Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Fayed Asked Employee to Lie

Can you think of a more despicable man in the public eye than the Phoney Pharoah, Mohammed Fayed? Ok, Ok, I grant you that Max Clifford runs him close. At the Diana Inquest today, Fayed's Head of Security at the Villa Windsor told the court that the Harrods owner had ordered him to fabricate a story that Diana was pregnant and that she and Dodi planned to live at the Duke and Duchess of Windsor's house.

Richard Horwell QC, representing the Met asked Reuben Murrell: "On behalf of Mohammed Fayed you were being asked to rewrite history?

Mr Murrell replied: "I was being asked to be part of something I knew to be a falsification."

Horwell: "You were being asked to pretend that Diana and Dodi were interested in living together at the Villa Windsor?"

Murrell: "Yes".

I raise this to remind people of the Neil Hamilton v Fayed case when Hamilton alleged that Fayed had ordered his employees to lie on his behalf about brown envelopes. On that occasion the court chose to believe Fayed's version of events. The evidence at the Inquest today confirms my belief that they got it wrong, and that Fayed will stop at nothing to get his own way. It's also why I haven't set foot inside Harrods for ten years. Hattip London Evening Standard

31 comments:

bill said...

Did they lie about Tim Smith as well?
I thought he coughed.

Unsworth said...

"Fayed's Head of Security at the Villa Windsor"

Should that not read "former Head of Security"?

Anonymous said...

Ever wondered why Fayed waited ten years after Diana's death before ordering the inquest?

Private Eye suggested that it was due to a French law which says that employers can only be held responsible for their employees' deaths for up to ten years after the event.

dearieme said...

Interesting. I concluded at the time that however sleazy Neil Hamilton was, you couldn't possibly convict him on the word of Fayed employees.

Oscar Miller said...

The Hamiltons were treated abominably. It just shows the power of anti Tory prejudice (manufactured so assiduously by Mandelson, Campbell and co) that the justice system could find the evidence of a proven liar like Fayed "compelling" and that the public had been so groomed to disparage anything Conservative that they lapped it up. I'd urge everyone to read Jonathan Boyd Hunt's valiant book - Trial by Conspiracy: The lies, cover-ups and injustices behind the Neil Hamilton affair. Then as now - it was always nu Labour and their fellow travellers who were the real sleaze bags - peddling lies purely in the interest of seizing power by whatever means necessary.

Anonymous said...

The Neil Hamilton case must eventually be re-examined. In that case, I have always believed there was a clear miscarriage of justice, based on false testimomy by Fayed, a man whom the Board of Trade had already called a liar.
In respect of the present case, we should also remember that Fayed has several times publicly and directly accused a person (by name) of murder. This should have landed him in court long ago, and perhaps will eventually do so. We can but hope.

Rachel Joyce said...

I always suspected Neil Hamilton was innocent. It is worrying if he was in regard to justice in this country.

judith said...

I have yet to learn why there needed to be a third inquest into this tragedy, and why the Establishment is allowing itself to be used by Fayed - at my expense, I believe.

molesworth 1 said...

Private Eye has been documenting the various schemes & machinations of the 'fugger for years, & very interesting it is too. I expect when it all comes out it'll make a rather good movie...

zendo said...

Absolutely disgusting!
Is there anything Neil Hamilton can do now?

Trumpeter Lanfried said...

This inquest is a grotesque waste of public money. Whatever the verdict, Fayed will still go on pumping out his conspiracy theory until the day he dies and conspiracy theories will always find an audience.

When the verdict goes against him, as it undoutedly will, he should be ordered to pay the entire costs.

crackers said...

Its why I contributed to Hamilton's libel action despite having a low opinion of his grubby persona. His judicial treatment is a disgrace and a travesty. Another feather in the cap too for the retired pornographer, alcoholic in remission, bully and manic depressive, the filthy scum that is Campbell.

Fayed is evil.

Paul Burgin said...

I have to say I do get annoyed every time Al Fayed opens his mouth, spouts his conspiracy nonsense and the Express just about follows his line. I just hope he will shut up if he loses this case but I doubt it. He will just try and waste more taxpayers money trying to impose his fantasies

freedom to prosper said...

The problem for the Hamiltons was their undisputed week-end at the Ritz without that there wasn't a shred of evidence. It will all come out one day like the Archer affair. People cannot keep their traps shut.

Anonymous said...

I don't suppose you will let through this extract from Wikipedia.

"Neil Hamilton took Mohamed Al-Fayed to court for libel in November 1999, but lost on 21 December after the 11 jurors determined that he had corruptly taken payments from Mobil Oil in 1989.[6]. He also lost the subsequent appeal in December 2000. [7]. In May 2001, unable to pay his legal fees and costs amounting to some £3m, he was declared bankrupt. He was discharged from bankruptcy in 2004."

Anonymous said...

It all comes down to who has a great lawyer. Fayed was lucky that George Carman QC was around to brand Neil Hamilton a man 'on the make, and on the take..'.

And despite this little setback today, the Phoney Pharaoh has Michael Mansfield QC on the case, so don't be surprised if the court of public opinion finds, at the end of this trial, that there might, just might, be a possibility that Diana was pregnant and that Prince Phil the Greek got the 'dark forces' [copyright Paul Burrell] to bump her off.

It would be great to think that this inquest would put an end to this speculation once and for all - but I very much doubt this will be the case...

Anonymous said...

Iain, look on the bright side - Fulham got dumped out of the FA Cup by Bristol Rovers..

Anonymous said...

Fayed has made so many offensive and baseless allegations over the years that he must surely soon be in line for a suit for libel. Is it still possible to prosecute people for criminal libel? It would be great if the phoney Pharaoh could go to prison for at least one of his many misdeeds.

Clothilde Simon

Anonymous said...

The Greasy Phoney Pharoah has used all these smoke & mirrors distractions to avoid facing up to the fact that his son was killed by his drunken employee and no one else.

Ergo, if followed thru to it's logical conclusion of where the buck stops, means that ultimately it is the Greasy Phoney Pharoah is responsible for the deaths of the people involved.

dodi's coke dealer said...

I cried for days when I heard that Dodi had been killed

K S Rees said...

I think it is all just very very sad. It is about time it was all just let to rest and left well alone.

I don't know what Fayed hopes to achieve.

A Swansea Blog

Chris A said...

And you can write now the letter he'll get the bouffanted one to write to the press come the end of the inquest: gross miscarriage of justice, establishment cover up blah, blah. How Michael Cole who used to be a respectable journalist can live with himself now I have no idea.

Anonymous said...

Hamilton lost because he managed to be even less credible than Al Fayed. It was the man from Mobil who did for him, not Al Fayed's lackeys.

Oscar Miller said...

Actually Alistair Campbell finally did for the Hamiltons with a juggernaut of a spin operation. It was Campbell who masterminded the anti sleaze election in Tatton. NuLab even approached Jill Morrell, long suffering girlfriend of John Macarthy before pompous old white suited Martin Bell saw the chance to revive his flagging career. (and btw Campbell's own diaries are the source for these facts). That Tatton election, the icon of NuLab squeaky cleanness over Tory "sleaze" sealed the success of the mendacious nulab brand the country has still not recovered from.
PS Anonymous 8.26am: the mobil oil testimony is a red herring. What did for the Hamiltons judicially was the Downey report stating that Fayed's evidence was "compelling".

neil craig said...

I presume the Hamilton's don't have the wherewithal to reopen the case however the Sheriden case in Scotland does establish a precedent for the authorities bringing someone to trial for perjury in such a case, even when the presumed perjurer won. I would not like to thinkl the authorities are using differnet rules for a charmless multi-millionaire as they use against a chancing Trot.

Anonymous said...

Oscar Miller said...
"PS Anonymous 8.26am: the mobil oil testimony is a red herring. What did for the Hamiltons judicially was the Downey report stating that Fayed's evidence was "compelling"."

You were on the jury were you?

Oscar Miller said...

You were on the jury were you?

January 24, 2008 12:31 PM


No I wasn't on the jury smartass. I was referring to the outcome of the Downey report undertaken on appeal, that astonishingly swept aside the fact that Fayed had access to cross examination questions through the good offices of Benji 'the binman' Pell who raided the dustbins of Hamilton's lawyers. Downey did actually find that there was insufficient evidence Hamilton had received cash from Fayed via Ian Greer. But he then sealed Hamilton's fate by finding that Fayed's evidence remained "compelling" despite Fayed's (and the Guardian's) dirty tricks. But oh what a glorious day it is to rake up NuLab's 'anti-sleaze' spin just as it is all blowing up in their collective faces. I wonder if Peter Hain, like Tony Blair, has any regrets about the crusade against 'sleaze' now?

Oscar Miller said...

Did they lie about Tim Smith as well?
I thought he coughed.

January 23, 2008 6:42 PM


Yes - Tim Smith did admit taking cash from Fayed. Ironically what that proved was Fayed's (as well as Tim Smith's) corruption. What was never proved - and this was the key charge - was that money had been illegally routed through the Tory lobbyist Ian Greer. The Guardian was out to get Greer and prove institutional corruption in Tory ranks. They never actually did this, but managed to create enough stink to suggest it anyway.

Jonathan Boyd Hunt said...

Oscar Miller January 23, 2008 7:12 PM:

Thank you for your kind words about my book on the Neil Hamilton affair: "Trial by Conspiracy," about which Iain Dale opined, in a private letter to me dated 13th November 1998:

"‘what a superb book you have written ... describing how two decent people have been ruined through no fault of their own … the media cannot ever accept that they have got something wrong…"

For those interested in the true story of the Hamilton affair, either read my book or check out The concise true story of the 'cash for questions' affair.

As for the comment by Anonymous at January 24, 2008 8:26 AM:
Hamilton lost because he managed to be even less credible than Al Fayed. It was the man from Mobil who did for him, not Al Fayed's lackeys.

There is no doubt that the "Mobil allegations" – that Hamilton had demanded £10,000 from Mobil Oil after tabling an amendment to the then Finance Bill - were the killer blow to Hamilton's defence of his character.

However, these new allegations were entirely – i.e. 100% – dependent upon the testimony of Mobil's tax barrister, a certain Professor Peter Whiteman QC, who acted as the interface between Mobil and Hamilton, and whom Hamilton claimed had engaged him as a proper parliamentary consultant.

Hamilton did indeed register a consultancy with Mobil in the Register of Members' Interests, which seems a little odd if one is also given to extortion, as Whiteman implied he was.

However, what was not reported in the press or broadcast media AT ALL was the fact that Professor Whiteman was, coincidentally, also Fayed's own personal tax adviser and had been so for the previous 14 (fourteen) years.

Of course, Professor Whiteman could have been telling the truth and Hamilton could have been lying. But it's interesting that Professor Whiteman's enduring employment by Fayed – and massive conflict of interest – was never reported by Britain's wonderful truth-seeking media.

For those interested in the Mobil issue check out the exchange between myself and a certain BBC troll who goes by the name of "John Reith," in a particular column of the Biased-BBC Blogspot.com

SACKERSON said...

Oscar Miller (Jan 23): a propos the evil-combatting Guardian, is it true that this newspaper employs a marriage-breaking adultress and a police murderer? What are the terms of the trust under which this august publication operates?

Oscar Miller said...

Jonathan Boyd-Hunt - thanks for clarifying the nature of the testimony of the man from Mobil oil. The entire affair stinks to high heaven and deserves proper exposure in the MSM. I can only second Iain Dale's appreciation of your book and all your work. Of course the political ramifications of this go to the heart of the essential deceit of the NuLab project, the complicity of the media and the destructive fallout we're all experiencing.