"We've been allowed to film the 27 volumes of confidential evidence the French inquiry gathered," boasted the narrator proudly, speaking as though the programme had unearthed top-secret information, rather than simply accessed documents that have already been widely studied. And sure enough, there were sufficient minor contradictions and inconsistencies buried in its 6,000 pages to fuel a conspiracy theorist's fevered brain for a decade, thereby enabling the programme to dispute the obvious facts surrounding a regrettable traffic accident. "Why was the tunnel reopened within four hours?" the narrator demanded to know (easy, because it's one of Paris's main transport routes); "Why was the accident scene scrubbed clean?" (even easier, because the city's main thoroughfares are cleaned early every morning); and "Why was the first witness on the scene ignored by police?", which was surely the simplest question of all. Because, like all good Parisian men, he was out on the tiles and smashed up against a wall at the time.