Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think Richard III blatantly killed the Princes in Tower?

664 replies

HenryTudor1485 · 23/07/2025 23:37

He’s undergone a bit of a reappraisal recently but I’m not having it. He was a wrong un.

He clearly had his nephews killed. He had motive, means and opportunity. The dates when they “disappeared” all add up.

He done the crime. He never did the time (unless you consider being defeated in battle and being hacked to death “time”).

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
NewAgeNewMe · 23/07/2025 23:55

I always thought most likely Henry VII. And that he smeared Richards’s name.

MyWarmOchreHare · 23/07/2025 23:55

LordGribeau · 23/07/2025 23:46

I read The Daughter of Time a few years ago. I actually think Henry VII makes a lot of sense.

Show quote history

How would he have accessed them?

MyWarmOchreHare · 23/07/2025 23:54

100% agree with you, OP. I started an almost identical thread on here several years ago.

It is so clear that he killed them. Those who say it was Henry VII, how would he have got to the boys and why didn’t Richard mention that an enemy faction had killed them?

Standardpain · 23/07/2025 23:54

I think its a fascinating subject .
I studied the Tuders for O level history many moons ago and we spent time discussing the Princes in the tower - it was our history teacher who recommended we read the Josephine Tey book.
I was always quite an admirer of Henry V11 and the pragmatic way he set about securing power for his dynasty.
So whereas murdering the Princes was a pretty callous unpleasant act it certainly fitted in with his modus operandi.

Original poster
HenryTudor1485 · 23/07/2025 23:52

It’s a shame Crimewatch is no longer a thing. A would’ve liked to see a reconstruction.

The suspect is a white male, aged between 500 and 600, wearing a suit of armour. Does not have a horse.

OP posts:
TotHappy · 23/07/2025 23:52

I thought that theory that is outlined in The Daughter of Time was widely negged by historians of the period? And the Richard III theory not proven, obviously, but again widely accepted as the most probable.
All historical judgement is guesswork, of course, but I think the Henry VII one probably is a bit of wishful thinking. Because I'd much rather it was him.

WarrenTofficier · 23/07/2025 23:51

I've always thought some lacky did it thinking it would curry favourite with Richard but that Richard was horrified rather than happy, not because he particularly cared but because the boys death put him in a tight spot.

stonebrambleboy · 23/07/2025 23:50

HowToTrainYourDragonfruit · 23/07/2025 23:48

I come to mumsnet for this incisive analysis of current affairs

You're about 500 years too late 😆

KenAdams · 23/07/2025 23:48

Wasn't there talk of having the bones DNA tested? The Queen wouldn't allow it but I've hoped Charles might.

Either way, we've got a lovely tourist attraction dedicated to him in my city now.

HowToTrainYourDragonfruit · 23/07/2025 23:48

I come to mumsnet for this incisive analysis of current affairs

LordGribeau · 23/07/2025 23:46

Standardpain · 23/07/2025 23:42

My personal opinion is that it was Henry V11 who was responsible for the Princes being murdered.

Have you ever read Josephine Tey's book The Daughter of Time? It's a fiction book where a recuperating policeman investigates the murders in the tower. Many years since I read it but it's very interesting and uses historical evidence.

I read The Daughter of Time a few years ago. I actually think Henry VII makes a lot of sense.

TheOtherAgentJohnson · 23/07/2025 23:45

Is there a true crime podcast about this? If not, there should be.

stonebrambleboy · 23/07/2025 23:43

Team Richard here.

Standardpain · 23/07/2025 23:42

My personal opinion is that it was Henry V11 who was responsible for the Princes being murdered.

Have you ever read Josephine Tey's book The Daughter of Time? It's a fiction book where a recuperating policeman investigates the murders in the tower. Many years since I read it but it's very interesting and uses historical evidence.

Swipe left for the next trending thread