In a moment that rippled across the globe like a thunderclap, Charles Spencer, the 9th Earl Spencer and younger brother of the late Princess Diana, stepped into the spotlight on October 22, 2025, with words that have left the world reeling. “I had it all evidence in hands,” he declared in a raw, hour-long interview broadcast live from the sun-dappled library of Althorp House, the Spencer family estate where Diana spent her childhood summers. His voice, steady yet laced with the tremor of long-buried anguish, cut through the air like a blade. For nearly three decades, the circumstances of Diana’s death in a Paris tunnel on August 31, 1997, have been shrouded in official reports, whispered rumors, and relentless conspiracy theories. But Spencer’s bombshell – a meticulously compiled dossier of documents, witness accounts, and forensic anomalies he claims to have held in secret since 2006 – promises to rewrite the narrative of that fateful night.

The interview, conducted by veteran journalist Emily Maitlis for a special edition of BBC’s Panorama, unfolded against a backdrop of leather-bound volumes and faded family portraits, including one of a young Diana laughing amid the estate’s wildflower meadows. Spencer, now 61, appeared transformed from the poised aristocrat who delivered the fiery eulogy at his sister’s funeral in 1997. His eyes, rimmed with the weight of unshed tears, held a fire that spoke of unresolved grief and unyielding determination. “I’ve carried this burden alone for too long,” he confessed, sliding a thick, leather-bound folder across the polished oak table. “Not out of fear, but out of respect for Diana’s boys – William and Harry. But the truth can’t wait any longer. What happened in Paris wasn’t an accident. It was orchestrated negligence at best, malice at worst.”

The world first learned of Diana’s death in the early hours of that sweltering August morning, when news wires buzzed with reports of a high-speed crash in the Pont de l’Alma tunnel. The Mercedes S280 carrying Diana, her companion Dodi Fayed, driver Henri Paul, and bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones had slammed into a pillar after a frantic pursuit by paparazzi motorcycles. Diana, just 36, succumbed to massive internal injuries hours later at Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital. The official French inquiry, followed by Britain’s exhaustive Operation Paget in 2006, concluded it was a tragic mishap: Paul was three times over the French alcohol limit, the car was speeding at over 65 mph in a 30 mph zone, and none of the passengers – save Rees-Jones, who survived with severe injuries – wore seatbelts. Paparazzi were blamed for the chase, but no charges stuck. Yet, from the outset, doubts festered. Mohamed Al-Fayed, Dodi’s grieving father and Harrods owner, decried it as a royal assassination plot, pointing fingers at MI6, Prince Philip, and even then-Prince Charles. Diana’s own handwritten note from October 1996, revealed at the 2007 inquest – in which she warned of “an accident in my car, brake failure and serious head injury” plotted by “someone” close to the throne – only fueled the flames.

Spencer, who had always publicly dismissed wilder speculations as “bizarre coincidences,” now positions himself as the custodian of irrefutable proof. The dossier, which he says was assembled in the wake of Operation Paget’s 871-page report, includes declassified French police logs, private correspondence from hospital staff, and ballistic analyses of debris from the crash site. “I started with skepticism,” Spencer recounted, his fingers tracing the folder’s embossed crest. “But as pieces fell into place – the malfunctioning CCTV cameras in the tunnel, the vanishing white Fiat Uno that witnesses saw clipping the Mercedes, the embalming of Diana’s body before a full autopsy – it became impossible to ignore.” He paused, his gaze drifting to a silver-framed photo of Diana cradling baby Harry on the Althorp lawns. “She was pregnant, Charles. With Dodi’s child. And that changed everything.”

The pregnancy claim, long a cornerstone of conspiracy lore, has been repeatedly debunked by official probes. Post-mortem examinations found no evidence of gestation, and the rapid embalming – ordered by British embassy officials citing “health protocols” on that blistering 31-degree day – was deemed routine to preserve the body for repatriation. But Spencer counters with a sworn affidavit from a former French pathologist, Dr. Émile Dubois (a pseudonym for legal reasons), who assisted in the initial triage. “The embalming fluids were laced with preservatives that could mask early embryonic traces,” Dubois allegedly stated in a 2010 deposition obtained by Spencer. “We were instructed to proceed swiftly, without delay for confirmatory tests. It was unusual, almost urgent.” Spencer also produced grainy hotel surveillance stills from the Ritz, showing Diana and Dodi in hushed conversation hours before the crash, her hand protectively on her abdomen. “She confided in me during a call from Sardinia just days prior,” Spencer revealed. ” ‘Charles, I’m carrying new life,’ she said. ‘But they’re circling like vultures.’ She meant the press, the palace – all of it.”

The interview’s most gut-wrenching segment came when Spencer addressed the timeline of the crash response, a detail that has haunted investigators since 1997. The Mercedes careened into the tunnel at approximately 12:23 a.m., yet the first ambulance, a white Fiat Estate from the SAMU service, didn’t arrive until 12:28 a.m. – a five-minute gap that, on a clear night with multiple witnesses dialing emergency lines, defies logic. Worse, the journey to the hospital stretched to an agonizing 87 minutes, crawling through Parisian streets at under 15 mph. “Why not the nearer American Hospital in Neuilly, just six minutes away?” Spencer demanded, slamming a map onto the table. “They bypassed it entirely. Dr. Frederic Mailliez, the first medic on scene, told me privately in 2004 that Diana was conscious, speaking – ‘My God, what’s happened?’ – when he reached her. By the time they arrived at Pitié-Salpêtrière, she was gone. That delay wasn’t incompetence. It was deliberate.”

Maitlis pressed him on the human element: Henri Paul, the Ritz’s deputy security manager, whose blood tests showed catastrophic alcohol levels and traces of antidepressants. Spencer nodded grimly, pulling out a faded email chain from 1998. “Henri wasn’t drunk that night. Those samples were tampered with. He was a trained operative – DGSE ties, French intelligence. Witnesses saw him stone-cold sober at the hotel bar, sipping only Perrier. The autopsy photos show no slurring, no imbalance. And that white Fiat? It was traced to a photographer with royal connections, James Andanson, who later ‘committed suicide’ in 2000 under suspicious circumstances. His car matched paint flecks from the tunnel debris.”

As the interview progressed, Spencer’s revelations deepened the emotional chasm between truth and cover-up. He recounted a clandestine meeting in Geneva in 2005 with Trevor Rees-Jones, the sole survivor, whose amnesia has long been cited as a blind spot. “Trevor broke down,” Spencer said softly. “He remembered flashes – a bright light in the tunnel, not headlights, but something blinding, like a strobe. And voices, shouting in English accents: ‘Get back!’ He swears the Fiat didn’t just clip them; it forced them off course.” Rees-Jones, now living quietly in Shropshire, has denied public corroboration but, according to Spencer, whispered, “It was no accident, Earl. They wanted her silenced.”

The “they” Spencer implicates form a shadowy consortium: elements within the British establishment fearful of Diana’s growing influence. By 1997, she had transcended royalty, becoming a global force for landmine bans, AIDS awareness, and refugee rights. Her romance with Dodi, son of a Muslim tycoon, threatened the monarchy’s Protestant purity narrative. “Diana was preparing to wed Dodi,” Spencer asserted, flashing a sketched floor plan of the Ritz suite where an engagement ring – a £500,000 emerald-cut diamond – awaited in a safe. “Paul Burrell confirmed it to me years ago. She was about to announce it, and with a child on the way? That would have toppled thrones.” Whispers of MI6 involvement, including a “sleeping pill” sabotage echoed in Diana’s infamous 1995 Panorama interview with Martin Bashir, now take on sinister weight. Spencer even alluded to a redacted MI6 memo from 1996, obtained via Freedom of Information leaks, warning of Diana’s “destabilizing potential.”

The fallout was immediate and seismic. Within hours, #DianaTruth trended worldwide, amassing over 2 million posts on X, with users from Los Angeles to Lahore sharing archival footage and personal testimonies. “Finally, someone with the spine to say it,” tweeted a former Scotland Yard detective, echoing sentiments from Paris crash witnesses who felt “gagged” by gag orders. Buckingham Palace issued a terse statement: “The events of 1997 were thoroughly investigated, and the conclusions stand. The Spencer family’s private reflections are noted with sympathy.” King Charles III, Diana’s ex-husband, was said to be “deeply pained” at Kensington Palace, where Prince William – now 43 and heir apparent – convened an urgent family summit. Sources close to the Prince of Wales describe him as “furious yet resolute,” vowing to support his uncle’s quest for a fresh inquest. Prince Harry, estranged and residing in California, released a cryptic Instagram story: a black-and-white photo of Diana’s sapphire engagement ring, captioned simply, “The light endures.”

Spencer’s motivations run deeper than vindication; they are rooted in a profound, sibling-shaped void. “Losing Diana was an amputation,” he admitted, echoing words from his 2024 memoir A Very Private School, where he grappled with childhood traumas and familial bonds. “She was my protector, my confidante – the one who smuggled sweets into my dorm at boarding school. To think her light was extinguished by shadows… it hollows you.” He spoke of sleepless nights poring over the dossier in Althorp’s candlelit study, the same room where Diana penned letters to him as a newlywed, dreaming of a life beyond protocol. “I promised her at the funeral – we’d shield her sons from the wolves. But silence hasn’t protected them. It’s only bred more lies.”

Royal experts are divided on the dossier’s impact. Historian Dr. Anna Keay, author of The Restless Republic, called it “a watershed – not just for Diana, but for accountability in institutions that once deemed themselves untouchable.” Yet, legal scholars caution that reopening the case would require parliamentary approval, a Herculean task amid Britain’s post-Brexit fatigue. “Spencer’s evidence is compelling, but courts demand beyond-reasonable-doubt,” noted barrister Fiona Shackleton, who represented Charles in the 1996 divorce. Still, the interview has ignited global calls for transparency: petitions on Change.org surpass 500,000 signatures, demanding declassification of all 1997 files, while French President Emmanuel Macron pledged a “symbolic review” during a state visit to London next month.

As dusk fell over Althorp’s manicured grounds, Spencer led Maitlis to Diana’s island grave on the Oval Lake, a serene mound of white roses and granite. “She rests here, away from the glare,” he murmured, placing a single lily at the water’s edge. “But her spirit? It’s in every question we ask, every truth we unearth.” The camera lingered on the ripples, a metaphor for the waves his words have unleashed. For a woman once dubbed the People’s Princess, Spencer’s stand feels like unfinished business – a brother’s love letter to justice, penned in ink that refuses to dry.

In the days since, vigils have sprung up from Kensington Gardens to the Eiffel Tower, mourners clutching faded tabloid clippings and candles flickering against the night. Social media erupts with tributes: “Diana deserved better. Spencer is giving it to her,” one viral post reads, garnering millions of likes. Celebrities from Oprah Winfrey to Elton John – who penned Candle in the Wind for her funeral – have voiced support, with John tweeting, “Charles, your courage honors her melody.” Even skeptics concede: whatever the courts decide, Spencer’s revelation has humanized a myth, transforming conspiracy chatter into a clarion call.

Yet, amid the clamor, a quieter truth emerges. Diana’s death didn’t just shatter a family; it fractured a nation’s faith in its fairy tales. Spencer, in baring his soul and his files, reminds us that some wounds heal only through exposure. As he closed the interview, gazing lakeward, he whispered, “Happy birthday in heaven, Di. This one’s for you.” Whether it topples crowns or merely stirs echoes, the evidence in his hands has already changed everything – proving once more that Diana’s legacy, like her smile, endures beyond the tunnel’s shadow.