Nearly three decades after the tragic Paris car crash that claimed Princess Diana’s life on August 31, 1997, her brother, Earl Charles Spencer, has finally spoken out, revealing chilling excerpts from the personal diary of the ill-fated driver, Henri Paul. The entry, described as Paul’s “last words on paper,” paints a harrowing picture of chaos inside the Mercedes: “The car flew like madness, the princess used both hands to hold on but ultimately could not.” This revelation reignites one of the most enduring mysteries in modern history – was Diana’s death a tragic accident, or something far more sinister?

The world remembers that fateful night vividly. Diana, 36, and her companion Dodi Fayed were fleeing paparazzi after dining at the Ritz Hotel in Paris. Henri Paul, the hotel’s acting security chief, took the wheel of a Mercedes S280 at high speed through the Pont de l’Alma tunnel. Traveling at estimates up to 120 km/h in a 50 km/h zone, the car slammed into a pillar. Paul and Fayed died instantly; Diana succumbed hours later in hospital from massive internal injuries. Only bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones survived, though with severe amnesia about the crash.

Official investigations – including France’s 1999 probe and Britain’s exhaustive Operation Paget in 2006 – concluded it was a tragic accident caused by Paul’s impaired driving. Toxicology reports showed his blood alcohol level three times the legal limit, combined with antidepressants and other medications. He was speeding to evade photographers, and none of the occupants wore seatbelts except Rees-Jones. The 2008 British inquest ruled “unlawful killing” due to gross negligence by Paul and pursuing paparazzi.

Yet conspiracy theories have swirled for years. Mohamed Al-Fayed, Dodi’s father, long insisted it was murder orchestrated by British intelligence to prevent Diana marrying a Muslim or bearing his child. Claims ranged from a white Fiat Uno causing the crash, to flashed lights blinding Paul, to swapped blood samples hiding the truth. Operation Paget debunked them all: no pregnancy, no engagement ring intended that night, no MI6 plot. Paul’s unexplained wealth – over $200,000 in accounts despite a modest salary – fueled spy rumors, but no evidence linked him to intelligence services.

Spencer’s decision to reveal the diary now, after 30 years of silence, stems from a desire for closure amid ongoing public fascination. He has spoken emotionally about Diana’s loss as an “amputation,” visiting her grave at Althorp Estate nearly daily. Recent interviews highlight his grief and the family’s pain, especially as anniversaries approach. The diary entry humanizes Paul, a 41-year-old bachelor from Brittany who passed a pilot’s medical just days earlier, yet drank heavily that night – two Ricards at the Ritz bar, possibly more elsewhere during a mysterious three-hour gap.

Why surface this now? Spencer, protective of Diana’s legacy, may aim to counter persistent myths while honoring her memory. He has shared home videos and reflected on her humanitarian work, from landmines to AIDS awareness. The crash robbed the world of an icon who captivated billions, drawing 2.5 billion viewers to her funeral.

This diary bombshell doesn’t overturn facts but adds raw terror to the narrative. Diana, the “People’s Princess,” clung desperately as the car hurtled uncontrollably. It underscores the deadly mix of fame, pursuit, and human error. As Spencer says, Diana deserves her place in history – not just as a victim, but a force for good. Yet questions linger: Could better security have saved her? Was Paul’s impairment the sole cause?

Twenty-eight years on, the world still mourns. Diana’s sons, William and Harry, carry her torch through charities. Spencer’s revelation reminds us: behind the glamour was vulnerability, and one frantic drive ended it all. The truth, as investigations affirm, is tragic but clear – no grand conspiracy, just a devastating accident that shattered lives forever.