cromwell wrote:
> "Ron" <ron_winn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:47fd0bf9_2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>So Trevor did have a seat belt. Or did he? Has it been decided he was
>>wearing his seat belt to have survived that collision? Just look at the
>>damage to that car. Would he have come out of it alive had he not been
>>wearing his seat belt? I think it was decided he had to be wearing it
>>despite it being contrary to bodyguard practice of not being free &
>>unrestricted in movement in town driving.
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
> For you to spew this nonsense after all that has been published, after
all
> that is known, is the ultimate flogging of dead horses. Idiot!
>
> No such decision on the seat belt was ever made - that's your warped
little
> fantasy. The seat belt question was part of an 'expertise' commissioned
by
> Stephan, during the original French investigation. This was conducted
by
> two crash experts Michel
> Nibodeau-Frindel and Bernard Amourourx who submitted their re****t to the
> Magistrate on the 1st November 1998. Here's
> what they concluded,
>
> "The seat belt is in perfect shape and cannot have been fastened. There
is
> a
> light scratch showing that Trevor may have tried to put it on when
seeing
> the crash coming."(The Bodyguards Story. p. 295)
>
> David Price is a Forensic Accident Investigator, who worked for the
> Metrapolitian Police investigation Operation Paget. Paget was given
access
> to the Mercedes and Price examined it, paying special attention to the
seat
> belts. He concluded,
>
> "that none of the seat belts were being worn at the time of the impact,
> including that of Trevor Rees-Jones. From the nature of marks found on
his
> seat belt, it is considered unlikely that he was even in the process of
> attempting to put it on at all at the time of the crash." (The Operation
> Paget inquiry re****t into the allegation of conspiracy to murder, p 421)
>
> Geoff.
Correct! And of course we still have THE question for all those who
think they see outside influences, whether it be flashes of bright
light, planted bombs or other devices.
It is the first question. It is the question which puts everything into
perspective. It is the question which should abruptly stop further
flights of imagination from those who see conspiracy and even murder in
any unusual event. The question is....WHY THE HELL WOULD THEY BOTHER?
LC
|
