Paul Burrell

A chance conversation between the monarch and the heir to the throne in the back of a car last Friday led to the dramatic end to the trial of Paul Burrell, butler and confidante to Diana Princess of Wales who, according to the police had stolen hundreds of her belongings.

The Queen recalled that, in a meeting shortly after the Princess's death, Mr Burrell had told her he was holding on to some of them for safe-keeping.

The information was passed on at the weekend and this morning the judge threw out the case. It's cost Paul Burrell almost two years of his life, and the taxpayers one and a half million pounds.

James Cooramasamy examined this most curious of Royal sagas.

NARRATOR:
They are changing their story at Buckingham Palace. Paul Burrell the Butler has come back to embarrass. Prince Charles and the Queen had an awkward day. He told you he had them, why didn't you say?" says Charles.

JAMES COOMARASAMY:
In the end, it wasn't the Butler who did it, it was the Queen.

After a dramatic intervention from Buckingham Palace, the trial of Paul Burrell collapsed today. He had been charged with stealing hundreds of items belonging to the princess. After a 21-month investigation, the charges against him have been dropped, the reason, the emergence of a conversation the Queen had had with Mr Burrell soon after the death of the Princess of Wales, during which he told her he was holding onto some of the princess's belongings for safe keeping. That information was passed on by Prince Charles to the police and this morning he was acquitted.

ANDREW SHAW:
He is happy to have been acquitted after the terrible ordeal of the last 21 months. He has always maintained his total innocence

ROSA MONCKTON:
The last two weeks have been very difficult for him and particularly for his wife Maria, and the last 21 months have been a real strain. The whole family and their friends.

GRAHAM BURRELL:
I knew he was innocent, from the very first day, and I told him it would never go through the full distance.

COOMARASAMAY:
The case against Paul Burrell may have collapsed, but growing bigger by the hour has been the list of questions raised by today's events.

Among them, why did the Crown Prosecution Service pursue a case which some argue was not strong enough, not least because there was no evidence of Paul Burrell's alleged dishonesty.

Did the police mislead Princes Charles and William over the strength of the case against the butler and over claims he'd sold some of Diana's goods, as the defence alleged in court?

Then there is the role of the Queen. Why did it take her so long to realise the significance of the evidence she had. Did the sensitivity surrounding her position get in the way of the CPS pursuing the case?

NARRATOR:
They are changing their story at Buckingham Palace. Paul Burrell the Butler has come back to embarrass. Just at the time when he had spilled the beans, my memory has returned, his hands are clean, says the Queen.

COOMARASAMY:
Today, Paul Burrell said the Queen has come through for me.

It's believed it was only after she returned from her recent Golden Jubilee trip to Canada that the Queen was struck by the importance of her information. She mentioned it to Prince Charles last Friday as they were being driven in this royal limousine to a memorial service for the victims of the Bali bomb blast.

Coming shortly before Paul Burrell was due to give his version of events in court, it could be seen as the stuff of a conspiracy theorist's dream.

BEN PIMLOTT:
One assumes it was a coincidence, it is in danger of being seen that way, that's why it's important that all those involved on all sides give convincing information as to why things took the course they did and what indeed was happening behind the scenes, which at the moment is very hazy.

COOMARASAMY:
Also unclear is the role of the CPS and the police. Why didn't they make further inquiries about the meeting between the Butler and the Queen which Mr Burrell said he mentioned in a lengthy statement to police?

BRUCE HOULDER:
It's only said that for the first time, in what solicitors describe as a detailed statement, a conversation with the Queen is mentioned. But the context of it is not mentioned, not mentioned at all. One cannot go rushing off to Her Majesty and ask her a series of open questions unless you have a good reason for doing so. Until such time as a positive defence is presented by a defendant, namely that the Queen knew that I had all this property, the police would have no reason to go to Her Majesty and ask her any questions about it at all.

ANTHONY SCRIVENER:
My overriding impression is that this case should never have been commenced in the first place. The police began the inquiry in the belief they could prove Mr Burrell was selling princess Diana's property in America. During the course of the investigation, they found this was untrue. They should have packed it in there and then. Instead of that, they tried to present the case in a different way. They said, he didn't go around telling anyone that he was retaining some of the property. In fact he had, he told the Queen.

COOMARASAMY:
The trial has raised wider questions over secrecy. It was adjourned on Tuesday when the prosecution applied for a public interest immunity certificate, to prevent some evidence being heard in court. Earlier in the trial, other evidence was controversially kept for the jury's eyes only.

SCRIVENER:
Where do you draw the line? Are you going to stop evidence being talked about in court because it embarrasses the Prime Minister or the leader of the Opposition, because that is what it leads to. The principle is very simple, all evidence is given publicly in open court, unless it causes real danger to somebody, like for instance a police informer, that would be a danger to the person concerned and undermine justice. The fact that someone was embarrassed, it doesn't matter how important they are, is neither here nor there. There are not special rules for important people.

VOICE OVER:
The Royal Victorian Medal Silver to be decorated, Mr Paul Burrell, for services to Diana, Princess of Wales.

COOMERASAMAY:
Almost five years ago, the Queen rewarded Paul Burrell for his unquestioning loyalty to his employer. According to some, the end of the trial has raised new questions about the role and nature of the monarchy.

PIMLOTT:
I think there is scope for further clarification about the appropriate relationship between the crown and its own courts. In theory you can have Regina versus Regina and there is a personal constitution of the crown. The two should not mix.

NARRATOR:
So it collapses, the trial is at a close, the butler is free and the palace is morose. The police are ashamed, the lawyers just rave and Princess Diana spins in her grave.

This transcript was produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors.