Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/03/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re[2]: [Leica] Princess Di and The Drunk Driver (off-topic)
From: Peterson_Art@hq.navsea.navy.mil
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:42:30 -0500

     
     Trying to assign responsibility is like a dog chasing its tail; that's 
     the dilemma our legal system is beginning to find itself facing at the 
     end of the 20th Century.  Simply put, responsibility is a fiction!
     
     Art Peterson
     

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: [Leica] Princess Di and The Drunk Driver
Author:  leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us at internet
Date:    3/4/98 9:16 AM


Marc James Small wrote:
     
> At 05:57 PM 3/3/98 -0600, Eric Welch wrote:
> >No! Please don't spread that rumor again. It's not true. A drunk 
> driver
> >driving the princess killed her. The pursuing photographers were 
> incidental
> >to the issue, and are guilty of bad taste, but not killing her. 
>
> Please!  Don't spread that rumour again!  The driver DID have an 
> illegal
> BAC but there hasn't been any evidence presented that this had any
> relationship at all to the wreck.  It MAY have been what killed her, 
> but we
> simply do not know.
     
Please!  Don't spread that rumor again!   Charles killed her.
     
If he hadn't married her, nobody would have heard of her.  The photogs 
would not have been following her, and she would have been driving 
herself.
     
Stephen Gandy