At last, something good has come out of the inquest into the death of Princess Diana – the skewering of her so-called "rock" Paul Burrell.
The former butler has made an industry out of his association with the royal household and turned it into a damn good living.
But would a real "rock" reveal the angry exchanges between the princess and her mother that the inquest has heard this we
ek.
A real rock would have known them for what they were: words said in temper that had no bearing on the princess' death, and kept them to himself.
Mr Burrell may not be the only one to blame in that, however. What were the lawyers doing in asking for them, and the coroner in allowing them to be heard by the jury? This was tittle-tattle, not evidence.
Mr Burrell was deservedly alone in his embarrassment, however, when, having hinted at a big secret he and the princess shared, he was unable to come up with a shred of proof, even though overnight he had been packed off to his home where he said he had papers that would confirm his story.
The newspapers, when he returned to the inquest with nothing of any account, enjoyed his discomfort: "Loyalty? This man wouldn't know how to sell it" shouted one headline.
Another report said: Mr Burrell complained again of his ordeal under questioning. "Quite frankly, it's been horrid," he said.
Good. Let's hope it gets horrid for him every time he attempts to earn even more money by inflating his importance to the princess.
As for the conduct of the rest of the players at the inquest, they might do well to reflect on what they are really there to achieve.
It is a serious, and hopefully final, inquiry to establish how the Princess died; it should not be a place where two sons hear that their grandmother called their mother a whore.
The full article contains 327 words and appears in Diss Express newspaper.
