Martin Bashir has told colleagues that his alleged use of forged documents to secure an interview with Princess Diana was due to “professional jealousy” and his background.
The email was written several months before Panorama’s interview documentary exposed the scandal.
It was released by the BBC on a judge’s order, along with around 3,000 emails related to the case.
Investigative journalist Andy Webb filed a Freedom of Information request over the email over two years ago, eventually taking it to the Right to Information Tribunal.
In an email dated July 20, 2020, seen by the PA news agency, Mr Bashir told the BBC’s head of history, Robert Seeter, that the forged documents had played no role in obtaining the interview. He said a “dynasty” journalist would have caused less controversy. Dimbleby and others were involved.
He writes: “I am disappointed to hear that this so-called ‘fabrication’ story is making headlines again.
“It didn’t help the interview, but professional jealousy, especially within the company, allowed hats to be thrown at the alleged misconduct.
“At the time, it was also clear that there was some frustration that a second-generation immigrant with non-white, working-class roots should have the courage to enter the palace and conduct an interview.
“It would have been easier if one of the dynastic families (Dimbleby et al.) had done it!”
In his email, Bashir referred to journalists David Dimbleby, who regularly covers royal and political events for the BBC, and Jonathan Dimbleby, who interviewed Charles about his marriage. It seems so.
Mr. Seeter had been asked to “publish archived interviews regarding events that referenced the fabricated article in which he was involved” and sought a statement from Mr. Bashir.
Mr Bashir also told Mr Setter that he was praised by the then Prince of Wales’ staff for not giving interviews on the programme.
He writes: “Since returning to the UK in 2015 and rejoining the BBC in 2016, senior staff in the Prince of Wales’s office have (surprisingly) declined all requests to discuss the interview. I have expressed my intentions.
“As I am sure you all will understand, the words of the late Princess have been deployed to attack the surviving members of the Royal Family, particularly the Prince of Wales, which is something I never wanted. That’s it.
“Someday – no one knows when (!) – I will have to look back on my career and think about it, but even if there is hope in it, once… It was not completely determined by the interview.
“To do that, I have to work hard at remembering, which I find very difficult.”
This comes ahead of the November 2020 broadcast of the ITV documentary Diana Interview: The Princess’s Revenge, in which graphic designer Matt Wiesler talks about mocking up Bashir’s documents.
The BBC later apologized and reached a financial settlement with Mr Wiesler.
Newly released documents show Mr Bashir was praised by colleagues at the broadcaster after the interview, with Lord Hall of Birkenhead, then the company’s head of news, praising Mr Bashir for his “good judgement”. He said he had responded.
A BBC spokesperson said on Tuesday: ‘Throughout this process we have taken our responsibility to comply with the court’s instructions extremely seriously.
“So today we released approximately 3,000 documents, approximately 10,000 pages, to Mr. Webb.
“This latest disclosure includes hundreds of pages of reproductions and materials unrelated to the 1995 Panorama, but nonetheless captured by electronic searches.
“When necessary, we are making redactions in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act.
“There is no evidence to support the allegation that the BBC acted in bad faith in 2020 and we maintain that this suggestion is simply false.
“We have worked hard to provide relevant material throughout this long process, which involved an extensive archive and record search spanning nearly 30 years.
“We also accept and apologize that mistakes were made and have taken extensive steps to correct those mistakes.
“Furthermore, far from covering up or attempting to cover up the matter, as has been said many times, the BBC is committed to obtaining additional material and otherwise ensuring a full picture of what happened in 1995. We have asked Lord Dyson to conduct an independent investigation. It may be owned by people other than the BBC.
“The BBC provided Lord Dyson’s inquiry with all relevant documents in its possession.
“Other people involved in these events have also provided written material to Lord Dyson, which is detailed in the report.
“It was published in 2021 and its findings were fully accepted by the BBC.”