Documentary Film

20 years later, in ‘Diana: In Her Own Words’, the princess says it was all too unbearable

Tom Jennings’ documentary presents excerpts from secret interviews that the Princess of Wales gave to a journalist.

Ahead of the 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death, when PBS and Channel 4 announced a new documentary featuring never-before-seen footage of the princess, there were ample reservations about it. Those close to Diana felt that the film could upset her sons William and Harry. Channel 4 aired Diana: In Her Own Words anyway and the channel’s ratings skyrocketed.

The subject of this review is another documentary with the same title that was aired as part of National Geographic’s Blockbuster series on September 1, a day after Diana’s death anniversary. Tom Jennings’ film Diana: In Her Own Words presents excerpts from a series of secret interviews that she gave to journalist Andrew Morton about her failed marriage to Prince Charles.

The scruples surrounding such documentaries are not entirely unfounded. It has been 20 years since the death of Diana, one of the most hunted and hounded public figures in recent times, and we are still not done rummaging through her life. Perhaps, what should be under heavy scrutiny instead is our apparently insatiable appetite for the private lives of public figures.

Morton was the author of Diana’s biography Diana: Her True Story. “Most of this unique series of interviews has never been broadcast before,” says Jennings’ film as it opens, referring to and stoking the fiery appetite of the general public. However, what it then goes on to do is rather remarkable. As the title of the film makes it obvious, here is Diana herself, speaking about how menacing it was to be incessantly followed, scrutinised and devoured. This is Diana not only telling her story but voicing it herself too. This is Diana saying that it was all just far too unbearable for her.


Morton’s questions to Diana begin from her first childhood memory (the smell of her cradle) and go all the way through the courtship, the marriage, the two pregnancies and their aftermath. Her rather tumultuous relationship with Charles is the focus – the marriage that ensured that Diana, a 19-year-old kindergarten teacher, would henceforth forever remain under the glare of the public.

The marriage was a difficult one, admits Diana, particularly because she was fully aware of the affair Charles was having even before they got married. She describes what it was like being gripped by a horrifying case of bulimia and chronic depression during the years of her marriage. And yet, being under the spotlight meant beaming for the cameras and presenting a picture of sheer marital bliss. The documentary conveys this conundrum rather powerfully: contrasting Diana’s dolorous voice with photographs and news footage of her happy-looking life in public. The juxtaposition speaks volumes about the pressures on a rather young, newly-wedded girl put through extraordinary circumstances all of a sudden.

Princess Diana and Prince Charles | National Geographic/1895 films
Princess Diana and Prince Charles | National Geographic/1895 films

One could argue that broadcasting private, in fact, secret interviews that divulge such personal details of Diana’s life is indeed problematic. And that too, 20 years after her death. But in Diana’s case, after a lifetime of being hunted repeatedly, a documentary such as this attempts to offer a kind of conclusion to the entire saga, a last word on the matter, one that is Diana’s herself.

Diana, as the documentary also makes evident, was indeed thankful for all the love that she was bestowed upon by the people of her country. Even though she did not fully understand it nor did she feel she was deserving of it, she was grateful for it. But it was still all far too overwhelming for her and that is a point that needs to be emphasised.

Diana: In Her Own Words asks us to re-examine our perceived right over the lives of public figures, our insatiable desire to know them inside-out, our particular appetite for the murkier details and lastly but equally importantly, some of the repercussions of iconising and hoisting ordinary individuals on pedestals. In this case, the princess myth. In a sense, she did choose the public life but that still doesn’t quite mean the hunt is justified.

Twenty years after her death, the world is still besotted by Diana. But in her own words, it is all still quite unbearable.

National Geographic/1895 films
National Geographic/1895 films
We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Behind the garb of wealth and success, white collar criminals are hiding in plain sight

Understanding the forces that motivate leaders to become fraudsters.

Most con artists are very easy to like; the ones that belong to the corporate society, even more so. The Jordan Belforts of the world are confident, sharp and can smooth-talk their way into convincing people to bend at their will. For years, Harshad Mehta, a practiced con-artist, employed all-of-the-above to earn the sobriquet “big bull” on Dalaal Street. In 1992, the stockbroker used the pump and dump technique, explained later, to falsely inflate the Sensex from 1,194 points to 4,467. It was only after the scam that journalist Sucheta Dalal, acting on a tip-off, broke the story exposing how he fraudulently dipped into the banking system to finance a boom that manipulated the stock market.


In her book ‘The confidence game’, Maria Konnikova observes that con artists are expert storytellers - “When a story is plausible, we often assume it’s true.” Harshad Mehta’s story was an endearing rags-to-riches tale in which an insurance agent turned stockbroker flourished based on his skill and knowledge of the market. For years, he gave hope to marketmen that they too could one day live in a 15,000 sq.ft. posh apartment with a swimming pool in upmarket Worli.

One such marketman was Ketan Parekh who took over Dalaal Street after the arrest of Harshad Mehta. Ketan Parekh kept a low profile and broke character only to celebrate milestones such as reaching Rs. 100 crore in net worth, for which he threw a lavish bash with a star-studded guest-list to show off his wealth and connections. Ketan Parekh, a trainee in Harshad Mehta’s company, used the same infamous pump-and-dump scheme to make his riches. In that, he first used false bank documents to buy high stakes in shares that would inflate the stock prices of certain companies. The rise in stock prices lured in other institutional investors, further increasing the price of the stock. Once the price was high, Ketan dumped these stocks making huge profits and causing the stock market to take a tumble since it was propped up on misleading share prices. Ketan Parekh was later implicated in the 2001 securities scam and is serving a 14-years SEBI ban. The tactics employed by Harshad Mehta and Ketan Parekh were similar, in that they found a loophole in the system and took advantage of it to accumulate an obscene amount of wealth.


Call it greed, addiction or smarts, the 1992 and 2001 Securities Scams, for the first time, revealed the magnitude of white collar crimes in India. To fill the gaps exposed through these scams, the Securities Laws Act 1995 widened SEBI’s jurisdiction and allowed it to regulate depositories, FIIs, venture capital funds and credit-rating agencies. SEBI further received greater autonomy to penalise capital market violations with a fine of Rs 10 lakhs.

Despite an empowered regulatory body, the next white-collar crime struck India’s capital market with a massive blow. In a confession letter, Ramalinga Raju, ex-chairman of Satyam Computers convicted of criminal conspiracy and financial fraud, disclosed that Satyam’s balance sheets were cooked up to show an excess of revenues amounting to Rs. 7,000 crore. This accounting fraud allowed the chairman to keep the share prices of the company high. The deception, once revealed to unsuspecting board members and shareholders, made the company’s stock prices crash, with the investors losing as much as Rs. 14,000 crores. The crash of India’s fourth largest software services company is often likened to the bankruptcy of Enron - both companies achieved dizzying heights but collapsed to the ground taking their shareholders with them. Ramalinga Raju wrote in his letter “it was like riding a tiger, not knowing how to get off without being eaten”, implying that even after the realisation of consequences of the crime, it was impossible for him to rectify it.

It is theorised that white-collar crimes like these are highly rationalised. The motivation for the crime can be linked to the strain theory developed by Robert K Merton who stated that society puts pressure on individuals to achieve socially accepted goals (the importance of money, social status etc.). Not having the means to achieve those goals leads individuals to commit crimes.

Take the case of the executive who spent nine years in McKinsey as managing director and thereafter on the corporate and non-profit boards of Goldman Sachs, Procter & Gamble, American Airlines, and Harvard Business School. Rajat Gupta was a figure of success. Furthermore, his commitment to philanthropy added an additional layer of credibility to his image. He created the American India Foundation which brought in millions of dollars in philanthropic contributions from NRIs to development programs across the country. Rajat Gupta’s descent started during the investigation on Raj Rajaratnam, a Sri-Lankan hedge fund manager accused of insider trading. Convicted for leaking confidential information about Warren Buffet’s sizeable investment plans for Goldman Sachs to Raj Rajaratnam, Rajat Gupta was found guilty of conspiracy and three counts of securities fraud. Safe to say, Mr. Gupta’s philanthropic work did not sway the jury.


The people discussed above have one thing in common - each one of them was well respected and celebrated for their industry prowess and social standing, but got sucked down a path of non-violent crime. The question remains - Why are individuals at successful positions willing to risk it all? The book Why They Do It: Inside the mind of the White-Collar Criminal based on a research by Eugene Soltes reveals a startling insight. Soltes spoke to fifty white collar criminals to understand their motivations behind the crimes. Like most of us, Soltes expected the workings of a calculated and greedy mind behind the crimes, something that could separate them from regular people. However, the results were surprisingly unnerving. According to the research, most of the executives who committed crimes made decisions the way we all do–on the basis of their intuitions and gut feelings. They often didn’t realise the consequences of their action and got caught in the flow of making more money.


The arena of white collar crimes is full of commanding players with large and complex personalities. Billions, starring Damien Lewis and Paul Giamatti, captures the undercurrents of Wall Street and delivers a high-octane ‘ruthless attorney vs wealthy kingpin’ drama. The show looks at the fine line between success and fraud in the stock market. Bobby Axelrod, the hedge fund kingpin, skilfully walks on this fine line like a tightrope walker, making it difficult for Chuck Rhoades, a US attorney, to build a case against him.

If financial drama is your thing, then block your weekend for Billions. You can catch it on Hotstar Premium, a platform that offers a wide collection of popular and Emmy-winning shows such as Game of Thrones, Modern Family and This Is Us, in addition to live sports coverage, and movies. To subscribe, click here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Hotstar and not by the Scroll editorial team.