20 November 2007 - Morning session
1 Tuesday, 20th November 2007
2 (9.37 am)
3 (Jury out)
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Burnett, I have asked for
5 the jury not to be brought in yet because difficulties
6 have arisen in Paris and I wish to raise these
7 difficulties with the French authorities over the
8 videolink in the absence of the jury.
9 MR BURNETT: Thank you, sir.
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Miss Gaffney, can you hear us?
11 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Yes, sir, we can hear you
12 clearly.
13 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Now, the position at this end
14 is that we have some difficulty. We were told that
15 Madame Coujard was going to give evidence this morning
16 and M Monceau after the midday break and that M Monceau
17 had been summoned on that basis.
18 It is a matter that is of crucial importance to our
19 inquests that we hear the evidence of both those
20 witnesses and, if possible, that we hear them in that
21 order. I have been told that due to some error in
22 the summoning process, M Monceau is not available this
23 afternoon. One solution would be to have M Monceau
24 first, but that would be not entirely satisfactory. The
25 other solution would be if he could possibly change his
1
1 arrangements so that he could be available this
2 afternoon.
3 The third solution, which would be the least
4 satisfactory, would be to ask him to come back another
5 day, preferably tomorrow, so that the jury can hear the
6 evidence in satisfactory sequence.
7 The message that I have been receiving is that
8 M Monceau is only available to give evidence this
9 morning and that there is a difficulty about that. So
10 I would be extremely grateful if a solution could be
11 found as quickly as possible so that we can continue
12 with the jury and I am asking the French authorities for
13 their help.
14 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Yes. The situation is that
15 M Monceau has to get a flight at 3 o'clock from
16 Orly Airport, 3 o'clock French time. He has to be at
17 a meeting this evening. Because of the transport
18 difficulties, that means leaving at least by lunchtime,
19 so that is the position. He cannot stay any later
20 unfortunately.
21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I know it would be very
22 inconvenient for Madame Coujard for the evidence to be
23 switched round, but that does seem to me to be the least
24 unsatisfactory possibility. I wonder if she would be
25 very helpful in agreeing to that in view of the muddle
2
1 that seems to have occurred.
2 THE INTERPRETER: The solution that we could suggest is to
3 hear Mrs Coujard first, because in the room are present
4 the general prosecutor for Paris and the Attorney
5 General, who have come here on this occasion and
6 themselves, obviously, they have obligations.
7 The idea would be to ask Mr Monceau if he is willing
8 to make other arrangements and maybe give his witness
9 statement this afternoon or make arrangements to come
10 another day. If the jury accept, we suggest to start
11 hearing Mrs Coujard now.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Well, we are very happy to start
13 hearing Madame Coujard now, but we are most anxious that
14 we should not lose M Monceau entirely. Could you please
15 make some arrangements for him to come back at
16 a convenient moment?
17 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Yes, sir. M Guardelli and I are
18 now going to talk to M Monceau and see if we can come to
19 some arrangement for giving his evidence.
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Obviously all the necessary
21 flights will be arranged and dealt with by the inquest
22 authorities, but it would be a very considerable
23 disaster if we were deprived of M Monceau's evidence.
24 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: I understand, sir. We will go
25 and talk to M Monceau straightaway and let you know
3
1 the outcome.
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you very much. We will
3 continue with Madame Coujard.
4 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Thank you, sir.
5 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Just while the jury are being
6 brought in, Mr Burnett, two administrative matters.
7 First the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has asked to
8 be recognised as an interested person in respect of
9 those witnesses who were employed in the Foreign and
10 Commonwealth Office in Paris in 1997 and I am minded to
11 grant that recognition.
12 The second point is that there are a number of
13 witnesses whose evidence appears to me to be unlikely to
14 be disputed. In accordance with the provisions of
15 rule 37, I indicate an intention, subject to
16 representations, to read their evidence in due course.
17 These are Patrick Riou, number [INQ0008785];
18 Philippe Massoni, [INQ0008493]; Bernard Pages,
19 [INQ0007335]; Huguette Amarger, [INQ0005259]; that would
20 be subject to agreed editing between counsel and any
21 other interested persons who wish it; and Janusz Knepil,
22 [INQ0005264] and [INQ0007879].
23 I should emphasise that the statements will all be
24 made available for any interested person and that
25 representations can be made in the ordinary way and also
4
1 that no decision has been taken as to whether or in what
2 form these witnesses' evidence would be adduced in
3 the event that it proves controversial.
4 (Jury present)
5 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Good morning, once again.
6 Madame Coujard, I am very grateful to you for coming
7 to give evidence on a particularly difficult day and
8 I am sorry we have had these difficulties that have
9 delayed us by 15 minutes. I now call you to give
10 evidence.
11 MRS MAUD COUJARD (affirmed)
12 Questions from MR BURNETT
13 MR BURNETT: Madame Coujard, my name is Ian Burnett and I am
14 counsel to the inquests and will ask you questions first
15 on behalf of the Coroner, the judge.
16 Is your name Maud Coujard?
17 A. My maiden name is "Morel", but my spouse's name is
18 "Coujard".
19 Q. Thank you. Are you a magistrate and a vice-procureur de
20 la Republique at the Regional Court of Paris?
21 A. Yes, currently, I am a magistrate and vice-procureur de
22 la Republique at the Parquet at Paris.
23 Q. I think, Mr Interpreter, we are having some difficulty
24 in hearing you. I wonder if you could make sure that
25 the microphone is in front of you and not obstructed by
5
1 paper.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Okay. Can you hear me well now?
3 Q. That is certainly better for me. I hope it is for
4 others.
5 Would you be kind enough to give that last answer
6 again? This is Madame Coujard's description of her
7 current position.
8 THE INTERPRETER: Yes. She just confirmed your suggestion
9 that those are her positions. She is a magistrate and,
10 as you said in French, vice-procureur de la Republique
11 in Paris.
12 MR BURNETT: Now at the time of the crash with which we are
13 concerned, is it right, Madame Coujard, that you were
14 a deputy prosecutor in Paris?
15 A. Yes, I was a deputy prosecutor; that is, if you will,
16 the least great in the profession of magistrates in
17 Paris.
18 Q. In connection with these events, I think it is right,
19 isn't it, Madame Coujard, that you made a statement to
20 British police officers on 15th November 2006?
21 A. That is correct.
22 Q. The other statements that we have from you, Madame, are
23 statements concerning searches that you made on
24 31st August 1997 of two photographic agencies. Do you
25 remember making those statements?
6
1 A. Well, it was not a statement that I made on
2 31st August 1997. It was a procedural act that
3 I accomplished on behalf of the Prosecutor of Paris and
4 under his authority.
5 Q. Do you have those documents with you, Madame?
6 A. No. Which documents are you talking about?
7 Q. We have two short records of the searches that were
8 carried out by police officers with Madame Coujard of
9 the Sygma agency and the SIPA agency on 31st August.
10 A. Yes, they are minutes of searches, so, as such, in
11 a company like a press agency, it is not something that
12 a magistrate can delegate to a police officer. It is
13 a matter of law.
14 Q. I shall come back -- I am so sorry.
15 A. So I did it with their assistance and they worked on
16 their own minutes.
17 Q. I am not asking you questions at the moment about
18 the searches. I am merely trying to establish whether
19 you have the document that records it available to you.
20 A. So you are talking about minutes relating to searches
21 performed in August 1997?
22 Q. Yes, 31st August.
23 A. At 8 pm?
24 Q. Yes, one at 8 pm and one at 6 o'clock. If the documents
25 are not available at the moment, I wonder whether
7
1 Miss Gaffney might see if she can find them amongst
2 the bundle that she has.
3 Now can I take you back to the events of the night?
4 You have told us that you were a deputy public
5 prosecutor. That, I think, meant that you were a junior
6 official at that time in the department and on the first
7 rung of the hierarchy.
8 A. Yes, correct.
9 Q. And the section in which you were located, was that
10 directed by Bernard Pages? Is that right?
11 A. Bernard Pages.
12 Q. Were you on call, that is to say on duty, on the night
13 of the crash?
14 A. Yes, I was on duty that night.
15 Q. Did you receive a telephone call at about 1 o'clock in
16 the morning informing you of the crash?
17 A. Yes. I cannot be more precise than that, but it must
18 have been about 1 o'clock in the morning.
19 Q. And at the time, were you at home, Madame?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Were you told immediately that one of those involved in
22 the crash was the Princess of Wales?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And were you also told that others involved in the crash
25 had been killed?
8
1 A. As much as I can remember, I think it was the case.
2 Q. Did you immediately go to the scene of the crash?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. When you arrived there, was M Massoni, the Prefect of
5 Police, already there?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And was M Patrick Riou, the director of the Paris
8 judicial police, also there?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In just a sentence or two, Madame Coujard, could you
11 explain to us, who don't understand the way in which
12 the Paris police is organised, what the difference is
13 between their two positions?
14 A. Well the Prefect of Police is superior in the hierarchy
15 of the police and Mr Riou reports to him. The Prefect
16 of Police has a very extended responsibilities,
17 especially of an administrative nature. The
18 particularities that the judicial police has,
19 the specific mission of the judicial police, and within
20 the framework of that mission, it is under the authority
21 of the prosecutor.
22 Q. Why was it necessary for a representative of the Public
23 Prosecutor's Office to be present at the scene?
24 A. Because it is the protocol. When an event that triggers
25 an investigation by the judicial police happens, then
9
1 the prosecutor or the representative of the prosecutor
2 in that situation, the substitute -- the deputy
3 prosecutor is directly informed, goes to the scene, and
4 it is important that he or she is there to choose which
5 police force is going to be responsible for the
6 investigations and the rest of the procedure.
7 Q. I see. So one of your functions was to decide which
8 part of the Paris police should be assigned to
9 investigate this crash; is that right?
10 A. Yes, but bearing in mind that I was acting on behalf of
11 the prosecutor, my function was also to inform him of
12 what was going on and to consult him before making that
13 decision.
14 Q. Were you aware as soon as you arrived at the scene about
15 the possible role of the photographers in the events
16 leading to the crash?
17 A. Yes, I think I remember I was aware of that, but that
18 was a long time ago. That was ten years ago. But
19 I think I was informed when I received the phone call.
20 Q. Did you discuss with M Massoni and M Riou which part of
21 the police should be assigned to investigate?
22 A. Well they told me what their opinion was and I told them
23 that I was going to call immediately the prosecutor
24 before making any decisions.
25 Q. Was it their opinion that the Brigade Criminelle should
10
1 be appointed?
2 A. Yes, I think I recall them talking about that, yes.
3 Q. Am I right in thinking that it would be unusual to
4 instruct the Brigade Criminelle in connection with
5 a road crash?
6 A. No, it was not unusual in the sense that the criminal
7 police service was the most appropriate to lead very
8 delicate and thorough and long investigations and it was
9 not unusual.
10 THE INTERPRETER: The witness would like to specify
11 something.
12 A. I suppose it is true that they had been in charge of
13 rather few car crashes, so that is why I decided that
14 they should be helped by a special police force and also
15 by the police officers that were there at the scene from
16 the very beginning because I knew that there were plenty
17 of witnesses on custody to be held.
18 MR BURNETT: Now, we have a statement from M Riou. I will
19 read to you what he says and ask whether you recollect
20 that this is accurate. He said:
21 "My first objective was to convince Madame Coujard
22 and the Prefect of Police of the requirement to instruct
23 the Brigade Criminelle, taking into account
24 the technical aspect of the investigation and
25 the significant resources that this unit has at its
11
1 disposal."
2 A. Yes, I remember that he told me about that. I cannot
3 remember if we discussed the technical aspects, but
4 I remember that his preference went to the criminal
5 police, also bearing in mind that one of the victims of
6 the car crash was a very important person.
7 Q. Now, is it right that following these discussions, you
8 telephoned the then Public Prosecutor to inform him of
9 the circumstances of the accident and to seek his
10 approval for the appointment of the Brigade Criminelle?
11 A. Well I did not call him to seek his approval. I called
12 him to inform him and then to discuss with him that
13 matter. He asked me for my opinion, but it was not in
14 order to seek his approval that I called him.
15 Q. Am I right in thinking that when appointing
16 the Brigade Criminelle, you also directed that they
17 should investigate in association with the first
18 division of the judicial police?
19 A. Yes, in the discussion with the prosecutor, we thought
20 that the best solution would be to appoint jointly those
21 two divisions. It is not something that is unusual.
22 And the unit of the police forces that was taking charge
23 of the first investigations was, as a matter of fact,
24 the first division of the judicial police.
25 Q. Leaving, if I may, the appointment of the police forces,
12
1 can I then move forward and ask you one or two questions
2 about your involvement on the night of the crash and
3 the following day?
4 Is it right that you stayed at the scene of the
5 crash until about 03.30 in the morning?
6 A. Yes, I think I stayed until about 3.30 in the morning,
7 but as I said last year, I could not be definite.
8 Q. During that time, it is right, isn't it, that you
9 witnessed the removal of M Paul's body from the vehicle
10 and you also ordered that Mr Al Fayed's body be driven
11 to the Institute of Forensic Medicine?
12 A. Yes, I saw Mr Paul's body being retrieved from the car,
13 being freed from the car, and I think Mr Al Fayed's body
14 was on the road with a blanket over him, and I think
15 I was there when it was driven to the Institute of
16 Forensic Medicine.
17 Q. Then you went home, but received a telephone call to
18 inform you of the death of the Princess of Wales. Is
19 that right?
20 A. Yes, it is correct.
21 Q. Did you immediately inform the Public Prosecutor of that
22 fact?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Can I ask you one or two questions about the process
25 that then followed for examining the bodies? Is it
13
1 right that there would automatically have been an
2 autopsy on the body of the driver, Henri Paul?
3 A. "Automatic" is not necessarily the word, but when
4 we discussed the matter with the prosecutor, it occurred
5 to us that it was a decision we could make without
6 further discussions because obviously he was the driver.
7 Q. I do not want to ask you any more questions about that
8 aspect, but what was the position as far as the
9 passengers were concerned?
10 THE INTERPRETER: What was the situation ...?
11 MR BURNETT: As far as the passengers were concerned.
12 A. As the driver was totally trapped where he was sitting,
13 we had no doubt as to who was driving the car. So it
14 meant that for us, Mr Al Fayed, who had died, and
15 the Princess of Wales, who also died, were to be
16 considered as passengers, and obviously
17 Trevor Rees-Jones was only injured.
18 So we had a discussion with the prosecutor
19 concerning the position we should adopt, bearing in mind
20 that usually for car crashes we do not proceed to
21 autopsies of the bodies of the passengers and we had no
22 element that would lead us to change that usual
23 procedure. So at that discussion we had, the decision
24 we made was to just have a forensic medical doctor to
25 examine the bodies externally.
14
1 Q. I see. So there was no need to have an autopsy of
2 either passenger, but you decided, in consultation with
3 the Public Prosecutor, to organise an external
4 examination; is that a fair summary?
5 A. I could add two sophistications. The one was that in
6 August, we knew that the Princess of Wales had undergone
7 extended medical examinations. The second thing that
8 I would like to say, the fact that I was not the one who
9 made the decision. It is the Public Prosecutor that
10 made it after discussion with me.
11 Q. Do you know who was appointed to conduct the external
12 examinations?
13 A. Yes, Professor Lecomte.
14 Q. At the time, was she the head of the Institute of
15 Forensic Medicine?
16 A. Yes, I think it was the case, yes.
17 Q. Her having been appointed, did a time come a little
18 later that morning when you were provided with the
19 results of her examinations?
20 A. Yes, I think it was at about 8/8.30 in the morning, but
21 once again it is too long ago for me to remember
22 precisely.
23 Q. Having received the results of the examination, did you
24 produce a certificate releasing the bodies of
25 Mr Al Fayed and the Princess of Wales for burial?
15
1 A. Yes, it meant that actually there were not any barriers
2 to their burial.
3 Q. Did that mean that having issued your certificate, there
4 was no legal reason for the bodies to be retained for
5 forensic examination in France?
6 A. Well, it meant that there was no forensic reason to
7 retain the bodies and it meant that the funeral
8 formalities could start.
9 Q. Did you have any further involvement with the treatment
10 of the bodies or their subsequent repatriation to
11 the United Kingdom?
12 A. Well, I had no decision to make in that regard, but
13 I must have been made aware that the bodies were going
14 to be repatriated to the United Kingdom.
15 I would like to clarify something. I would like to
16 say the same, that once the permit for the burial is
17 issued, there are specific procedures by a special unit
18 of the police --
19 THE WITNESS: No, no, not by a special unit.
20 A. It is not a special unit of police; it can be the same
21 police officers, that is the judicial police officers,
22 that perform administrative tasks not under the
23 authority of the prosecutor but under the authority of
24 the Prefect of Police; for example, closing the coffin
25 or moving the body outside of Paris and obviously
16
1 outside of the country. But once again, that does not
2 concern the Public Prosecutor.
3 Q. Now, Madame Coujard, were you aware on 31st August that
4 the body of the Princess of Wales had undergone
5 a process of embalming?
6 THE INTERPRETER: Can you repeat please?
7 MR BURNETT: Were you aware on 31st August 1997 that
8 the body of the Princess of Wales had undergone
9 a process of embalming?
10 A. I do not remember whether I was made aware of that that
11 particular day. Maybe that was later on. I have no
12 memory of being made aware of that particular piece of
13 information at any particular moment.
14 Q. Did you have any part in the decision-making process
15 that led to the embalming of the Princess of Wales?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Madame Coujard, I wish to read you something and then
18 ask your comment on it.
19 What I am going to read you comes from a document
20 produced by Mohamed Al Fayed in which he said that
21 the embalming was done on the specific instructions of
22 the British authorities. Then this:
23 "These instructions from Sir Michael Jay were,
24 from what I am given to understand, conveyed by
25 Sir Michael Jay to Madame Coujard of the Public
17
1 Prosecutor's Office in Paris."
2 A. No.
3 Q. Is there any truth in that whatsoever?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Can I return now to the events of 31st August 1997?
6 I understand that your boss, M Pages, returned to Paris
7 and you met him during the afternoon of 31st August. Is
8 that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Of course, at this stage, the journalists were in
11 custody, were they not?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Did you go with M Pages to the Brigade Criminelle to
14 extend the detention of the journalists by one day?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Had you become aware during the day of rumours that
17 photographs of the events surrounding the crash were
18 available and might be published?
19 A. Yes, there were rumours.
20 Q. Now, of course, the police had seized the cameras of the
21 journalists they had arrested, had they not?
22 A. Yes, but we did not know for sure that other journalists
23 were or were not present also.
24 Q. Is it because of the concern about photographs that you
25 went to search two agencies, namely Sygma and SIPA?
18
1 A. Well, I am not the one that made that decision. It is
2 the Public Prosecutor who had asked me to proceed to
3 those two searches.
4 Q. What was your role in the two searches, Madame Coujard?
5 A. It was to supervise them and they were being -- well,
6 they were being performed by police.
7 Q. As we understand it, the Sygma agency was the agency for
8 which Jacques Langevin worked. Do you remember that?
9 A. No, I do not remember.
10 Q. Do you remember any of the details of the search at
11 Sygma agency?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Do you remember that the search produced a number of
14 contact prints which the agency suggested had been taken
15 by a photographer they sent to the scene after the
16 crash?
17 A. No, I do not remember that.
18 Q. I wonder whether the notes of the search that I asked
19 you about at the beginning of my questioning have been
20 located.
21 Is there anyone there who can help?
22 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, it has been located.
23 MR BURNETT: Do you have them in front of you now, Madame?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Can I take you very quickly through this?
19
1 The first search is of the Sygma agency at 6 o'clock
2 on 31st August.
3 THE INTERPRETER: At what time? Sorry.
4 MR BURNETT: At 6 o'clock, sir.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. If you have the document in front of you,
7 Madame Coujard, which is a statement of yours from
8 the dossier, at the bottom of the first page do we see
9 the reference to Mr Langevin working for Sygma agency?
10 Do you find that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Then on the third page of the statement, we see an
13 account given by the man at the agency that he sent
14 photographers to the scene afterwards. Do we see that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And that he produced to you 23 prints. That is at the
17 bottom of that page.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. If you turn to the next page, Madame, we see that at
20 the top of the next page you record that all of the
21 photographs are views of the scene after the arrival of
22 the rescue services. Is that right?
23 A. Yes, I can see that.
24 Q. Can we look at the record of the search of the SIPA
25 press agency which took place at 8 o'clock that evening?
20
1 Do we see, towards the bottom of that page, a reference
2 to Mr Nikola Arsov who worked for the agency?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Then, similarly, questions asked of the staff at
5 the agency. Towards the bottom of the second page,
6 we see that M Sipahioglu was asked about photographs and
7 said he had none taken of the journey between the Ritz
8 and the scene of the crash.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. He gave you -- I am looking at page 4 now --
11 12 pictures, 11 of which followed the arrival of
12 the rescue services and one of which was taken earlier
13 in the day. That is the top of page 4.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Your statement records that you examined those
16 photographs and confirmed that. That is correct, is it?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Did you conduct any searches or attend any searches at
19 any other press agencies, Madame Coujard?
20 A. I think there were only two press agencies searched, but
21 I have no precise memory. The question was about how
22 many I conducted because I know that there were other
23 searches conducted by other magistrates.
24 Q. But these were the only two that you were involved in?
25 A. Yes. It seems to me, yes.
21
1 Q. Can I return then to the process in which the
2 photographers/the journalists were involved?
3 For how many hours could they be detained in
4 a police station before the judicial authorities needed
5 to become involved?
6 A. Well, they are initially informed that they are in
7 custody.
8 Q. You had extended their custody by 24 hours, if
9 I remember correctly.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. So what then needed to happen when 48 hours in custody
12 had passed?
13 A. Well, a decision had to be made concerning the way
14 the procedure should follow. One of the things,
15 a decision had to be made concerning the decision to
16 appoint or not an instructing and examining judge,
17 a magistrate. It was decided after discussion between
18 the Public Prosecutor and all of the people working with
19 him, including myself.
20 Q. Following that discussion, the examining magistrate was
21 appointed. Is that correct?
22 A. Well, following that discussion, we opened what is
23 called the "judicial information" and it is
24 the president of the higher court of justice said
25 that -- made a decision to appoint and instruct an
22
1 examining magistrate.
2 Q. Was that Judge Stephan?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Following his appointment, did he become responsible for
5 decisions concerning the custody of the journalists?
6 A. Well, there were no more in custody. They were
7 presented to the examining judge or magistrate and it is
8 that magistrate that was to make the decision of freeing
9 them on a provisional basis or not.
10 Q. So it was Judge Stephan who made the decisions after
11 that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Madame, did you have any further involvement in
14 the investigation that followed?
15 A. Well, the investigations were conducted by Mr Stephan
16 with the help of Mrs Devidal, another examining
17 magistrate. Sometimes they consult the Parquet,
18 the Parquet gives its opinion, but it is not any more
19 involved in the investigations themselves.
20 Q. One or two more questions. The first is this: have you
21 ever given an interview to any English or French
22 journalists about the events of that night?
23 A. No.
24 Q. One further question on that topic, or one or two
25 questions: our understanding of the French system, which
23
1 may be imperfect, is that investigations are carried out
2 in confidence.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, this was an unusual case. I just wonder whether
5 you can help me with this. Two days after the crash,
6 British newspapers were quoting the Paris prosecutor's
7 office as saying that Henri Paul's blood analysis
8 revealed that the alcohol level was illegal.
9 A. Well, I did not participate in that. I was not aware.
10 It did not happen at my level.
11 Q. Presumably you are not able to help us even with whether
12 it happened at all?
13 A. I think I recall there was a press release, but that is
14 a long time ago really.
15 MR BURNETT: Thank you very much.
16 Sir, those were the questions I had in mind. Would
17 this be a convenient moment?
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes. Just before we break off,
19 Madame Coujard, there is one question I would like to
20 ask. Witnesses have told us that photographers were
21 taking photographs of the Mercedes between the Ritz
22 Hotel and the crash, but we have not seen any such
23 photographs. Have you ever seen any photographs of
24 the Mercedes during that journey?
25 A. Well, first of all, I have only seen the photographs
24
1 that are part of the French procedure. If I recall,
2 I think there were photographs of the Mercedes on
3 Cambon Street. So I think you have to look at the
4 French procedural file because I have only seen
5 photographs that are part of that file.
6 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: So does it follow that you are
7 not aware of any photographs being in the possession of
8 the French authorities showing the journey of the
9 Mercedes after it left the Rue Cambon?
10 A. Well, I just remember photographs taken in Rue Cambon.
11 I can only rely on my memory and I can only remember
12 those photographs, Rue Cambon.
13 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We are very grateful to you.
14 Thank you very much. I am just puzzled, as I suspect
15 other people are, as to what may have happened to these
16 photographs and I thought you might be able to help.
17 Now we ordinarily have a break at this time in
18 the morning because the shorthand writer has to have
19 a slight rest.
20 The message that I have received is that M Monceau
21 is going to be available, no doubt at considerable
22 inconvenience to himself, to give evidence from half
23 past 1 our time, but it is essential that he starts at
24 half past 1. So we will break off now and resume,
25 I hope, after as short a break as we can keep it today,
25
1 members of the jury.
2 (10.50 am)
3 (A short break)
4 (11.00 am)
5 (Jury present)
6 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes, Mr Mansfield.
7 Questions from MR MANSFIELD
8 MR MANSFIELD: Good morning.
9 A. Good morning.
10 Q. Just before I begin, would you be kind enough to let us
11 know who the gentleman is who is sitting to your left?
12 A. Mr Patric Meydon(?), who is a barrister in Paris.
13 Q. Is he present to represent your interests?
14 A. I asked him to assist me.
15 Q. May we know who else is in the studio at the moment,
16 again to your left?
17 A. The Public Prosecutor for Paris, Mr Marin(?).
18 Q. Thank you. I want to, if I may, ask for your assistance
19 on procedure first of all. I should introduce myself.
20 I am Michael Mansfield, and I represent
21 Mohamed Al Fayed, whose son, Dodi, was killed in
22 the crash.
23 Now for the first 24 to 48 hours, who is responsible
24 for the investigation of the crash? Who is in overall
25 supervision?
26
1 A. The Public Prosecutor.
2 Q. Is it right that in relation to that, we have heard that
3 seven journalists were detained for garde a vue or
4 arrest?
5 A. Yes, I think there were seven.
6 Q. I want to remind you of their names and their agencies
7 because it is some time ago.
8 The first is Christian Martinez, who worked for
9 the Angeli agency. To save coming back to this, you did
10 not go to that agency that night, did you?
11 A. Which night?
12 Q. The night of the crash; in other words, either in
13 the early hours of the morning of the 31st or later on
14 on the 31st or for that matter on the 1st. Did you go
15 to that agency in that time?
16 A. No, I do not believe so. I do not recall.
17 Q. We have no records at the moment suggesting you did.
18 Can you help as to who did go to that agency?
19 A. I do not know whether anyone went there. I do not know.
20 Q. As you have the present public prosecutor in the studio,
21 would it be possible for that to be identified, namely
22 who went?
23 A. Well, everything is in the French procedural file. If
24 any magistrate of Paris went to that agency, bearing in
25 mind that the Public Prosecutor at the time was
27
1 Mr Bestard, who is not in the room, then it must be in
2 the file.
3 Q. The second name is a M Rat, from the Gamma agency. Once
4 again, it does not appear that you went to that agency
5 on 31st August 1997 or 1st September. Is that right?
6 A. Well, once again, I would refer to the French procedural
7 file that you should consult for that matter.
8 Q. Jacques Langevin, at the Sygma agency, you did go.
9 I will come back to that.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. The fourth name is a person called Serge Arnal.
12 Originally the agency attributed to him was Steels press
13 agency, and that again is not an agency you went to, is
14 it?
15 A. Same answer as before.
16 Q. Right. The fifth name was Laslo Veres. He was
17 freelance.
18 The sixth name was Nikola Arsov from the SIPA
19 agency, where you did go, so I do not come back to that.
20 Finally, Stephane Darmon, linked to M Rat at
21 the Gamma agency.
22 Now, those seven were detained for particular
23 reasons at that stage, is this not right: one, that
24 consideration was being given to their failure to assist
25 those who were in danger in the crash. Is that right?
28
1 That is the first reason?
2 A. I cannot confirm that there was an order in the reasons.
3 Q. What was the reason for their detention, garde a vue, at
4 that time?
5 A. Because the first witnesses had said that the driver had
6 been hindered and then, it is true, for the attitude
7 they had right after the crash.
8 Q. I was coming to the second reason. The second reason
9 you have just given, that they were hindered by vehicles
10 driven by journalists. Now, those are the two reasons.
11 The witnesses who were being seen at that stage in
12 the early stages on the 31st, I want to put four names
13 to you: Mlle L'Hostis, M Boura, M Partouche and
14 M Gooroovadoo.
15 Who decides on any charges that arise out of these
16 matters at the early stages?
17 A. Well, the decision to put them in custody belongs to
18 the judicial police officer that had started
19 the investigations, so he informs the Parquet, and it is
20 a magistrate from the Parquet that makes the decision to
21 extend the term of the custody. At the time, we did not
22 have to have specific charges. Even a witness could be
23 put in custody.
24 Q. Were there any witnesses in custody in this instance?
25 A. Well, of the four whose names you just quoted, no.
29
1 Q. This question may be a little more difficult. I will
2 take it slowly.
3 When the matter transfers to a juge d'instruction,
4 an examining magistrate, does there have to be an
5 evidential threshold for the matter to be transferred?
6 A. Well, we need to be aware of signs, matching signs, that
7 the particular person concerned was involved. So it is
8 an assumption.
9 Q. I am sorry, could I ask a supplementary question?
10 What is meant by "matching"? I think I understand,
11 but could you just explain what is being looked for at
12 that stage?
13 A. It is difficult to explain. Could you ask a more
14 specific question?
15 Q. Yes. Does there have to be certain specific evidence
16 suggesting involvement against each of the seven before
17 an examining magistrate takes it over?
18 A. No evidence, but signs that suggest their involvement.
19 When the matter is transferred to an examining
20 magistrate, it is because we think that the
21 investigations must be continued. In some cases it is
22 associated with the presentation to that examining
23 magistrate of people; in some cases, it is not the case.
24 Q. Is it right that the investigation that the juge
25 continues may change course if the juge receives
30
1 evidence from another source, of a different kind,
2 suggesting something else may have happened?
3 A. Well, it is not a very precise question. Could you
4 specify?
5 Q. Yes. If the juge receives some evidence suggesting that
6 it may not have been an accident, but that it may have
7 been a deliberately staged crash, that would be of
8 interest to the juge, would it not?
9 A. Yes, of course.
10 Q. Before I get to a specific item, I just want to ask you
11 a little bit more about your own investigations. Could
12 you kindly look at the record for the Sygma search?
13 THE INTERPRETER: Do you want the witness to look at that
14 document, to read that document again?
15 MR MANSFIELD: Well, no, not for the moment. It is just
16 there in case you need to refresh your memory.
17 I appreciate it is a long time ago and it is quite
18 difficult to remember.
19 Now, this search, the actual search, lasted about
20 half an hour. Is that right?
21 A. Yes, you may find this bit of information in the
22 document itself. I do not remember.
23 Q. No, it is on the last page.
24 A. Are we referring to the same document, marked "V599"?
25 Q. Yes, that is right.
31
1 A. That is our reference.
2 Q. Now when you went to these premises, when you went to
3 the premises of Sygma --
4 A. You have not answered. The question was: is it the same
5 document that --
6 Q. Yes, it is.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. D599, 598, 597, 596. The timing is on 596.
9 THE INTERPRETER: So it says 6.15 ...?
10 MR MANSFIELD: Yes. The search is on the last page, 6.45 to
11 7.15.
12 A. Well, it is one hour and 20 minutes because it is
13 supposed to start at 6 and it ends at 7.20.
14 Q. Yes. The search --
15 A. Well, actually I think it started at 6.15.
16 Q. Yes. That is when you started interviewing. The actual
17 search, the operation, was conducted from 6.45 to 7.15.
18 It is on the last page, D596.
19 A. No, I think it concerns -- what you are talking about,
20 6.45 to 7.15, it only concerns one office, one
21 department.
22 Q. All right. What were you looking for?
23 A. Photographs other than those that we could find from
24 the cameras seized from the photographers and, if
25 I remember well, especially photographs that we could
32
1 think were taken before the rescue services were on the
2 site.
3 Q. Well, when you were searching, did you ask the gentleman
4 at this particular agency -- so that it is clear, this
5 is Sygma and the gentleman who is in charge there is
6 Mr Henrotte -- did you ask him whether there was any
7 other film on the premises?
8 A. Well, we asked him what is in the minutes, in the record
9 of that search.
10 Q. The film that you were shown, you were shown 23 contact
11 prints.
12 A. Yes, it is what is in the record.
13 Q. The reason I am asking these questions is this: film and
14 negatives and photographs relevant to what happened
15 between the Ritz and the crash and in the tunnel have
16 gone missing?
17 A. Well, basically we had photographs and we were trying to
18 get to know if there were others.
19 Q. During your period as part of the procureur's office,
20 did you ever get to know that photographs and films had
21 gone missing?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Is this the first time --
24 A. Well, photographs -- which photographs are you talking
25 about?
33
1 Q. Well, it is a self-answering question, if I may say so.
2 Since they are missing, we don't know what they are.
3 However, it appears that more photographs were taken
4 between the Place de la Concorde and the tunnel and in
5 the tunnel.
6 A. Well, I cannot answer a question that suggests that it
7 may be known photographs had been taken.
8 Q. Well, were you aware that photographers had smuggled
9 film out of the tunnel before the police arrived? Did
10 you know that?
11 A. I do not remember at all.
12 Q. Well, just going back to Sygma, this first search you
13 conducted, did you secure the 23 contact prints that you
14 were shown? Did you take them?
15 A. Well, reading the record, it does not seem to be
16 the case.
17 Q. No. The question I have is: why did you not take
18 those 23?
19 A. Well, if I read the record, it is because they were
20 photographs that had been taken after the rescue
21 services had arrived.
22 Q. But if they are prints, there must be a film.
23 A. I would imagine.
24 Q. Yes. Well, did you imagine at the time to ask
25 the question of Mr Henrotte, "Where is the film"?
34
1 A. Well, if it is not in the record, it means that that
2 question was not asked.
3 Q. Yes. Why not?
4 A. Ten years later, I cannot answer this question.
5 Q. Would you agree that the initial search and questioning
6 was not very thorough, was it?
7 A. Well, I will let you make your own opinion concerning
8 this matter.
9 Q. You asked Mr Henrotte some questions; it is on the same
10 page so that you may follow. It is D597.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. There is a sentence suggesting that this is what he told
13 you, that he did not know whether M Langevin took any
14 photographs or what he did with them. Do you see that?
15 A. Yes, I can see that. I can see that sentence.
16 Q. Now M Langevin was already in custody. He had already
17 been detained. Did you ask M Henrotte whether he had
18 had any contact with M Langevin that day, by phone or
19 mobile?
20 A. Well if that question cannot be read in the record, it
21 means that I did not ask that question.
22 Q. Why did you not ask him whether there had been any
23 contact with the photographer to find out what he was in
24 fact taking photographs of? Do you follow? It is
25 a simple question.
35
1 A. Well, contact at what point in time?
2 Q. Well, any point in time; for example who sent
3 Mr Langevin on the shoot, at what stage did he go, was
4 there any feedback. Do you follow? A series of
5 questions about his movements that day?
6 A. Well I did not ask these questions because they are not
7 in the record and, ten years later, I cannot tell you
8 why I did not ask those questions.
9 Q. Well, can I move to the other search that you did of
10 the other agency that you went to, SIPA? That is D585.
11 It is 8 pm.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, once again, in this agency, so that it is clear,
14 you spoke to Mr Goksin Sipahioglu. Is that right?
15 A. Yes, it is what the record says and I can read that.
16 Q. Yes, I know. It is just for the benefit here of
17 the jury, who do not have these documents.
18 Now, on D582, that gentleman says that he is in
19 a position to give you "... 12 plates from exposures in
20 our possession".
21 "One of these plates concerns the journey from
22 the mansion [it meant the flat] and the other 11 were
23 taken after the arrival of the rescue services at
24 the Alma Bridge."
25 A. Yes, the fact that it says "mansion" indicates that
36
1 it was Rue Arsene Houssaye.
2 Q. Did you ask who had taken these photographs?
3 A. Well, if it is not in the record, it means that I did
4 not ask that.
5 Q. It does not appear that you asked who had taken them; it
6 does not appear that you asked for the film from which
7 they came. Do you agree?
8 A. Yes, if it is not in the record, it means that I did not
9 ask.
10 Q. It appears that you did not take the plates,
11 the photographic plates. Is that right?
12 A. Well, it says that -- the record says that I examined
13 the plates, that they seem to be -- well, that they were
14 in conformity with what had been described and did not
15 bring any useful element to the investigation.
16 Q. Yes, I know that is what it says. The question I put is
17 it appears -- and I want you to confirm -- that you did
18 not take into your custody the plates themselves, did
19 you?
20 A. Well, if it does not say so, it means that I did not
21 take them in my custody.
22 Q. So may I just stop for a moment and summarise?
23 You go on two searches. In both searches you are
24 shown photographs that you do not take, in both searches
25 you do not ask where the film is that relates to the
37
1 photographs that you are shown and in both searches you
2 do not ask who actually took the photographs.
3 A. Well, if it summarises the record, yes.
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Mansfield, in fairness to
5 the witness, she does record that the photographs that
6 she saw, certainly on the second search that you have
7 just been asking about, did not contribute any element
8 of use to the investigation, which would be consistent
9 with not taking them. Of course, looking at the film
10 may be another matter.
11 MR MANSFIELD: Yes.
12 Of course, at that stage of your investigation, you
13 would not know exactly where the investigation was going
14 to lead you, would you?
15 A. Well, I considered at the time, if I read the record,
16 that they were no use for the investigation.
17 Q. Yes, I appreciate that. All right. But do you agree
18 that you did not know then where the investigation was
19 going to lead you?
20 A. I do not understand the question.
21 Q. Very well. Now these searches you conducted with regard
22 to particular provisions of the penal code. An example
23 is on D584, you mention paragraph 434.4, paragraph 2 of
24 the penal code. Do you see? It is mentioned on D584 in
25 relation to the Sygma search?
38
1 A. Well, I make Mr Sipahioglu aware of this provision, but
2 it is the provision of the penal code. It is not
3 a provision of the code of criminal proceedings.
4 Q. Is it right that this article relates to effectively
5 obstructing an inquiry and concealing private or public
6 documents that may help or facilitate the search for
7 evidence? Is that effectively what that article deals
8 with?
9 A. Well, it is a warning that you give to the witness.
10 Q. Yes. And if the witness does not comply and conceals
11 a document, potentially has the witness or the person
12 committed an offence?
13 A. Well, it was just a warning. At that very point in time
14 I could not assume that Mr Sipahioglu was guilty of an
15 offence.
16 Q. I just want to deal with it generally.
17 A. Yes, but we could answer specific questions.
18 Q. I am going to ask you a specific question now, but it is
19 hypothetical.
20 If a police officer, a French police officer,
21 searching the Imperial Suite at the Ritz where
22 Princess Diana had stayed or Dodi Al Fayed's apartment
23 where she had also visited and found a record in either
24 of those places by Princess Diana which said this -- and
25 I am going to just put it slowly to you -- a letter or
39
1 a memorandum -- do you understand -- that indicated that
2 efforts would be made, if not to get rid of her, be it
3 by some accident in her car such as a preprepared brake
4 failure or whatever, at least to see that she was so
5 injured or damaged as to be declared unbalanced --
6 the question is this: such a record would be relevant to
7 your inquiries, would it not?
8 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Now, Mr Mansfield, before that
9 question is answered, that is an entirely hypothetical
10 question and I have concerns about the witness answering
11 it because it seems to me to touch potentially on
12 proceedings that have been taken in France and are quite
13 separate from these inquests.
14 MR MANSFIELD: Well, sir, I understand your concern, but
15 it is a matter that this jury may have to consider in
16 the longer term.
17 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Put in that form, I am not at all
18 convinced that it is an appropriate question. We may
19 have to hear argument about it.
20 MR MANSFIELD: Yes. Sir, may I just explain?
21 As far as I know, there is no one else giving
22 evidence -- if there is, then I will leave it for
23 them -- after this particular witness, who has
24 a responsibility for the investigation, particularly in
25 September 1997, when these matters were made clear to
40
1 the Metropolitan Police.
2 THE INTERPRETER: We cannot hear you very clearly.
3 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Mr Mansfield, we cannot hear you
4 very clearly. Can you restate the question?
5 MR MANSFIELD: Yes. May I just go back and I will go
6 slowly?
7 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Please.
8 MR MANSFIELD: It is not clear that we will be having
9 another witness from the procureur's office or a juge
10 d'instruction who had the responsibility for the
11 investigation in relation to material that would
12 be relevant to the investigation. We know by
13 18th September that the Metropolitan Police in London
14 had the information that I have just read out.
15 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: But not in the form that you read
16 it out.
17 MR MANSFIELD: Well, it is a note of a conversation. I will
18 make that clear. I appreciate you don't know this, and
19 I am sorry.
20 What the Metropolitan Police had was a note of
21 a conversation by her lawyer which had been recorded two
22 years before in 1995.
23 Now, sir, I am quite happy not to ask this witness
24 if I can --
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Well, Mr Mansfield, of course
41
1 I was not aware that you were putting this specific
2 question, but thinking about it, the position seems to
3 me to be this: my understanding is that your client has
4 brought proceedings in France, seeking to re-open the
5 French investigation that was closed some years ago,
6 the basis of that application being the document to
7 which you are now referring.
8 MR MANSFIELD: Yes.
9 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Now I have no objection to
10 the question being put to this witness for the jury to
11 hear the answer, but I am concerned that the French
12 authorities may have concerns about their witness, in
13 the sense that she is --
14 MR MANSFIELD: Yes, yes. I follow.
15 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: You follow -- answering these
16 questions, and I really put the marker down to give them
17 an opportunity of considering the position.
18 MR MANSFIELD: May I say at once, I had forewarned
19 Mr Burnett that I was going to ask this, so it is not
20 done without notice.
21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: No, no.
22 MR MANSFIELD: However, I am prepared obviously, bearing in
23 mind your concern, to use the phrase, to place this on
24 the back-burner for the moment.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Well, the witness has heard
42
1 the question and had an opportunity to consider
2 the position. Perhaps we can take it from there.
3 Madame Coujard, is this a question that causes you
4 any embarrassment to answer from the point of view of
5 the French proceedings?
6 A. Yes, because it is hypothetical.
7 MR MANSFIELD: It is not for the reason that we thought it
8 would be.
9 MR BURNETT: There it is.
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: It does not really help.
11 MR MANSFIELD: Well, I appreciate what she is saying. It is
12 hypothetical in this sense, that obviously this did not
13 actually happen during her currency and I appreciate
14 that.
15 A. I do not understand at all where you are going.
16 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I think we will have to put it on
17 the back-burner.
18 MR MANSFIELD: I think others here may know where I am
19 going, but ... hopefully.
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I think the point is there for
21 the jury ultimately anyway. I am not sure it is going
22 to help to get the witness to answer hypothetical
23 questions.
24 MR MANSFIELD: Can I just add one rider, not for this
25 witness, but for future reference?
43
1 The reason I ask it is because of the explanation
2 given by the Metropolitan Police as to why it was not
3 disclosed. That is the reason --
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: You can take that up with
5 the Metropolitan Police.
6 MR MANSFIELD: I will.
7 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: This is not a trial of the French
8 or the Metropolitan Police.
9 MR MANSFIELD: No, I do not intend it to be a trial of this
10 witness or anyone else. It is merely to look at
11 the overall context.
12 I will move to another topic. This concerns the
13 forensic examination that you requested in relation to
14 Princess Diana. At the time that you authorised or
15 ordered that, were you aware that there was to be, in
16 the United Kingdom, a full autopsy?
17 A. No, I do not think so.
18 Q. Did you have any contact at all with British Embassy
19 representatives, whether it be the Ambassador or
20 the Consul General or anyone else from the British
21 Embassy?
22 A. No. I do not remember having had any contacts with
23 representatives at the British Embassy.
24 Q. Do you know whether you signed the burial certificate
25 before the embalming had taken place or after
44
1 the embalming or don't you know?
2 A. Well, that certificate is obviously issued before any
3 embalming procedure starts, but anyway, I do not
4 remember any kind of embalming procedure being performed
5 that night, before the morning. But anyway, what is
6 sure is that it cannot start before that certificate is
7 issued.
8 Q. In any event, your recollection, is this right, is that
9 you don't recall being told anything about embalming?
10 Is that the position?
11 A. I do not remember having been told about it during
12 the night or during the day on 31st August 1997.
13 Q. Now, a final question is this: the choice of the
14 Brigade Criminelle. First of all, the Brigade
15 Criminelle normally deals with murders, kidnappings,
16 terrorism; is that right?
17 A. It is what they normally deal with, but I already
18 explained that it is possible for a matter that is
19 considered to be particularly difficult to be
20 transferred to them.
21 Q. I want to suggest to you that they hardly ever -- hardly
22 ever -- deal with road traffic incidents, do they?
23 A. Well, to my knowledge, I had no knowledge of such
24 a matter being transferred to them, but --
25 Q. Right.
45
1 A. -- I may not know everything.
2 Q. Well, I appreciate, but I suggest your knowledge is
3 correct.
4 Were you aware that one of the senior officers
5 concerned -- he was a major then, Major Mules. Do you
6 know Major Mules?
7 A. Yes, I do believe so, yes.
8 Q. He had spent 23 years with the Brigade and he had never
9 investigated a road traffic incident. Did you know
10 that?
11 A. Yes, but I answered concerning myself, not on behalf of
12 Mr Mules.
13 MR MANSFIELD: Sir, I have no other questions, subject to
14 that other matter.
15 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you very much. Mr Keen?
16 MR WEEKES: Mr Weekes, sir.
17 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Sorry, Mr Weekes.
18 MR WEEKES: Sir, I could endeavour to do it in a Scottish
19 accent but ...
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I should make it clear that this
21 witness has a limited time of half past 12, particularly
22 in relation to the next witness. I do not know how many
23 questions anybody wants to ask.
24 MR WEEKES: Sir, I am aware of that and I propose to deal
25 very briefly with one issue.
46
1 THE INTERPRETER: Is it possible to have a quick break?
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Would you like a break?
3 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Yes please.
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Five minutes, members of the
5 jury.
6 (12.03 pm)
7 (A short break)
8 (12.08 pm)
9 (Jury present)
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes, Mr Weekes.
11 Questions from MR WEEKES
12 MR WEEKES: Madame Coujard, my name is Robert Weekes. I ask
13 questions on behalf of the late Henri Paul.
14 I wish to ask you just about two matters. The first
15 matter will be the blood tests that were taken on
16 31st August 1997 and the second issue is that of the
17 press release.
18 Madame Coujard, I believe that you ordered
19 the autopsy of Henri Paul.
20 A. I do not remember whether it was me or Bernard Pages.
21 It is possible that it was me.
22 Q. Mr Pages was out of Paris, was he not, until the evening
23 of 31st August?
24 A. He arrived in the course of the 31st, so it might have
25 been me.
47
1 Q. Well, in any event, the autopsy took place at about
2 8 o'clock in the morning on 31st August, didn't it?
3 A. Yes, I do not remember that precisely.
4 Q. The autopsy direction, which was sealed by your office,
5 the prosecutor's office, included the direction to take
6 two identical batches of blood, didn't it?
7 A. Well, it was -- encompassed obviously the taking of
8 blood samples, but I do not remember whether two blood
9 samples had been ordered precisely.
10 Q. Well, I do not want to detain us unduly. The order
11 directs that two identical blood samples are taken and
12 I understand that that was standard practice, was it
13 not, for an autopsy in Paris at the time?
14 A. Well, you say that. It is possible. So if you ask me
15 questions about what I do remember -- I do not really
16 remember whether I personally ordered the autopsy and
17 I certainly don't remember whether I asked for two blood
18 samples to be taken.
19 Q. You were not at the autopsy, were you, Madame Coujard?
20 A. No.
21 Q. But you assumed that the autopsy had been performed
22 correctly because you signed the permission to bury
23 Henri Paul on 31st August?
24 A. I cannot say that I did not sign that permit, but I do
25 not remember it.
48
1 Q. Well, there is a document which bears the marker that
2 "Mrs Coujard, Deputy Public Prosecutor, Paris Public
3 Prosecutor's Office, section 1, granted permission for
4 burial today" in respect of Henri Paul.
5 A. Well, if it is in the file relating to the case, then it
6 must have been the case, but personally I have no
7 recollection today.
8 Q. Thank you. Do you recall on 1st September 1997, so
9 the day after the crash, directing Professor Ricordel to
10 do a blood test on some of the blood that was said to
11 have been taken from Henri Paul the day before?
12 A. I do not remember whether it was me or Bernard Pages who
13 ordered that examination.
14 Q. Is the same true of the examination of the blood which
15 was ordered to be undertaken by Dr Gilbert Pepin on the
16 same day?
17 A. Yes, I cannot remember whether it was me or Mr Pages who
18 gave the order to Mr Pepin.
19 Q. But you are aware that those tests were done and that
20 their results showed that the blood tested was about
21 three times over the alcohol limit in France?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And you received that information on 1st September 1997.
24 A. I do not remember whether I received that information on
25 1st September 1997, to be extremely precise.
49
1 Q. Would you recall that 1st September 1997 was the second
2 day of your investigation?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And it was also the day before the examining magistrate,
5 Judge Stephan, had even been appointed?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And it was likewise the day before either Mr Al Fayed or
8 the parents of Henri Paul were made party to the
9 proceedings?
10 A. I do not remember at which date they became parties.
11 Q. Well --
12 A. But it must have been after the examining magistrate had
13 been appointed.
14 Q. Indeed. I think it was the same day. It was
15 3rd September 1997.
16 So on this day, 1st September, somebody from your
17 office issued a press release to the world's media
18 saying that Henri Paul was three times over the alcohol
19 limit when he was driving the car.
20 A. Well, I already said that I was not involved at all in
21 the issuing of such a press release. The only person
22 who could issue that release would be the Public
23 Prosecutor, and it was -- it is not my office; it is
24 the Office of the Public Prosecutor that issued that
25 press release.
50
1 Q. I appreciate, Madame Coujard, for the avoidance of
2 doubt, that you did not issue that press release. I am
3 more interested in what you know about that press
4 release.
5 You said that the decision was not taken at your
6 level and you have just said that it had to be issued by
7 the Office of the Public Prosecutor.
8 A. Yes.
9 MR BURNETT: Sir, I am so sorry to interrupt, but I just
10 wonder whether we might be clear of the basis upon which
11 these questions are being asked. I do not recollect
12 Madame Coujard confirming or knowing anything about
13 a press release and I am not sure whether Mr Weekes has
14 one to show her to see whether she does know something
15 about it.
16 MR WEEKES: I am grateful to my learned friend.
17 At page 25 of the [draft] transcript, Madame Coujard
18 replied to a question posed by Mr Burnett that she
19 recalled there was a press release. That is the basis
20 upon which I ask the questions.
21 MR BURNETT: Sir, I wonder whether that might be clarified
22 because although we have not checked the transcript, our
23 recollection was that she said she did not recall one
24 being issued, but it may be that she missed it.
25 MR WEEKES: It is page 25, lines 7 to 8. I am told that
51
1 the words were "... I recall there was a press release,
2 but that is a long time ago really".
3 I only have two further questions in relation to
4 this press release. The first is: given what you have
5 said, that the decision to issue it was taken at a level
6 above you, and given that you have said it would have to
7 be issued by the Office of the Public Prosecutor, can
8 you tell us the name of the person who issued that press
9 release?
10 A. The person precisely? No.
11 Q. Can you tell us --
12 A. What I will say, the fact that bear in mind the way
13 the Parquet is organised, I do not believe that a press
14 release could be issued without the approval of the
15 Public Prosecutor.
16 Q. Who was the Public Prosecutor at the time?
17 A. I already said that it was Mr Gabriel Bestard.
18 Q. Do you have a copy of that press release or could one be
19 made available to you to send to us?
20 A. You mean today?
21 Q. Well, not necessarily today, but in short order, soon.
22 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Mr Weekes, there seems to be some
23 confusion here. You are asking for a copy of the press
24 release to be sent to you?
25 MR WEEKES: Well, not to me. It would have to be sent to --
52
1 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: To the court, sorry.
2 MR WEEKES: I apologise, Miss Gaffney. I would be asking if
3 a copy of that press release could be made available to
4 the Coroner for the purposes of these inquests.
5 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Thank you.
6 A. Well, I am not the one to ask that one.
7 MR WEEKES: We may have to take it up with Mr Bestard.
8 I wish to ask you one further matter that follows on
9 from that. I understand, Madame Coujard, that you
10 continued to play a role in investigating this case
11 until 1999.
12 A. Well, I stayed at the Parquet of Paris in the same
13 section, under the authority of Mr Bernard Pages, until
14 1999. It is the section that kept on working on
15 the case and it is true to say that I participated in
16 the drafting of the final document, which is called
17 a retinitois(?) definitif in French. I have to specify
18 that the investigation was led by both examining
19 magistrates.
20 Q. I understand that, Madame Coujard. Is the document you
21 referred to the one dated 3rd September 1999? It is
22 translated as "notice of dismissal" in our file.
23 A. Well, I participated in drafting. It was submitted to
24 the Public Prosecutor and then transferred to the
25 examining magistrate and I had no responsibilities
53
1 anymore with regard to that document at that stage. And
2 I had certainly no responsible in it being made public
3 and I do not even know if it was made public.
4 Q. Yes. Well I want to ask you about something which
5 happened much earlier than 1999.
6 Two days after Judge Stephan was appointed examining
7 magistrate, so that is 5th September 1997, Judge Stephan
8 ordered Dr Pepin to conduct some more tests on some of
9 the blood that was said to have been taken from
10 Henri Paul on 31st August --
11 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Now, Mr Weekes, what does that
12 have to do with this witness?
13 MR WEEKES: Sir, if you will bear with me, I have two
14 questions which pertain to the issue of the press
15 release.
16 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We are running out of time, you
17 are well aware that other people need to have an
18 opportunity as well and at the moment I cannot see what
19 reason there is for asking this witness this question.
20 MR WEEKES: I apologise, sir. The witness may not be able
21 to answer the question I am about to put, but it does
22 bear directly on the evidence she has already given in
23 relation to the issue of the press release.
24 Those blood tests, do you recall, Madame Coujard,
25 indicated that the blood had a carboxyhaemoglobin level,
54
1 a carbon monoxide level --
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Weekes, this witness is not
3 concerned with those blood tests.
4 MR WEEKES: I can promise I have two questions, sir.
5 A. I have no recollection.
6 Q. I am grateful. Do you know whether there was a press
7 release released after those blood tests?
8 A. I do not know. I was not responsible for the press
9 release.
10 MR WEEKES: I am grateful, Madame Coujard.
11 Sir, I hope I have not taken too much time.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you.
13 MR WEEKES: Sir, I should have pointed out, sir, the
14 carboxyhaemoglobin level I referred to is 21 per cent.
15 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Croxford?
16 MR CROXFORD: Well, sir, I had hoped to ask just a few
17 detailed questions on the searches, but I think I can
18 hear the blade of the guillotine drop and therefore
19 I will sit down.
20 MR HORWELL: I have only a few.
21 Questions from MR HORWELL
22 MR HORWELL: My name is Richard Horwell and I appear on
23 behalf of the Chief of London Police.
24 Madame, I have only a few questions to ask you. In
25 relation to the searches of Sygma and SIPA, were you
55
1 looking for any photographs that had been taken from
2 the Ritz to the Alma Tunnel up until the time
3 the emergency services had arrived?
4 A. According to my recollection, we were looking for any
5 photographs that could be useful in the framework of the
6 investigation, so this kind of photographs and others.
7 Q. Did you see any?
8 A. No. Well, reading the record, it is not the case, no.
9 Q. Can I ask you to look at your statement of
10 15th November 2006 please? Could I ask you to go to
11 the second page? It is a paragraph that begins in
12 English. It is about halfway down:
13 "At that time I telephoned Mr Bestard, the Public
14 Prosecutor."
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, is it right, as we see from that paragraph, that
17 you indicated to the Public Prosecutor that you were
18 considering to appoint the Brigade Criminelle to conduct
19 the enquiries?
20 A. Yes, it was one suggestion that I made to him in
21 association with the first division of the judicial
22 police, and the road traffic unit was -- yes, one of the
23 things that I suggested to him.
24 Q. The question I ask is that: this was a suggestion that
25 came from you?
56
1 A. Well I do not remember at all what we said precisely,
2 but I gave a description of what had happened and he
3 asked me for my opinion and I told him that that could
4 be one of the solutions.
5 Q. Can I simply ask you this? Why did you suggest
6 appointing the Brigade Criminelle? What was your
7 reason?
8 A. Well, I have already answered this question. I thought
9 that the Brigade Criminelle was appropriate in the sense
10 that it was going to be a long, difficult and thorough
11 investigation and they had the necessary skills to
12 conduct it and to ensure the necessary level of legal
13 safety, if you will.
14 Q. Thank you. Last point: you issued the burial
15 certificate in relation to the Princess of Wales and
16 Dodi Al Fayed.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. In relation to the Princess of Wales, were you aware
19 that Professor Riou had pronounced her dead at 4 o'clock
20 in the morning?
21 A. I was called to be informed that she had died. I think
22 I remember receiving the phone call, I think from
23 the headquarters of the judicial police, to inform me
24 that she had died.
25 Q. Were you aware that the doctor who had pronounced her
57
1 dead had completed a document entitled "accidental death
2 certificate"?
3 A. Well, once again, all I can remember is that I received
4 a phone call from the judicial police telling me that
5 she had died, but when I got back home, TV was on on
6 a permanent basis and I remember seeing the press
7 conference with that professor.
8 Q. You don't remember seeing the certificate, is that
9 right?
10 A. I do not remember seeing the certificate.
11 MR HORWELL: That is all I ask. Thank you.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Burnett?
13 Further questions from MR BURNETT
14 MR BURNETT: Two matters. The first matter -- I promise you
15 it will not take long -- you have referred on a number
16 of occasions to the "Parquet". Could you simply explain
17 who or what it is?
18 A. Well, it is the Public Prosecutor and all of the
19 services in the authority. It is to distinguish those
20 people from the judges who judge independently.
21 Q. The second matter, to clarify something that I think was
22 responsible for, the confusion with the press release.
23 Were you aware on 1st September 1997 that a press
24 release had been issued by your department?
25 A. I think I must have been made aware.
58
1 MR BURNETT: Thank you. That is all I have to ask, sir.
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Madame Coujard, that is all
3 we require. I am extremely grateful to you for agreeing
4 to give evidence to these English inquests when you were
5 under no obligation to do so.
6 It is of considerable importance to us that people
7 like you do give oral evidence for the jury to hear and
8 I am very grateful to you. Thank you.
9 We will resume, if we may, at half past 1 our time,
10 that is half past 2 in Paris, in order to accommodate
11 Mr Monceau.
12 (12.42 pm)
13
14
59
Français