Hey!!!!   CTAL,

If  you are well aware that background was not clear then how can you even support or point out the statment that " He killed his entire family".  Though, he was a moody since childwood and was under influence numerious times as you have stated, that doesn't mean that he was a Psycho to killer. You cannot  mark a  person's character just from his past.

We all know,  as of now we have been seeing only  the things that our Nepal Media were  forced to bradcast.

SO WHO IS THE ONE WHO DID ALL THIS???????????????????THEN

Nepal: The Royal Massacre & the Mystery Unfolding

Thanx Twanke ji,

U did good job. I saw first time the romantic mood of X crown prince. Every body knows who killed the royal family. But I don't know Why Maoist are silent in this issue? Now,they are taking taste of people's blood who has been killed in run of 12 years civil war urf Janauddha. All the parties of Nepal has huge and sweet voice when they are in opposition but forgot whole things when they got power in government.

Prachanda ji, That's ur duty to find out who are the killer of royal family?

Gaf matra garne hoina kehi garera dekhaune bela pani ho yo.

To believe whether or not Dipendra killed his own family will be a quandary for centuries. Even though we have already orchestrated various permutation of the massacre, finding a plausible answer still remains a far cry. Rather than revisiting the details of what happened that fateful night, why don’t we try to provide more insight to our own system of beliefs. Before I forget, would you guys care reading a book called “End of the line” by writer Neelesh Misra? The facts there could be subjected to criticism by some cynics, but they certainly provide enough fodder for a realistic analysis.

As compared to specifics, gossips and rumors sell by volumes. Don’t believe me? Ask how many people purchase “People” magazine instead of “The economist”. Nepalese are not far behind when it comes to catering to those rumors. Actually, considering the fact that we live in South Asia and bear the similar mindset of our neighbors, we might even top the list when it comes to that.

I personally believe Dipendra killed most of the family members. I know I am crazy, but perhaps not, let’s highlight some of the vital issues that we often fail to enlist when it comes to blame games.

1. Most of us fail to understand the fact that people like Dipendra are never really attached to their parents as we are to ours. Dipendra’s father was a monarch, chances of being close and dear to the king even from his standpoint had to encounter certain protocol and security measures. Besides, Dipendra’s life had multifarious avenues opened for exploration than find refuge in his mother’s love. Women, liquor, effusively servile friends, drugs, parties, extreme wealth and weapons were some of the factors that provided enough hurdles for him to be a mama’s boy.
2. Paras was a sorry individual who always happened to be caught in a notorious act to everyone’s agony. Dipendra was perhaps the same, except that he did not leave any proof of his evil-doing. They both belong to the same clan of despotic bullies. Leaving aside some submissive friends in Bulanikantha, others have their own horror story to tell inside the Royal palace. Also, did we forget his infamous stint in Eton College?
3. We Nepalese believe only what suits our mentality the best, and we believe in gossip. One of the best examples I could bring in is the Hrithik Roshan episode, an embarrassing showdown where a girl lost her life. We also have a short memory, we accuse Pamfa devi only to exonerate her later, and choose democracy yet again even after the brazen fiasco by political parties.
4. There were number of people who survived the massacre, and their story explicitly points towards Dipendra as the murderer. Is fear of Paras, Gyanendra or any other conspirator so horrifying that people veer away from actual facts, even lie about the real murderer of their dear ones? There is a limit to fabrication, not everyone could stick to the same story which comes correct to every passing second.
5. The effect of alcohol and drug is not linear, even the most experienced drinkers and drug abusers lose it sometimes at little intake, it solely depends upon one’s state of mind, his surroundings and his recent ingestions. Let’s visualize this – Dipendra actually got inebriated, alcohol fueled his long term spat with the queen, he suddenly realized all her allies were his enemies, he had access to an ultra sophisticated automatic gun he’d been dying to use (at perhaps human targets), and then he explodes, just like one bipolar individual. What is wrong with this story? It is in fact million times more plausible than someone masked as him. Agreed, he did not commit suicide himself and was shot by a nonplussed security guard who did not have enough courage to admit it.
6. Once a thief is always a thief – this old folklore back home no longer holds true. A person can be a thief ninety-nine times but does not necessarily become one the hundredth, fact is always a fact, it should not be derived out of experiences and backgrounds. Paras could have been a victim of that old forbidden myth.

The video posted above is an absolute pleasure to watch,I barely saw Dipendra so delightful. However, this does not establish the fact that whether or not he has killed his family members. Think about it, someday, Bin Laden’s mirthful manifestation of Jihad might surface in a video-tape too.

 Well said, Jet Fabre, very very logical. I totally agree with you.