THE year 2004 has barely emerged and already the newly-born is beginning to look like so many of its predecessors; old before its time. An example of the crime which has turned this country into one of the most dangerous in Europe was the killing of an innocent holidaymaker at Liverpool's John Lennon Airport, run over by a thief trying to steal his car.

Contrast that with the chemist who exposed the current lunacy in our laws, threatened with prosecution by police to whom he had given details, including a photo, of a young thug who beat him unconscious in his shop.

Apparently the chemist breached the Data Protection Act in so doing -- a similar crazy ruling to that which allowed murderer Ian Huntley to escape detection for offences committed against children and young women.

Before moving on to the Diana Princess of Wales inquiry, likely talking point of a year still only nine days old remember, can I ask is this the same data protection legislation which allows banks, building societies and other financial institutions to trawl records before saying "yea" or "nay" to requests for a credit card, mortgage, loan, etc? If so, can we then assume that it's OK to reveal if an applicant has CCJs or a poor credit rating but not if he is a child molester? Funny that. We apparently attach more importance to money than we do human life.

Still, whatever else happens this year, and we can safely forecast that there will be more bad news than good, the first week will indeed take some beating, topped as it was by the launching of the inquests into the deaths of Diana and her lover, Dodi Fayed.

Whatever one thinks about the crash in the Paris underpass on August 31, 1997, a number of opinion polls conducted by newspapers, radio and television stations have revealed that an astonishing 90 per cent of those who took part believe Diana was the victim of a murder plot.

Dodi's father, Mohammed Al Fayed, has campaigned vigorously for a public inquiry into his son's death, convinced that he and the Princess were assassinated. He believes Diana planned to marry and have children with his son, a Muslim, which in itself would have been a severe embarrassment for the House of Windsor.

Conspiracy theories abound. For myself, I have long wondered why the sole survivor of the crash, Trevor Rees-Jones, the Princess's bodyguard and the man responsible for her personal safety, allowed Henri Paul to drive the powerful Mercedes, packed to the gills with alcohol and drugs, as revealed by subsequent blood tests.

Fuel has been added to the murder conspiracy theory with media revelations that Diana was convinced Prince Charles was plotting to kill her in a road accident. When she disclosed those fears in a letter to her butler and confidante Paul Burrell, she was said to have been under extreme stress following her divorce. The coroner given the job of sorting out this mess has asked for that letter, and no doubt will almost certainly have to question Charles about its contents. I feel a Data Protection Act coming on...