Princess Diana’s brother Charles Spencer has slammed BBC for sending him a “piecemeal apology” for using fake documents in order to obtain his sister's famous TV interview 25 years ago, reported People.
Spencer had sent a scornful letter to BBC’s head in which he accused the outlet for whitewashing the unethical tactics employed to secure Diana's 1995 interview on Panorama, in which she said there were “three of us” in her marriage — a clear reference to Camilla Parker Bowles, then mistress of Prince Charles.
According to a story published back in October this year, the Panorama interviewer Martin Bashir created bogus bank statements before the November 1995 interview in a bid to convince Spencer that one of his staff was leaking information about the princess’s family. A 1996 BBC internal investigation concluded that the faked papers had "no bearing" on the interview, a claim Spencer dismissed while accusing BBC of "sheer dishonesty.”
“They [BBC] have yet to apologise for what truly matters here: the incredibly serious falsification of bank statements suggesting that Diana’s closest confidants were spying on her," Spencer said in a statement. "This was what led me to talk to Diana about such things. This in turn led to the meeting where I introduced Diana to Bashir, on 19 September 1995. This then led to the interview," he added.
"BBC has so far refused to acknowledge the above. They claim Diana wasn’t misled. They have ignored my inquiry as to whether the apology over their false bank statements extends to the ones that actually persuaded Diana to meet Bashir.”
In a letter to the director-general of BBC, Tim Davie, published by the Daily Mail on Tuesday, Spencer, 56, calls for a new inquiry. “There needs to be a much larger apology: One directed posthumously to Diana; to all who were grossly lied to — including a global audience; and to me.”
Have something to add to the story? Share in the comments below.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ