The book's backcover blurts that the author uses «unique contacts in the secretive worlds of intelligence and royalty», but you and I have read so many magazine articles and books with leaks from intelligence sources and rivers of mud from royalty close friends, servants, and bodyguards, that the book could not be defended on that merit alone.
It also claims to be «astounding [for] blowing the lid off the secrets the Establishment does not want us to know», but that's not true for Al Fayed Senior and plenty of journalists have exposed that and more, a good number of times, even quoting people that this book also cites as sources.
I made myself a duty to read first A Royal Duty (Paul Burrel, 2003) and listening to The Bodyguard's Story (Trevor Rees-Jones 2000), plusa few others, as well as to the grieving father's accusations and the French and English authorities official reports (as far as these have been made public). Naturally I made mental notes of an unexplained point here, a surprising inuendo there, a gross fact overlooked elsewhere. I am not paid to keep tabs on unexplained facts in car crashes, security videotapes that appear and disappear, and relations between who was at the scene of the murder, sorry, the accident when Diana and Dodi (and please do not forget, Monsieur Henri Paul) died.
The merit of this book is that it exposes in a clear, matter-of-fact (at times even irritating) way a possible link of persons and events, through time and space, until they sort of meet at fatal pilar 13, Alma Tunnel, Paris, on the fateful 31 August 1997. The book makes clear that fate did not play a part in this tragedy, that every step of the «actors» was logical per se, and names the people and the institutions that are to blame. Like in some of Agatha Chistie's crime murders, you may end up thinking this is a bit far fetched, but on second reading you realise that the Author did not let a stone unturned, and you can not explain ALL the facts and events in a more logical way.
It makes for fascinating reading - and very, very disturbing to people who still accept the idea that we are living in a law abiding world.
To reach 5 stars the book should have been longer and spell out in dense footnotes it's sources. Not that I doubt things and sources are true, as I remember having read them first place in the world media.