Last year, a report found Mr Bashir “deceived and induced” Princess Diana’s brother, Earl Spencer, to secure an interview with Panorama in 1995. As part of that process, Mr Bashir allegedly lied about Alexandra Pettifer – then known as Tiggy Legge-Bourke – telling Earl Spencer she was having an affair with the heir to the throne. BBC director-general Tim Davey said the state broadcaster had “let down (Diana), the royal family and our audience. Ms Pettifer said she was one of “many people whose lives have been affected by the fraudulent way in which the (scheme) was run”. He added: “Even today, so much about the creation of the program has yet to be adequately explained.” Louise Prince, barrister for Ms Pettifer, said the allegations against her client included “very serious and completely unfounded allegations that the claimant had an affair with HRH the Prince of Wales, resulting in an aborted pregnancy”. Ms Prince added: “The allegations were fabricated. They also appeared to capitalize on some previous false speculation in the media about the claimant and HRH The Prince of Wales.” The lawyer continued: “The claimant had no relationship with HRH The Prince of Wales, did not become pregnant with his child and did not have an abortion.” Princess Diana was affected by the allegations, Ms Prince said, “they” became aware of in late 1995. William and Harry’s late mother “became upset with her (Ms Pettyfer) for no apparent reason”, Ms Prince told the High Court. Image: Martin Bashir ‘deceived and induced’ Princess Diana’s brother, report claims The awkward situation caused Ms Pettifer to become “extremely upset and confused”, the lawyer continued. “He felt he had to prove to others that the allegations were untrue by revealing highly sensitive matters, including private medical information. “Unfortunately Diana, Princess of Wales could not be convinced, even when presented with incontrovertible evidence.” There was widespread publicity, causing Ms Pettifer further distress, Ms Prince said. “Much to the plaintiff’s chagrin, the lies were very prominently published in the national press at the time and have been repeated over the intervening 25 years. “Both she and her family have continued to this day to face suspicion and mistrust. A long shadow has fallen over relationships with her near and dear ones.” Ms Prince said the allegations appeared to have arisen “as part of BBC Panorama’s efforts to secure an exclusive interview with Diana, Princess of Wales”. In court this morning, BBC representatives apologized to Mrs Pettifer and agreed to pay compensation. They said: “The BBC accepts that the allegations made against the claimant were completely unfounded, should never have been made, and that the BBC did not, at the time, adequately investigate serious concerns about the circumstances in which the BBC secured the Panorama interview . with Diana, Princess of Wales.” Earlier this year, the BBC apologized “unreservedly” to the Princess of Wales’ private secretary, Patrick Jephson, and paid him a “significant sum” in compensation – again for the way Martin Bashir received his Panorama interview . Image: Ms Pettifer’s lawyer said the allegations were ‘completely without merit’ Tim Davie, director general of the BBC, said: “The BBC has agreed to pay significant compensation to Ms Pettifer and I would like to take this opportunity to publicly apologize to her, the Prince of Wales and the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex . , about how Princess Diana was duped and the subsequent impact on their entire lives.” Mr Davey said it was “a matter of great regret” that “the BBC did not get to the facts immediately after the programme”. “There were warning signs that the interview may have been conducted improperly,” he added. “On the contrary, as the Duke of Cambridge himself put it, the BBC failed to ask the hard questions. “If we had done our job properly, Princess Diana would have known the truth in her lifetime. We have let her down, the royal family and our public.” Mr Davie added: “Now we know the shocking way in which the interview was received, I have decided that the BBC will never show the program again nor will we license it in whole or in part to other broadcasters. “It remains of course part of the historical record and there may be cases in the future where it will be justified for the BBC to use short extracts for journalistic purposes, but these will be few and far between and will have to be agreed at executive committee level and put in the full context of what we now know about how to get the interview. “I would urge others to exercise similar restraint.” Ms Prince said: “Had the BBC not backed down, the claimant and her family could have been spared 25 years of lies, suspicion and upheaval.”
