‘The Crown’ will present Mohamed al Fayed’s claims that Diana was pregnant in 1997

We’re at the point where the British tabloids are openly begging Prince William to react/overreact to both The Crown Season 6 and Omid Scobie’s Endgame, neither of which have come out yet. I find it interesting that William hasn’t briefed any friendly reporters about either project… yet. But the media is definitely goading him and trying to incite him into throwing a hissy fit. These next two months will be fascinating. So, what’s the latest attempt? The Sun swears up and down that William will be incandescent with rage at Netflix’s The Crown, because the series will properly present/dramatize Mohamed al Fayed’s claims that Dodi Fayed and Princess Diana were murdered in some kind of establishment plot, and that Diana was pregnant at the time. Mohamed al-Fayed actually did say all of that, it’s not like Peter Morgan is making it all up.

The Crown is set to anger Prince William again by repeating lies that his mum Diana was pregnant when she died. The outlandish claims were made by late Harrods boss Mohamed Fayed whose son Dodi was killed with the princess in the 1997 Paris car crash.

In the Netflix series, Fayed (played by Salim Daw) will be heard claiming the crash was the result of an establishment plot to kill Diana (Elizabeth Debicki) to stop her marrying Dodi.

A TV insider said: “This is likely to enrage the Prince of Wales, who has been upset by many Crown storylines that have featured his mother. After it emerged her 1996 Panorama interview with Martin Bashir was obtained by deception, William asked that it never be seen again. But The Crown chose to ­recreate it against his express wishes. Hearing the claims about his mother’s pregnancy and the plot will feel like salt in the wound, particularly as so many of them have been debunked over the years.”

[From The Sun]

It’s sad that William is being presented as the kind of son who would be angrier at “Diana was pregnant” as opposed to “Diana was murdered in an establishment plot.” I mean, it’s probably true that William would care more about a pregnancy conspiracy than an assassination conspiracy. Anyway, Mohamed al Fayed was presented as a bitter, delusional man post-1997, but looking back at his claims now, after seeing how the same establishment has reacted to Prince Harry and Meghan’s exit from the UK, I think Mohamed al Fayed understood that something wasn’t right, that there were too many unanswered questions, that a coverup was afoot. Harry even indicated, in Spare, that he doesn’t believe the official story.

Photos courtesy of Netflix.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

45 Responses to “‘The Crown’ will present Mohamed al Fayed’s claims that Diana was pregnant in 1997”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jais says:

    Think it was also in the Anderson Cooper interview that he was asked about the investigation. Didn’t he say both he and William were not happy with it?

  2. Eleonor says:

    I lost interest in The Crown, but my mum is a HUGE Dianalooney, basically if I am into gossip it’s her fault.
    If I remember correctly Diana had a relationship with a Pakistani surgeon (I don’t remember the name), the relationship ended because he couldn’t stand the media circus around her, and Dodi was her way to make him jealous. I remember the pregnancy rumours, and to me it was BS , and still is.
    Kudos to the surgeon who has never sold her out.

    • Zapp Brannigan says:

      It was Hasnat Khan, I think the media scrutiny and the worry that he couldn’t keep her safe (provide her security personnel) ended the relationship.

    • Professor Plum says:

      Hasnat Khan was the Pakistani surgeon.

  3. moderatelywealthy says:

    People wearing grey made a decision with the Prince of Wales approval to make Diana´s life miserable and difficult after she left, to reel her in.

    We know how the same office employed a similar campaign to bring back into the fold a ” rogue” member of the RF. We saw how the same office saw no problems in intensifying said campaign,. even when someone was pregnant and suffering.

    Come on, it is not hard to conclude that , no, the RF did not hire the paparazzi, they did not plan the car chase with the specific goal to have Diana die or lose a baby we still do not know it existed, but they obviously knew the risks, and were more than willing to let it all play it out. A win -win for them.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Yes, the Royal Family enabled the environment in which saw Diana lose her life. There’s no denying that and their treatment of Harry and Meghan proves it.

    • Snuffles says:

      Exactly. Charles couldn’t bare the thought of Diana thriving after leaving and outshining him. She was already doing it while within the system. Imagine how she would have soared without their shackles. Charles couldn’t have that.

  4. Brassy Rebel says:

    So if William is unhappy with the interview his mother gave and wants to silence her forever, all British media, including The Crown, must oblige him? It’s clear that press freedom in Britain exists only for the royals.

  5. Rapunzel says:

    “It’s sad that William is being presented as the kind of son who would be angrier at “Diana was pregnant” as opposed to “Diana was murdered in an establishment plot.” I mean, it’s probably true that William would care more about a pregnancy conspiracy than an assassination conspiracy. ”

    Of course he’d be angrier at her being pregnant. Dodi wasn’t white. That’s only sad as it reflects Will’s racism.

    • lanne says:

      How dark would Diana’s baby be after all?

      We have already seen them deny Lili and Archie. He would have definitely denied a half brother or half sister. We know he would rather see his mother dead than happy because he’s already shown he’d rather see his brother dead than happy.

    • Beverley says:

      William would be appalled to have a half-sibling by Dodi. No matter how sincerely he claims they are a “not racist” family, the world knows better. We all can see what has happened and continues to this day. Neither the British media nor the Royal Family can deny their blatant racism.

  6. Nubia says:

    So was Diana becoming a nuisance to them because of the paparazzi frenzy or they simply didnt want the Future King to have a mixed race sibling!? Either way they havent learned anything in almost thirty years.

    • aftershocks says:

      I do not believe the rumor that Diana was pregnant. The rumor may have risen out of al Fayed’s grief-stricken wishful thinking. Dodi & Diana had only recently met each other and thus, they were still in the ‘getting to know each other’ phase. Dodi had just been forced, by his father, to break off an engagement with his ex-girlfriend, in order to woo Diana. Plus, Diana was obviously on the rebound, and not fully over her deep feelings for Hasnat Khan. These facts do not support the pregnancy speculation.

      • lanne says:

        The pregnancy speculation at the time was just speculation, for the reasons you named. But for that speculation to be repeated now is much more significant. We have seen how the British royals and media have reacted to mixed-race royal children. I think it’s a way to open commentary on the royal family’s racism.

      • Emmlo says:

        I agree, Diana wasn’t pregnant. She wasn’t naïve about what an unwed pregnancy would mean for her – no way would she have been careless with someone that new to her life. Besides which, Rosa Monckton testified about Diana having her cycle while on the boat with the Fayeds. I believe Rosa.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Lanne: “But for that speculation to be repeated now is much more significant… I think it’s a way to open commentary on the royal family’s racism.”

        More significant in what way, though? It is still groundless speculation, soundly debunked by a close friend of Diana’s. In his book, Harry describes being present when his mother first met Dodi al Fayed. It was early to mid-summer before Harry and Will departed for Balmoral. Such a brief matter of weeks for Diana and Dodi being in each other’s company. No, I do not think such speculation is warranted. I believe the pregnancy speculation began as an overdramatic, over-romanticized, grief-stricken reaction to their tragic deaths.

        In any case, there’s nothing wrong with reflecting on the prospect of D&D’s union having lasted, and offspring resulting from such a union. (See the interesting article below about an artist who got into trouble for doing just that though). Still, such discussions can take place, without resorting to using erroneous speculation for the purposes of “opening commentary on the BRF’s racism.”

        We already have the uncalled for racially-motivated attacks against the Sussexes front and center. Thus, there have already been discussions taking place regarding British systemic racism, the class system, and BRF racism.

      • CherryBerry says:

        They were engaged, so they were past the ‘getting to know you’ part. Maybe that’s why they became engaged? Who knows, but the fact that she was cremated (and so quickly) raises questions.

      • Scarlett says:

        I hear you but this pic of Diana’s tummy looks pregnant to me.
        What do you think? Scarlett x

  7. snappyfish says:

    So revisionist history seems to be the way of the upcoming Crown series. This post isn’t about either son. After the accident, Fayed went a little mad. Understandably he lost a beloved son and was immersed in grief and the death of the princess was devastating. But there are other reasons he went on the “they killed them” rant. It was his driver, who was drunk, behind the wheel. I never understood why they left the Ritz that night if the paparazzi was so aggressive. Fayed owned the place, stay in the presidential suite until all the kerfuffle died down. I do agree there are a lot of unanswered questions but at the end of the tragedy there was an impaired driver behind the wheel who thought they were fine. The worst kind. My opinion, is that the comments about Diana trying to make jealous Hasnet mentioned upthread are spot on. I don’t believe she was pregnant, as her friend, Rosa Monckton came out many times to refute that claim or the one that she was madly in love with Dodi. I understand not wanting to believe the stories you are told about the death of a loved one, especially a beloved mother, but the whole “they killed Diana” seems like a fan fiction and more that Fayed was trying to cover his own liability in the deaths.

    • FHMom says:

      Perfectly said. The truth doesn’t matter anymore. People love a good conspiracy theory, especially when it involves murder, sex, money and a famous person. Dodi was not a great love for Diana. This was just his father’s spin on the tragedy. I don’t watch The Crown, but I adored Diana, and this is very irresponsible fan fiction. I think her family should keep quiet and not lower themselves by commenting.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ The Crown has used a great deal of dramatic license over the course of its run. There are specific historical details and characterizations which I know are untrue. OTOH, there are many other incidents and characterizations which are kept closer to factual accuracy. Some of the casting is very problematic, while other cast members are spot-on.

        I disliked many aspects of The Crown, season 5. However, I love Elizabeth Debicki as Diana. Yet, the production is overly focused on the melancholy, morose details of her life, which mostly leaves no room for depicting the naughty, delightful, fun-spirited parts of her personality. For me, that’s a huge drawback. OTOH, the casting of Camzilla is great, and I feel that the final episode is very revealing in its coverage of the genesis of Camzilla’s comeback campaign, with the help of p.r. guru, Mark Bolland.

        My advice is: Take it all with a grain of salt, or Don’t watch.

    • AnneL says:

      I’ve read that the family of the driver was very upset that the accident was largely chalked up to him being drunk. They said he wasn’t a drinker and didn’t abuse alcohol. Also that there was some camera footage from the hotel or wherever he was when he left to drive them, that showed him steady on his feet and seemingly sober.

      It is possible that the toxicology report could have been tampered with, someone paid off to do that and also to keep that camera footage under wraps?

      I don’t know what to believe but I certainly wouldn’t put it past the Men In Gray to do something like that.

      • snappyfish says:

        @AnneL. I completely understand the family of Paul defending him after his death. The French inquest reported he tested over the legal limit. There was also a drug, tiapride in his system that people take to help them stop drinking, prozac and the bartender at the Ritz said he had been drinking in the bar while Dodi & Diana ate their dinner. Its all very sad and tragic.

      • CherryBerry says:

        There was also the mysterious white fiat that was in the tunnel with them but disappeared afterwards. Wasn’t there also CCTV footage missing? I believe every CCTV footage conveniently failed to catch Diana on her route to the tunnel. Even in the tunnel itself, it was said there was none. Harry tried to imply in his book that he suspected foul play.

    • aftershocks says:

      Sure @Snappyfish. But there’s a whole lot more to what actually happened than any of us realize. People involved in the lab testing of Paul’s toxicology samples are on record as stating that tampering occurred with the test results. Why was this particular Mercedes used, when the seatbelts were not working? Why did it take over an hour for Diana to arrive at a hospital located ten minutes away from the accident scene? Why were some witnesses not interrogated?

      Also, try explaining away the pap photographer who had been tailing Dodi & Diana over their entire vacation. He moonlighted as an M16 informant. This pap was found, weeks later, burned to death in his vehicle. See my below posts about these unexplained and little discussed details which, of course, are not included in the official ‘cover-up’ investigation.

      • Ciotog says:

        French ambulances stabilize the patient before driving to the hospital, unlike American ambulances which scoop up the patient and transport immediately.

      • Tessa says:

        The French ambulance treatment did not work for Diana. Several cardiologists commented that the overly long trip to the hospital doomed Diana. The ambulance should have gone to the nearest hospital

    • Emmlo says:

      Well said. I agree with you wholeheartedly and I also have empathy for Mr. AlFayed’s suffering.

  8. ao says:

    A physic said that it was a murder, they did something to the car. Speculations, yes, the driver was drunk however it was a huge accident to be honest. It doesn’t add up.

    • ao says:


    • aftershocks says:

      @AO, it has been factually stated that the seatbelts in the Mercedes that crashed, WERE NOT WORKING. 👀

      It is so often loudly fingerpointed that, ‘Diana did not buckle-up in the car’s seatbelt.’ Uh well, how could she if the seatbelts were not operational? 🤔😟🥺

      • snappyfish says:

        @aftershocks. & yet the only survivor was wearing his seatbelt. Many people don’t fasten seatbelts when they travel in the rear of a car. There is so much speculation. I always wondered why she wasn’t rushed to a hospital until a friend in Paris said that the ambulances are actually fully equipped surgical vehicles. I’m sure everyone involved, in hindsight, thinks of a hundred things they should have done. As I said, it is all very sad and tragic.

      • aftershocks says:

        To each their own way of looking at this. Believe whatever makes you feel comfortable. 🤷🏽‍♀️

        It’s clearly possible the seatbelts weren’t working in the back, but were working in the front. For sure, some backseat passengers do not always buckle-up. However, Diana, as someone who was accustomed to buckling up, may have tried to do so, and the belts were not operational. No one can prove what happened inside the vehicle when they first entered it.

        I am skeptical of all the ‘official’ investigation claims. In addition, I am leery of the huge frenzy around people claiming Diana was at fault in her own demise: “She wasn’t wearing a seatbelt!” 😱 “Diana could have survived if she had worn a seatbelt!” 🤞 Ad infinitum…

        As well, there is irrefutable evidence that the Mercedes they were in had been completely totalled in a prior road calamity, after it had been stolen. There have been investigations and discussions about whether or not repairs to the vehicle were sufficient enough to have allowed it to be back on the road! 🤯 There are obviously way too many discrepancies, mysteries, troubling coincidences, failures in judgment, evidence of tampering and cover-up, and unanswered answerable questions.


        There’s absolutely no excuse for not getting Diana to the hospital as soon as possible, no matter how surgically decked-out the ambulance is supposed to have been. 🙄

      • Tessa says:

        The ambulance did not have an operating room. She needed to get to a hospital and onto surgery. The ambulance driver bypassed a hospital ten minutes away

  9. aftershocks says:

    The problem with outright stating that the Ritz security guy/ driver of the car was drunk, is that the toxicology test results were undeniably tampered with. This was also part of the overall cover-up strategy of the official findings. I do believe the driver had a drink at the bar. But my take is that something may have been put in his drink, because he was definitely not visibly sloshed! Why would the other three occupants in the vehicle have allowed him to get behind the wheel, if he was as drunk as is claimed?

    There’s proven murkiness and tampering involved with the driver’s toxicology test results. The tampering was likely done to hide what had been placed in the drink, as well as to increase the alcohol levels. A pap photographer who doubled as an M16 informant, was tailing Diana and Dodi during this entire trip. He owned a white vehicle similar to the car witnesses say was also in the tunnel that evening. This mysterious pap photographer/ spy was later found burned to death inside his conflagrated vehicle. Just sayin’ 🙈 🙉 🙊

    • Mimi says:

      The fact that people have witnessed what this family tried to do to Meghan and Harry in real time yet still believe three people, one of them a security guard, willingly got into a car with a drunk driver is incredible. Henri-Paul had no known history of drinking but he’s going to choose to do it that night while he’s escorting the most famous woman in the world? That defies logic. Isn’t it interesting how the ruthless British media has largely left Trevor Rees-Jones alone and accepted his claim of having no memories of the accident? None of this is coincidental. They might not have planned the accident but the BRF knew what could happen by removing her security and they no doubt ensured that the blame would not be pointed at them when the worst happened.

      • snappyfish says:

        @Mimi… Henri-Paul was an alcoholic . He was on Tiapride which is a medication for alcoholics. I have heard many say he didn’t look drunk, he may not have been drunk but he could have been impaired. The Ritz bartender said he served him while Dodi & Diana where at dinner. I dont’ think there was anything sinister going on with Paul. I think he thought he was okay. He might have been had there not been a high speed chase into the tunnel. A driver completely in control might have had the same outcome under those circumstances. Its all very sad and tragic and pointing fingers at anyone now seems rather sadistic especially for entertainment purposes

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Nothing about any of the horrible things that happened to Diana, much less anything surrounding the deadly crash in the Paris tunnel, should ever be described as, ‘entertaining.’

        That doesn’t mean documentaries, biographies, plays, films, re-tellings in Diana’s own words, and docudramas about the People’s Princess and the events surrounding her death, won’t be produced and aired until the end of time.

        How fortunate for Diana’s son, Prince Harry, to have had the presence of mind, courage, and good sense, to get his family up outta there, so as to prevent a repetition of these BRF toxic series of ‘sad, tragic,’ coincidental, and very suspicious occurrences.

      • snappyfish says:

        @aftershocks… I said entertainment. not entertaining..i.e. The Crown which is what this thread is about. It is in poor taste to feature this event with the “Fayed” fables set forth as truth. You are right though in that this will be debated & all sorts of series will be aired until the end of time.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Snappyfish, as you can see, I also referenced so-called ‘entertainment,’ in the second paragraph of my previous post. So, you accept that due to who Diana was, what she endured, and the tragedy of her death, filmmakers, historians, artists, and playwrights, et al., will continue to be interested in re-telling, investigating, and/ or dramatizing her story.

        I will wait until I see The Crown, season 6, and then assess its contents. Whether or not debunked speculation about a deceased individual is in poor taste or not, depends upon how such speculation is handled within the context of a dramatized series that has received both praise and criticism over its long run. To each their own.

        I would also point out that documentaries, dramatizations, films, and plays can be educational, inspirational, and uplifting (or not), in addition to serving as entertainment.

    • Gaah says:

      Actually they announced that he was drunk before the intial toxicology report came out. There is also video footage of that night of Henri Paul balancing just fine to tie his shoe and everything showed that he was not overtly drunk. Also, why did it take 10 years after Diana’s death before the Brits started an inquest into the crash and why did they rely so heavily on the French reports esp since there were gaps in the French report. There is a doc on Tubi that goes over some of the unusual actions during the investigation esp with the photog who was found burned in his car with 2 bullet holes in his head and they claimed suicide. (Not sure how you shoot yourself in the head twice and set your car on fire at the same time).

  10. JoanCallamezzo says:

    Snappyfish I think it’s possible the toxicology report was switched out.