the only two conversations I had.
6 Q. So there was the conversation immediately he arrived and
7 then the conversation we are getting to, towards the end
8 of the stay.
9 So is it fair to say that you certainly would not
10 describe yourself as a close friend or confidante of
11 Trevor Rees-Jones?
12 A. No, no, I definitely would not say that I was a close
13 friend, but I just think that sometimes, when you are in
14 a situation, you say things, like -- can I go back to
15 before the crash?
16 Q. Go on.
17 A. I had a -- we were -- in the building where I work,
18 there are several entrances and exits, and I was waiting
19 with Trevor on the eighth floor inside what I will call
20 the "family area" in the apartment block, and it was in
21 the evening because Dodi and Diana were having dinner
22 and we were waiting for them to leave at -- I do not
23 know -- 11.30, midnight, something like that. I cannot
24 be sure of the time, when we were passing -- because you
25 are kind of killing time and rather than just standing

65

1 there saying nothing, you chat about nothing or anything
2 or whatever comes to mind. I mean, Trevor knew me
3 sufficiently to tell me at that point that he was having
4 marital problems, so I know I would not call him an
5 intimate friend, but at least I knew that about him.
6 Q. Yes. I think other members of security staff have said
7 that that was something that he discussed with a number
8 of people.
9 Now turning to the specific conversation which you
10 mentioned later to Ms Cornwell, this, I think, was
11 towards the end of his stay at Park Lane and when you
12 and he were both waiting for a lift, is that right?
13 A. I had come out of the front door of the apartment where
14 I was working at the time and was going to another
15 apartment, and when I came round the corner, Trevor was
16 already standing at the lift, so we waited together for
17 the lift.
18 Q. Before we get to the specific remark that you recounted
19 to Miss Cornwell, what was the general nature of the
20 conversation as far as you can remember it?
21 A. Of the conversation at the lift?
22 Q. Yes.
23 A. There was not a lot of conversation. Again, all I can
24 say is that we passed the time of day and I must have --
25 we must have said something about how he was or what

66

1 was -- how he -- I honestly cannot remember exactly.
2 The only thing I am absolutely clear about is what he
3 said to me.
4 Q. How long was the conversation? Was it just while you
5 waited for the lift to arrive?
6 A. Yes, it was while we waited for the lift to come up
7 seven floors. He got in it, I did not.
8 Q. A couple of minutes?
9 A. Maybe not even that.
10 Q. Can you tell us the specific remark that you recall him
11 making which you later recounted to Patricia Cornwell?
12 A. "If I remember, they'll kill me".
13 Q. "If I remember, they'll kill me". Before he said that,
14 can you remember what you had asked or what he had been
15 speaking about?
16 A. To be honest, I do not. But that part I am absolutely
17 100 per cent clear about because it is something that
18 I have remembered always. I know, when I re-read my
19 statement, it kind of maybe does not read like that. To
20 be brutally honest, when I read my statement, it does
21 not sound like it is me at all because it is not
22 really -- a lot of the words are not the words -- are
23 not exactly how I would have -- if I had written it
24 myself, it would not have been exactly like -- when
25 I read it back, it does not sound like me talking, if

67

1 that kind of makes sense.
2 Q. But the quotation appears in the statement.
3 The quotation you have just given appears in your
4 statement.
5 A. Yes, because it is something -- it is still in my mind
6 now. I can see Trevor in front of me, telling me.
7 It is not something I am ever going to forget.
8 Q. But you cannot remember, can you, what you had asked
9 beforehand or what you had been speaking about in which
10 context this appeared?
11 A. No. If I was to think about it long and hard, which
12 I have tried to do, then I do not know if what I think
13 about is actually fact or is it because you are wanting
14 to think about that is what it is, but the words he said
15 to me are definitely -- no question about it, that is
16 what he said.
17 Q. Can you remember what his tone was like when he said
18 these words? Lighthearted? Grim? Deadpan?
19 A. Just -- "deadpan" is as good a word as I would say.
20 Like not -- just now I am quite emotional, so he was not
21 like that, which was "If I remember, they will kill me",
22 and he got in the lift and ...
23 Q. Can you remember whether it was something said out of
24 the blue or in connection with other things that were
25 being said?

68

1 A. I mean, I cannot be sure, but I would think I must have
2 said something like "Don't you remember anything? Has
3 nothing come back to you yet?"
4 Q. You have said you did not mention it to anybody before
5 Patricia Cornwell. It was a fairly remarkable thing to
6 say, wasn't it? Something that stuck in your mind
7 certainly.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Since it was such a remarkable thing, something that
10 stuck in your mind, why did it not occur to you to
11 mention it to anybody?
12 A. The whole thing of the crash was obviously very
13 emotional, and when I had -- have had to show people
14 round the apartment, I find it very difficult. Sorry.
15 Q. If you would like to have some water, use a tissue, take
16 a moment.
17 A. I could do with a bit of whisky in that or something.
18 Q. I do not think we can run to that.
19 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Just take your time.
20 A. Sorry.
21 I just -- well, in an ideal world, I would wish none
22 of this was happening and I did not have to obviously
23 come here and talk to all of you. When I have had film
24 crews or people, journalists or whatever, doing --
25 asking me other things, the first -- at the beginning

69

1 it was incredibly emotional, I could not even string two
2 words together, probably, and then after I had done
3 a newspaper article, I did not -- I did not like
4 the fact that my name was in the paper, there was
5 a picture of me in the paper. I did not want any of
6 that to do with it.
7 Q. Again, take a moment. We understand that this is
8 stressful. (Pause)
9 A. Can you ask me again? I am sorry.
10 Q. I was just trying to get to the question of why it was
11 that you first decided to mention it to Patricia
12 Cornwell; why you had not mentioned something that was
13 apparently quite remarkable to anybody else before.
14 A. I think really she just managed to get through to me
15 a bit or under my skin or caught me on a day when I was
16 more emotional than other days. Some people you can
17 just cut off from and not kind of get emotionally
18 involved, but then other days things just ... it is
19 easier. When I told her that, it was after we had done
20 one or two hours in the apartment, going round, and she
21 was doing her programme, whatever angle she was doing.
22 And it was after, and we were sitting down and I was
23 like this and it just blurted out.
24 Q. Now, in fairness to you, I have to let you comment on
25 something that Trevor Rees has said about this

70

1 conversation because your account was put to him and he
2 says that he has no recollection of having said anything
3 like this and thinks it very unlikely that he said
4 anything like this to you. In the light of that, do you
5 think you may be mistaken about these specific words
6 having been used?
7 A. Definitely not, and I wish I could do what Trevor has
8 done and just say "I do not remember", but unfortunately
9 I do remember. I might regret him having told me, but
10 I do remember.
11 Q. Did it strike you at the time that it was an odd remark?
12 A. It was -- it depends on the context you take it.
13 The crash was odd. The last ten years have been odd.
14 Q. If he had no memory, he could not say why somebody would
15 want to kill him or that somebody would want to kill
16 him, could he?
17 A. My personal belief is that ten years later, you cannot
18 not remember something, as in if, I am sure -- well,
19 I feel that Trevor should remember what happened of
20 everything, not just the conversation that I had with
21 him.
22 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: You mean all the details of the
23 accident?
24 A. Yes.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: The collision?

71

1 A. Yes. I think he should be able to have hypnosis or
2 something and be able to remember everything.
3 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Well we have heard expert
4 evidence about that --
5 A. Sorry.
6 MR HOUGH: I was about to say that we have heard agreed
7 expert evidence that his memory is very limited and that
8 the couple of memories that did come back to him could
9 be false memories.
10 I was simply suggesting to you that there were some
11 oddities of the way the remark was supposedly made
12 because he certainly did not comment to you that he did
13 remember anything, did he?
14 A. No, he said "If I remember ..."
15 Q. As I say, that would be an odd thing to say because if
16 he does not know what he was going to remember, how
17 could he think how somebody else would react?
18 A. I do not think he was looking for a reaction from me.
19 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: What was the message that you
20 thought you should take from what he said?
21 A. I thought that he probably knew what had happened or he
22 thought he would remember what would have happened at
23 a later date, but that it was probably too -- everything
24 was too fresh. I know it must have been a huge trauma
25 and trauma does make you react in different ways.

72

1 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Who is the "they" mentioned?
2 A. I do not know.
3 MR HOUGH: Is it possible that your own view that he really
4 ought to have remembered everything could be influencing
5 how you recall that conversation going?
6 A. No. Definitely not.
7 MR HOUGH: Thank you very much.
8 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Mansfield?
9 MR MANSFIELD: No, thank you very much.
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Weekes?
11 MR WEEKES: No, thank you, sir.
12 MR CROXFORD: No questions, sir.
13 Questions from MR HORWELL
14 MR HORWELL: I only have a few questions to ask.
15 We have heard from Trevor, and it is not only that
16 he has no recollection of this conversation, but he
17 effectively says that it could not have taken place
18 because he was not worried about anyone trying to kill
19 him at this time. Do you understand? That is the
20 difference in the evidence that has been presented.
21 All I want to ask is this: did you ever ask him what
22 he meant by the comment?
23 A. No, I have never seen him or spoken to him since.
24 Q. At the time?
25 A. The lift door shut and he went downstairs and I went

73

1 into the apartment that I was going to go into.
2 Q. You had no opportunity to ask him what he meant by
3 the comment at all?
4 A. None whatsoever.
5 Q. If it is the case that you have told no one at all about
6 this conversation, why were you appearing on this
7 American television programme?
8 A. I was not appearing on it.
9 Q. You were being interviewed by her, weren't you?
10 A. No, Patricia Cornwell was doing a programme and she was
11 asking me questions really into Dodi and his apartment.
12 Q. With the camera running?
13 A. Not on me, I don't think, no; on Patricia Cornwell.
14 Q. But it was being recorded?
15 A. At the point we had that conversation, I do not think
16 so.
17 Q. I am only asking because there is a transcript, which
18 I have not been able to find. We only discovered this
19 morning that you were giving evidence. Was this not
20 recorded at any stage or not?
21 A. I am not 100 per cent sure. The thing in the apartment
22 was recorded, but at the point that I told
23 Patricia Cornwell, we were sitting down after she had
24 finished her programme and I do not think that was on
25 film.

74

1 Q. Your recollection is that --
2 A. That it was off record.
3 Q. We will check, and if my recollection is wrong, I will
4 make sure that is put right.
5 So why mention this at all to her?
6 A. Because it had been on my mind for the last five years
7 or six years. It was something that was in there and it
8 just came up because (a) I was in a state like I was
9 a minute ago and being in Dodi's apartment is incredibly
10 hard and very emotional.
11 MR HORWELL: Right. Thank you.
12 MR HOUGH: Sir, nothing further from me.
13 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you very much. I am sorry
14 you had to go through this.
15 A. I am sorry I had to put you through it.
16 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I am sorry you were put off on
17 the last occasion because another witness overran.
18 A. That is all right. Thank you very much.
19 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: That is all we require. Thank
20 you.
21 I think Lord Jay is here and is available to start
22 his evidence, if that is convenient.
23 MR HOUGH: Yes, I believe so, sir.
24 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I call Lord Jay.
25

75

1 LORD JAY (sworn)
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Would you prefer to sit down?
3 A. Thank you, sir.
4 Questions from MR BURNETT
5 MR BURNETT: Lord Jay, could you give us your full name
6 please.
7 A. Michael Hastings Jay, Lord Jay of Ewelme.
8 Q. As you know, I shall be asking you questions on behalf
9 of the Coroner and thereafter you will be asked
10 questions by others.
11 Before I start, can I simply identify that you have
12 in front of you one or two documents that it is going to
13 be necessary to look at?
14 First, did you make a statement dated
15 13th December 2005 in which you set out your detailed
16 recollections of events that are material for these
17 inquests?
18 A. Yes, I did.
19 Q. Do you have a copy of that statement with you?
20 A. Yes, I do.
21 Q. Additionally, Lord Jay, do you have a copy of your
22 personal diary entry for Sunday 31st August 1997?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 Q. Lord Jay, we have that both in its original handwritten
25 form and also typed to assist us. Your handwriting is

76

1 not the easiest to read, at least for me. At some stage
2 in the course of my questioning of you, I shall ask you
3 to read that entry.
4 Lord Jay, is it right that you were British
5 Ambassador in Paris at the time of the crash in which
6 Dodi Al Fayed and Diana Princess of Wales died?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Having completed your term as British Ambassador in
9 Paris, did you go on to be Permanent Under Secretary of
10 State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and thus
11 head of the Diplomatic Service?
12 A. Yes, I did.
13 Q. Put shortly, you were the professional head of
14 the service; the Foreign Secretary is the political
15 head.
16 A. Yes, that is right.
17 Q. Now can I start by asking you to take us through your
18 career, if you would be so kind.
19 I hope we can do this relatively speedily. Is it
20 right that you left university in 1969 and joined what
21 was then called the Overseas Development Ministry?
22 A. Yes, it is.
23 Q. Did you remain with that ministry until 1973?
24 A. Yes. I remained with that ministry until I transferred
25 to the Foreign Office in 1981. As a part of that

77

1 ministry, I was then seconded to the World Bank for two
2 years and then to the British High Commission in
3 New Delhi for three years.
4 Q. So you went to the World Bank in 1973, is that right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Thereafter you went to the British High Commission in
7 Delhi?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And that was 1978 until 1981?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You were on secondment at that stage to
12 the Foreign Office, but still technically serving with
13 the Overseas Development Ministry?
14 A. Yes, that is correct.
15 Q. And then you transferred to the Diplomatic Service in
16 1981?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Having completed your tour of duty in New Delhi, did you
19 come back to London and have a posting at the Foreign
20 and Commonwealth Office between 1981 and 1985?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. One of the posts that you occupied during that period
23 was Private Secretary to the Permanent Under Secretary?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Of course, as we have identified, permanent under

78

1 secretary is the post from which you retired.
2 A. That is correct, yes.
3 Q. Between 1985 and 1987, were you seconded as a counsellor
4 to the European Secretariat of the Cabinet Office?
5 A. Yes, I was.
6 Q. Immediately after that, did you go back to
7 the Diplomatic Service and to a posting in Paris as
8 financial and commercial counsellor?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And that was a post you held until 1990?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. I shall ask you in a few minutes a little bit more about
13 how the structures in an embassy work, but would it be
14 right that financial and commercial counsellor
15 essentially meant that you were in charge of one of the
16 departments within the Paris Embassy at that time?
17 A. Yes, it was. There was a department which was called
18 the "Financial and commercial department of the Embassy"
19 and I was the counsellor in charge of that.
20 Q. Having completed that first stint in Paris, did you come
21 back to London, to the Foreign Office, where you were
22 appointed Assistant Under Secretary of State for EC --
23 European Community -- Affairs?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Did you hold that post for nearly four years?

79

1 A. I did, until 1994.
2 Q. What appointment did you take up in 1994?
3 A. I was appointed as Director General for European and
4 Economic Affairs in the Foreign Office.
5 Q. And that was a post in the rank of deputy under
6 secretary?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Was it from that post that you were appointed British
9 Ambassador to Paris in 1996?
10 A. Yes, it was.
11 Q. Did you remain in that post until 2001?
12 A. Yes, I did, until October 2001.
13 Q. No doubt a little time in leave after that, but you took
14 up your position as Permanent Under Secretary in 2002?
15 A. In January 2002, yes.
16 Q. And at the time that you made the statement that I have
17 identified, you were still serving as head of the
18 Foreign Office, but in fact you retired, I think, in
19 2006, in the summer.
20 A. I did, yes.
21 Q. In just a sentence or two or three, Lord Jay, could you
22 explain to the jury what the function of an ambassador
23 is in a foreign country, and then, in just a sentence or
24 two, what the Embassy is there to do?
25 A. Perhaps I could start by saying that the function of the

80

1 Embassy is to represent the interests of Britain and
2 British subjects and British business in France and also
3 to report back to the British Government on significant
4 developments in France, so that, by doing that, we can
5 improve the relationship between the two countries.
6 The role of the Ambassador is to preside over
7 the Embassy. The Ambassador is, as it were, the head of
8 the Embassy. In Paris, working for me, there was
9 a deputy, who was known as the Minister in the Embassy,
10 and then, underneath him, a series of different
11 departments in the Embassy; for example, a political
12 section; financial and commercial section; consular
13 section; Visa section. A number of different sections
14 all of which would be headed by a diplomat, a man or
15 a woman, of the rank of counsellor, who, as I say, would
16 then report either to my deputy or, in many cases,
17 directly to me.
18 Q. In each of those departments, if that is an accurate
19 division, there were presumably other Foreign Office
20 staff who worked to those counsellors?
21 A. There would be other staff. In some cases they would be
22 from the Foreign Office. There would be first
23 secretaries and there would be second secretaries, but
24 because of the range of interests of an embassy such as
25 the Embassy in Paris, there were people also from

81

1 the Treasury, from the Department of Trade and Industry,
2 from the Ministry of Agriculture, from the Department of
3 Education. To that extent it was more like a mini
4 Government service operating from Paris.
5 Q. Additionally, there were defence attaches, were there
6 not?
7 A. There were defence attaches, yes; a defence attache and
8 then an air attache -- a military attache and a naval
9 attache.
10 Q. And their function was to liaise particularly with
11 the French services and defence establishment?
12 A. Yes it was. That was the main function. Yes.
13 Q. Now, Lord Jay, I am sure you are aware of the fact that
14 there has been public speculation and suggestion that
15 two of your first secretaries had posting dates that
16 were somehow suspicious. Is that something you are
17 aware of?
18 A. I am aware of that allegation, yes.
19 Q. And the two first secretaries concerned are Mr Spearman
20 and Mr Langman.
21 Now, we are going to be hearing shortly a statement
22 read from Susan Le Jeune -- if I can be forgiven for
23 calling her that -- the head of personnel at --
24 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: You cannot pronounce her name?
25 MR BURNETT: I might try a little later today, sir, if I am

82

1 feeling brave enough.
2 She explains that there is simply nothing in that at
3 all, and that is your understanding as well?
4 A. That is my understanding. That was the case, yes.
5 Q. It is right, is it, that you are a fluent French
6 speaker?
7 A. Yes, I speak pretty fluently, yes.
8 Q. You presumably, if you did not already speak it, you had
9 learned French fairly intensively before your first
10 posting to Paris?
11 A. Yes, I learned -- yes, I did.
12 Q. No doubt, in the various offices you held in the Foreign
13 Office dealing with European relations, EC relations,
14 a good working knowledge of French was pretty critical
15 for that?
16 A. It was essential. Much of the negotiations went on in
17 French.
18 Q. That is something that you no doubt bru