Customer Reviews

Diana: Secrets & Lies

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

I've had several of Mr. Davies books and found each to contain weak writing, wild speculation and possibly even a hatred/envy for the Princess. This book is no different, he spends lots of time rambling on about her good works and skills and then will rip into the Princess for a variety of things.
I find the title "Diana, Secrets & Lies" to be interesting becasue Davies seems to imply that most of the secrets and lies in the story were Diana's although he often rambles off about some other members of the royal family.
One of the most outrageous things in the book is Davies virtual, near continuous insistence that Prince Harry is James Hewitt's son. He even has the nerve to quote Hewitt denying this 'fact', something I personally don't believe that lowlife would do, he'd want the attention.
The first two reviewers liked the Diana murder conspiracy segment, it is interesting but not very well developed, I'd like more on that one.
Ingrid Seward for all her faults is a much better writer, getting her books instead might prove to be the better investment.

When I read the first few pages of this book, I thought it would be fair and balanced with an honest look at the couple and perhaps shedding some light on conspiracy theories involving Diana's death. I was wrong. I was incredulous at some of the ideas presented by the writer. The worst was the author's insistence that Diana was to blame for the marital disaster when she allegedly cheated on Charles in 1983 (he has very very flimsy "evidence" for this) and didn't know if Harry was sired by Charles or Hewitt!! First of all, despite all the insistence by the author on a "resemblance," I see none. Harry looks like a Windsor with the Spencer red hair, and he is Charles' son. Case closed. Charles and Diana in their respective biographies (via Dimbleby and Morton) maintain that Harry was very much a planned child. Hewitt denies being intimate with Diana before 1986. He would have nothing to lose if he said he was intimate before--indeed he would probably welcome the publicity of possibly siring Harry. And wouldn't even Davies look at pictures of Harry and Hewitt and see no resemblance between them? This sort of hearsay gossip hurts Diana's reputation and certainly would be painful to Harry (Is Davies trying to help Charles' cause in marrying Camilla and propagating this spin against his late ex-wife?) I was equally astonished that Davies insists that Camilla and Charles were just friends and became lovers only after Diana cheated with Hewitt in 1983! Give me a break! Camilla and Charles' affair was an open secret as far back as the early 1970s and courtiers knew that Charles was intimate with her over the years. This was no innocent "friendship" and Diana knew it. This is suspiciously like spin--but it is so outrageous I don't even think Charles spin doctors would put the "just friends" allegation out there.

Another allegation (which is contrary to all other accounts) is that Diana and Charles lived together and were intimate prior to their marriage. This is totally improbable. Diana herself indicated that there was no pre-marital intimacy, indeed Charles spent much of the engagement away from her plus the royal family would be afraid that servants would tell the press if anything "improper" were going on between the couple. The Royal Train episode where Diana was alleged to spend the night with Charles (some sources insist Camilla was the woman spending the night with Charles) was firmly denied.

The illustrations are good, except for the rather tasteless montage of Diana surrounded by photos of lovers or alleged lovers. This picture belongs more in tabloids than what is supposed to be a book about the Princess' life and conspiracy theories of her death.

There is other gossip about Princess Anne and her marriages--alleging Zara isn't Mark Phillips (despite the obvious resemblance). And also about Prince Philip's womanizing.

Davies maintains that Diana's death was no accident and prepares a possible scenario leading up to her demise. The scenario proposed by Davies is perhaps the only intriguing part of the book.

I am disappointed in the book because it is too gossipy and seems to point the finger of blame at Diana and makes Charles and Camilla look totally innocent and Diana a manipulative adulteress who had a child with a man other than her husband. Diana and Charles indicated in their biographies that Harry was a planned child. It is very hard to believe that Diana would sleep around at the time she wanted to get pregnant with a second child. She was a loving mother and would not want to have a child of dubious paternity. Also, Harry looks like a Windsor and the red hair comes from the Spencers, not James Hewitt. Plus, I very much doubt if Charles thought Hewitt fathered Harry Diana would have walked away with $26 million after the divorce. I think the paternity rumors are nasty gossip and it is tragic that Diana isn't around to defend herself and Harry against books such as this one that promote this obvious falsehood.

This would have been a better book if Davies had concentrated more on the events leading up to the death of Diana instead of rehashing gossip, and outrageous gossip at that.

As a fan of the Princess of Wales, I picked up this book because the cover claims to "tell what others are afraid to." Expecting little more than a publisher trying to hawk their wares, I have to admit I was surprised at the information and new sources that author Nicholas Davies brought to Secrets & Lies. The book not only claims that the Princess was murdered, but actually explains, in detail, the conspracy that led to the fatal and "accidental" crash in August of 1997. I found myself glued to this story, and now urge that a more in depth review of Diana's death be conducted by an independent investigator. I'm absolutely amazed this book hasn't gotten more press, as it makes the best arguement to date that Diana was murdered.

Finally, a writer with the courage to take on the House of Windsor and the English secret service! This writer makes what amounts to the most difinitive case yet that Diana's death was orchestrated by those that wanted her out of the picture. I have followed Diana's life and death and read many of the biographies written, but this was the best from an insider's perspective, with facts and details I have read nowhere else. A fascinating read with serious consequences for those that have tried to keep one of the biggest murders ever under wraps!

I too believe that Nicholas Davies is a little toad who hated the Princess. His book was total crap and it is so obvious he is writing it to get money for himself. Don't waste your money!

I would thought that someone from the Globe magerzine would wirte this. Many people with Nicholas Davis is trying to make more money from Diana. He already worte many before this one. In his first book, it said about the James Hewitt afair. I like that fact Diana was sleeping with her cokcney bodygard. That was cute. This is in My princess Diana collection. It dosen't bad mouth her like most people think. He just told the truth about her affairs before she diead. I do belive that Diana was a if off with Will Carling. Bloddy good luck to her

Well if I'm not greatly mistaken this is published by the same people who published National Inquirer, The Glove and The Star. Enough Said. It's just rumours put into a book.
I mean whatever gossip that's been on the royals that's been out there for the pass 30 or 40 years is thrown in this book.
It's a great titles at least the LIES part.
I love the rumour which has been going around since it was disclose Diana had the misfortune to chose James "the cad" Hewitt as a lover that he's the father of Prince Harry. Well as been stated many times they didn't meet or start their affair until 1986 with Harry being born 1984 but why let that stop you Nicholas Davis? What has been know of Hewitt is since the affair ended he has done whatever he could to make money of this affair giving interviews, writing books, trying to sell her love letters to him proves he's totally without character so if there was even a remote possiblity he could be Harry's father don't you think he would milk it for what it's worth??? Plus if the Royal Family wanted to murdered an annoying person who better then Hewitt especially should there be an ounce of truth to him being Harry's father. As someone else stated red hair is a family trait just look at the present Earl Spencer plus Lady Sarah and Lady Jane truth is Diana was the only one without red hair it's fairly obvious that a child of her would have red hair.
I have read about Princess Diana since she got engaged to Prince Charles in Feb. 24'81 so I feel I'm pretty knowledgeable but this book it's from the gutter. I bet this wasn't published in the U.K. it's too libel???? Total total trash save your money.
PS Wish I could get it no stars it's that horrible.

Good looking - good. Not good looking bad. And THAT is how shallow people and the biased media judged Prince Charles and Diana. She was NO lady. If he screwed around with Camilla, SHE had affairs with everyone from horse groomers to army officers (5 years of him), security personnel, and bankers (whose wife she harassed from phone calls traced BACK to Buckingham Palace) to soccer players (Diana broke up their young marriage)

Charles married for convenience - he needed an heir. During an interview BEFORE they were married he was asked "Do you love her?" His answer: "Whatever love means" DIANA WAS STANDING RIGHT BESIDE HIM so SHE KNEW this was a marriage of convenience just like the hundreds of royal weddings before. For her to act the victim is a farce. She LIED to Charles by pretending to like everything HE LIKED and even said so in that same interview. She LIED and said she liked fishing, hunting, environmental issues, reintroducing native plants, painting/water colors, reading, etc. Diana followed him around like a bitch dog on the hunt exclaiming everything he did she liked going so far as to wear waders - LOL. BUT, when the ring was on the finger - the truth came out. She was BORED. She like theater, movies, city lights, shopping, crowds - IN SHORT THEY HAD NOTHING IN COMMON. Charles never should have married her.

While he is no genus, she was had an IQ so low, she NEVER graduated from high school She was a teacher ASSISTANT - a teacher requires a college degree. Diana did not graduate from high school because she could NOT PASS a single 0 level test in any subject. (to graduate, students have to pass an 0 level test in a lot of subjects like history, math, ect.) Diana even worked as a maid cleaning homes while living in London in an apartment she inherited and Diana had several flat mates who lived with her paying rent to help with the expenses.

And come on!!!!!!!!!!! What kind of mother makes her young son "her confident" telling him everything? Children do NOT need to hear their parent's woes/troubles let alone push Kleenex under the bathroom door to a sniveling Diana. That is plain sick sick - a Mommy Dearest moment if ever there was one. Children do NOT have the emotional maturity to be their mother's confidant. And, hearing Diana sob on about how she hated Charles and his extended family or how Fergie betrayed her also to young William is just plain WRONG.

This book helps balance the scale.

Hurray, Nicholas Davies! The cover caught me, but the book held me, continously from beginning to end. I couldn't put it down! You bring to light some issues and points worth thinking about. Any reader out there is a fool to think they understand the whole story just by having read one book. You must read many books on the subject from different authors, different perspectives to only begin to put the whole complex puzzle together. I recommend this book!! The Royal history it provides gives it even more depth. A must read!!

This is a very bad book. It contains a lot of lurid information that is given as fact, whereas I saw it as perhaps the "Lies" of the title. Diana was murdered by British secret services. Diana thought Prince Harry's father was really James Hewitt. Prince Philip carried on a long-term affair with Princess Alexandra.

The book is hard to read because of the constant repetition. Information given in one chapter is repeated almost word-for-word in later chapters. And the grammar is horrendous. There are just too many mistakes that a careful editor would not have let pass.

One odd thing. The text has apparently been cleaned up to make it conform to US grammar rules instead of British rules. But I seriously doubt that a Brit in a direct quote would say "dollars" instead of "pounds." And I really doubt that a Frenchman would talk about "miles per hour" instead of "kilometers per hour."

Nobody (except perhaps Prince William) comes out of this with a clean image. Prince Philip comes off the worst, with the Queen coming in a close second. I was surprised at some of the passages that exonerate Camilla. According to this author, she was smeared by Team Diana.

There must be better books about Princess Di. Try to find one of them and avoid this one.