An Old Etonian's Killing Spree

Written by Caspar Whitwam

Readers may be thinking that Captain Hook’s crimes were the most heinous amongst the OE register of criminals. Reality shows us, however, the moustachioed captain’s crimes pale into insignificance when compared to those of Crown Prince Dipendra. I hope to rip off the burial shroud that covers the history of the OE scandalous, murdering, intimidating royal teenager “without much of a sense of humour” behind the Nepalese royal massacre.

Allow me to elaborate on the life of Crown Prince Dipendra, which led to him murdering nine members of the Nepalese royal family including his father, mother and siblings in a mass shooting. The late Crown Prince Dipendra of Nepal was a thriving sportsman whilst at Eton, attending various national and international sports ceremonies in Nepal. He became a karateka whilst at Eton and eventually became head of Eton’s martial arts society andachieved a black belt aged 20. Prince Dipendra wrote after he left in 1990 “that he always cherished his years at Eton with a great sense of pride and achievement”. Tom Holden (TLH) was Dipendra’s house master at Eton and described the prince’s behaviour on the night in which his murdering would begin as being “totally out of character”. Holden appeared fond of Dipendra keeping in touch with both the prince and the King (also an old Etonian) after Dipendra had left Holden’s house.

However the prince’s classmates at Eton painted a far less flattering and contradictory image of the hard-drinking, sexually precocious royal teenager who telephoned the Nepalese ambassador in London and asked him to arrange for his room at Eton to be redecorated at the embassy’s expense. Old classmates described his “flashing his money about” and getting into trouble for smoking and drinking (apparently both bad things- who knew?). Within a week of his arrival at Eton college, aged 16, the school authorities chastised him for whisky drinking. He was “constantly getting in fights” probably paying tribute to being made keeper of the Martial Arts society in his final year. Other of the old classmates,when asked to speak about Dipendra, put it slightly more crudely, saying he “was a big fat guy with a Gurkha-type haircut” and that he “only teased him when he was doing skipping exercises and he lifted [him] off the ground by [his] jaw” said Danial Kruger, a political consultant to Dipendra. These accounts of the true personality of this murdering prince give a more insightful reach into why things went sour.  

On the 1st of June 2001 at the Narayanhiti Palace, the then-residence of the Nepalese monarchy, Dipendra opened fire at a house on the grounds of the palace where a party was being held. A drunk Prince Dipendra ambushed the family event killing nine people including his father, King Birendra, his mother, Queen Aishwarya and seven other members of the royal family including his younger brother and sister. In a single night, the Himalayan Kingdom’sroyal family was almost entirely wiped out. After Dipendra though his work there was done he shot himself in the head. Despite this severe killing of himself, he took three days to die, laying in comatose state. These three days spent laying on a floor of the palace would be Dipendra’s only time as king which allows us to ask ourselves weather the late Crown Prince Dipendra was the worst monarch ever or is that debate still to be left with John I and Henry VIII?

The motive of these murders is inevitably unconfirmed but a few theories have been put at the forefront. Dipendra wanted to marry Devyani Rana, whom he met in the United Kingdom. Some alleged that, due to her mothers family being lower class Royal of India and her fathers political alliances, the royal family objected. In fact, Devyani’s Gwalior family were one of the wealthiest former royal families of India, and allegedly far wealthier than the Nepalese monarchs. The prospective brides mother warned her daughter that marrying the Nepalese Crown Prince might mean a drop in a standard of living. Dipendra’s prospective bride, selected by the Royal family, was from a competing branch of the Nepalese Rana clan, the Juddha Shamsher line. It is believed Dipendra was threatened with being disinherited if he continued with the match and this may have been what drove him to murder in 2001. Dipendra’s marriage would be used to form a political alliance, a Henry and Elizabeth of York from the war of the roses type of marriage. It is thought that there would have been a higher possibility of Indian influence if Dipendra would marry Devyani, to which the palace objected. Old Etonian classmates said his thwarted love for Devyani Rana, a niece of Indian politician Madhavrao Scindia, offered the only explanation for his actions.

Other theories alleged that Dipendra was displeased with the country’s shift from an absolute to a constitutional monarchy, and that too much power had been given away during the 1990’s Peoples Movement. Dipendra was fearful of inheriting a diminished role. However, this in fact is unlikely. The crown prince responded to the 1990 uprising and return to an elected government with enthusiasm while a student at Eton College, where he was finishing his studies.

The circumstances of the massacre provoke controversy and even today, with the abolition of the monarchy following the 2006 revolution, many questions remain unanswered. The absence of Dipendra’s uncle who succeeded him, princeGyanhendra is though provoking. Not only is his absence unusual, but the lack of security at the event and Dipendra’s self-inflicted head-wound located on his left temple despite being right handed. King Birendra and his son Dipendra were popular and well liked by the Nepalese people, Birendra beingdescribes in the Nepalese news after his death as “one of the most respectable and honoured King’s” who “managed to impress and entire nation”. On the day of the massacre, Gyanendra was in Pokharawhilst on most other royals attended the dinner function. His wife Komal, their sons Paras, and daughter Prerana were in the room during the massacre. Whilst the entire families of Birendra and Dipendra were killed, nobody in Gyanendra’s family died. His son escaped with slight injuries and his wife sustained a life- threatening bullet wound but survived.

Since the massacre, eyewitnesses have released statements saying that “multiple people with the mask of the Crown Prince Dipendra were present in the room at one point” The bodies of some royals were dispersed around the palace not in the dining hall where the massacre was said to have occurred. Dipendra was cited as one of the first ones to be shot, providing explanation to the question of the head injury’s on his left temple despite being right handed. The book ‘Raktakunda’ is based on the interviews of two palace maids which details this theory. Promoters of these ideas alleged that Gyanendra had a hand in the massacre so that he could assume the throne to himself. His ascent to the throne would have only been possible if both of his nephews, Dipendra and Nirajan were Removed. One of the eyewitnesses of the massacre, Lai Bahadur Magar, claims that Paras, the son of Gyanendra, is the man behind this mysterious massacre. Magar was one of the bodyguards of Crown Prince Dipendra at that time. Both conspiracies that Prince Gyanendra and his Paras are behind the massacre of 2001 provide an idea as to why the duration of the subsequent investigation, which lasted for only two weeks and did not involve any major forensic analysis, despite an offer by Scotland Yard to carry one out.

Written by Caspar Whitwam