Lord Justice Scott Baker had told the jury that it was "blindingly obvious" her former butler had lied to them.

But after the verdict, he said he was "not minded" to involve the police.

In his summing up, Lord Justice Scott Baker told the jury that the evidence Mr Burrell gave was clearly "not the whole truth", but that not all of his testimony should be discounted.

Mr Burrell, who has published several books and was a reality television participant, may have given evidence while thinking that "whatever he said might have an impact on his future enterprises", the coroner said.

In a video obtained by the Sun newspaper, Mr Burrell appeared to claim he introduced "red herrings" in court and held back facts.

Mr Burrell, 49, who denies perjury, had refused to return to the UK from the US to reappear at the inquest.

Lord Justice Scott Baker also cast doubt on Mr Burrell's conversation with the Queen several months after the August 1997 crash, in which he claimed that the Queen told him "there are powers at work in this country of which we have no knowledge".

Dodi's father Mohamed has rejected the verdicts. His spokeswoman, Katharine Witty, told BBC News 24: "I think he is just going to reflect on the full ramifications of the verdict."

Asked if he would challenge it through judicial review, she said: "I think it is something he is considering...I think he is going to be very mindful of what people are saying - which is that it should end here."

She said Mr Al Fayed accepted some issues had "fallen away" during the inquest, but added: "It is possible that MI6 were involved...we are still saying that, it's possible, but whether...we can do anything about that remains to be seen."

Lord Justice Scott Baker was beginning his summing up at the hearing into the death of the Princess of Wales.

He told jurors they could find Diana and Dodi Fayed died in an accident, or because of gross negligence by the paparazzi or their driver Henri Paul.

A British court had issued a secret arrest warrant for Major General Doron Almog for the alleged war crime under the Geneva convention of ordering the demolition of 59 civilian Palestinian homes.

Israeli diplomats were tipped off after Almog's plane left Israel on September 11 2005. Once it landed in London a military attache from the Israeli embassy boarded the jet and warned Almog to stay on board. He refused to leave the plane until it took off again for Israel, two hours later.

The war crimes arrest warrant was issued by senior district judge Timothy Workman, after an application by British lawyers acting for Palestinian victims of the demolition in 2002 in Gaza. Under British law on war crimes UK courts have jurisdiction to try suspects even if the alleged crimes are committed abroad.

Almog, commanding officer of the Israeli defence forces' southern command from December 2000 to July 2003, was due to arrive at 1.25pm on a flight belonging to El Al, Israel's national carrier.

Those who obtained the warrant say police made errors. The document is written by detective superintendent John MacBrayne, from the counter-terrorism command, who was in charge on the day. It was drafted in response to an Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation.

MacBrayne wrote of events the day Almog landed at Heathrow: "Consideration was given to boarding the El Al flight and DSU MacBrayne sought clarification of his powers to do so with those officials present." Top detectives were told that police routinely boarded flights, but were not sure if they could do so without the permission of the airline.

"It was confirmed that El Al were refusing voluntary access to the plane ... another consideration being that El Al flights carried armed air marshals which raised issues round public safety. There was also no intelligence as to whether Mr Almog would have been travelling with personal security as befitted his status, armed or otherwise. DSU MacBrayne took the considered opinion that, as access to the plane would not be consensual, there existed a real threat of an armed confrontation."

Daniel Machover, a solicitor involved in gaining the warrant, said police did not need permission to board the plane, and could also have stopped it taking off until Almog emerged. The document reveals that before the planned arrest Scotland Yard consulted a police unit called the Communities Tensions Team, for advice on reaction in the British Jewish community. A "trusted partner" of the police, a Jewish contact, was also involved.

The warrant, issued at Bow Street magistrates court, central London, is believed to be the first of its kind issued in Britain against an Israeli national over conduct in the conflict with Palestinians. The attorney general would have had to sanction a prosecution before it went ahead.

Horrifying allegations of torture and killings carried out by the British Army in southern Iraq emerged on January 31.

Based on witness statements, death certificates and video evidence, the lawyers allege that nine more people survived torture and abuse.

"the allegations were the most harrowing he had ever heard"

“the police asked us to send ambulances to the British base to collect some bodies. When they brought the 22 bodies, it was a surprise to us to see some of these bodies mutilated and tortured.”

At the time, the British Army dismissed allegations of torture as “absurd.” But the case, along with hundreds of accusations arising from its activities in Iraq, has been the subject of calls for a public inquiry ever since. A yearlong investigation by the Royal Military Police (RMP) found no evidence of deliberate mutilation.

On January 31, however, the ban was overturned by Lord Justice Moses following legal moves by the victims’ families, the Guardian, the Times and the BBC. The Guardian reported Moses as ruling that the MoD’s attempt to stop media reporting on the allegations has no basis in law and that their handling of the case was “barmy.”

Regarding the ban on naming soldiers, Moses told the defence secretary’s counsel, “It is not the way it works. If you’re right about that there would be one rule for the Ministry of Defence and another for the ordinary citizen.”

The Majid al Kabir allegations further refute the central point made in a recent report published by the British Army into aspects of its reign of terror in southern Iraq, which whitewashed previous abuses as the result of bad planning, inadequate training and the work of individuals.

Baha Mousa was a 26-year-old hospital worker detained September 2003 during a raid by members of the Queen’s Lancashire regiment on a hotel in Basra. Mousa, who witnessed soldiers stealing cash from the hotel, was arrested along with six other workers at the hotel. All were hooded, bound, subjected to stress positions and brutally beaten for days.

Photographs and records show Mousa suffered 93 injuries, including four broken ribs, a fractured nose, smashed wrists and a ligature around his neck. According to one witness, “I heard Baha Mousa screaming. I was still hooded but it sounded like he was in another room. I heard him scream: ‘Please help me, blood is coming out, please help me, I am going to die.’ The last thing I heard him say was: ‘My nose broke.’ After this there was silence.”

The case was also central to a 2007 ruling by the British Law Lords that the government was in breach of the European convention of Human Rights and the UK’s own Human Rights Act for not conducting an independent inquiry.

Aitken also reported on the outcome of cases against soldiers accused of brutality following a riot in Amara in 2004. A video showing youths being beaten by British troops was passed to the News of the World. No charges were brought.

In the Camp Breadbasket case, four soldiers were finally found guilty of abuse after images showing prisoners being forced to simulate sex were discovered by a worker at a photo-processing shop. Other images showed prisoners suspended from a forklift truck.

“As a senior officer in the Iraqi army, I am clear that these terrible actions could not have taken place without support from senior officers within the British army.”