Cold Case Reopened: The Princes in the Tower

Chapter One - Introduction

Chapter Two - A murder case?

Chapter Three - A detective's musings

Chapter Four - What of the boys?

Chapter Five - The discovery of the "bodies"

Chapter Six - The changeling theory

Chapter Seven - Events after Richard III's coronation

Chapter Eight - The usual suspects

Chapter Nine - The repealing of Titulus Regius

Chapter Ten - The unspoken theory

Chapter Eleven - The ultimate schemer and the duke

Chapter Twelve - The case against Richard

Chapter Thirteen - I've gathered you here today

Chapter Fourteen - Author's Notes

Twenty-two years in the Metropolitan Police Force and six years working as an investigator in the insurance industry has taught me one thing - there is always
one key piece of evidence
that proves fundamental when trying to establish a person's guilt for a particular crime. I have found from experience that this applies to any crime, from fraud to murder.

As you probably appreciate, working on a “
cold case”
is harder than working on a fresh case. The evidence is all historical, be it five years ago or thirty years ago. It is actually very rare that a new piece of significant evidence emerges in the older cold cases, despite what television programmes have you believe. Often the witnesses that have left statements in the original investigation are no longer around to interview again; they are either untraceable or dead. The other problem with cold cases is that the new investigator is often not afforded the luxury of having the forensic evidence at their disposal that is normally available today.

When you are considering a case that occurred more than five hundred years ago you are really up against it. The case has moved from simply being
“cold”
to “
freezing.”
Obviously none of the witnesses are alive and no forensics are (currently) available. In reality we don't even know what crime, if any, has been committed. If we now factor into the equation that this case is one of the most enduring and famous in English history, no sensible detective would take the case on. The case of the
“murder”
of the Princes in the Tower has been debated by academics, history lovers and, yes, even fellow detectives for centuries. Everyone has an opinion on the matter. Even those that aren't sensible… just like me.
 

I will say at the start of this book that I do not consider myself a writer - I am an investigator. This is my first book and quite probably my last. I don't expect to be able to quit my job because of it; in truth I am writing it for a bit of fun, so please go easy on me with your scathing reviews. Think of me as the bumbling, yet loveable, cigar smoking Lieutenant Columbo – you couldn't possibly insult him, could you? It probably will not be a long book, as I am trained in keeping reports as short as possible. If you are looking for waffle then this is not the place to come. I'm sure many of you will be glad I've kept matters short, as we have all picked up massive biographies with a sense of foreboding. I am not an historian. I had an extremely poor history teacher at school and that led me to drop the subject as soon as I was able. As a result I don't even have an O-Level in history. However, over time I have come to love the subject and given my time again, who knows which path I would have taken? Finally, I am writing under a pseudonym. I can just see the sort of reaction my former colleagues would have in the pub on Saturday night if they realized that I had “written a book.”

It is also worth mentioning that I am neither a Ricardian nor a particular supporter of the House of Tudor. I am not coming at this work from a particular angle, and I am not looking to demonise any particular person or defend another. I will go where the evidence and my gut feeling takes me.

I will look at the evidence as I see it and try to establish probable guilt. The evidence that is available in this case is not evidence that would support a conviction in a court of law today. Even a part time student of the law would have any such case we brought against a “guilty party” thrown out of court in less than a day. However,
“evidence”
such as we have is used by the police every day in attempting to understand events and draw links between victims, suspects and motivations. Real evidence for the courts has to follow later. I am not saying that I will treat each piece of “evidence” the same; weight has to be given to more reliable sources and less weight to less reliable sources and hearsay. Downright lies have to be discarded without any consideration.

So, the preliminaries are over, and you know who I am and how I am approaching this book. We need to reach into the archives and dust off the case. I will approach the case in the order that I would if I were investigating it. This means that we may jump around a little, and we certainly won't be handling matters in a chronological order.

One final thing, there is a Facebook page that discusses the issues around this book and related matters, please like it
here.
 

These are the facts of the case as we know them:
 

Two boys were taken into the Tower of London. Boy One entered the Tower of London in mid May 1483. Boy Two entered the Tower of London on 16
th
June 1483. The last sighting of them was sometime between late June and the 6
th
July 1483.
 

The two boys in question are:

1. Boy One:
   

King Edward V of England – Aged twelve.
Eldest
son of King Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth Woodville.
 

1. Boy Two:
   

Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York – Aged nine.
Youngest
Son of King Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth Woodville.

That is really all we have to go on.
 

We have no identified bodies (more on that later). Hence, if this case were brought to the police today, it would not be treated as a murder case, simply a missing person case. However, we all know that a missing person case can very rapidly develop into a murder case, even if there are no bodies found.
 

If I were the investigating officer then, I would immediately interview the responsible adult in whose care the young princes were. In this case, the responsible adult would be their uncle, Richard III. Regretfully, this isn't possible.
 

So, instead I would attempt to build up a timeline of events that lead up to the point that the case was reported to the police. This will give me a background and allow me to make connections and decide where to go next. In this list of events I will try to remove as many of the events that could be classed as hearsay as possible.
 

Of course we have no formal record of the case being reported. There was no-one to report it to.

It would then make sense to consider events up to when we can be sure that there were no further sightings of the missing boys. We know this was after Richard III's coronation on the 6
th
July 1483. We will start our timeline from the most significant event that led up to the coronation of Richard III, namely the death of his elder brother Edward IV.

9
th
April 1483

King Edward IV dies in the Palace of Westminster.

Prince Edward is residing at the traditional home of the Prince of Wales, Ludlow. His uncle, the queen's brother, Lord Rivers is with him.
 

Upon his father's death Prince Edward immediately becomes Edward V, despite the fact that he himself is not aware of it.

Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, is with his mother, Queen Elizabeth, and his sisters in Westminster.
 

Richard, Duke of Gloucester is at Middleham Castle, Yorkshire.

Although no documentation exists, everyone at court seemed to be aware that King Edward IV had named his brother, Gloucester as
“Protector of the Realm”
.

10
th
April 1483

Factions opened up at court:

1.
The Woodvilles – the queen’s supporters.
 
They had control of the new king (via Rivers) and the royal treasure at the Tower of London (via Dorset who was Constable of the Tower. Dorset was the queen’s son via her first marriage.) They did not want Gloucester as Lord Protector as they knew their power would diminish.
 

2.
The Anti- Woodvilles – Lord Hastings and Lord Stanley plus others.
 

There were notable others including the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Lincoln who gave support to neither faction at this stage.
 

11
th
April 1483

1. Prince Edward is proclaimed Edward V in London.
   

The Woodvilles believed that precedent meant the role of Lord Protector only lasted until the time the new king was crowned.

A Council Meeting takes place and date of coronation is fixed at 4
th
May.
 

It is agreed that Edward V should be summoned to London without further delay. Hastings objects to the size of the escort that the Woodvilles demand. Compromise is reached and the escort size is set at 2000 men.

Letter written by Dorset to Rivers informing him of death of Edward IV and that the new king should be brought to London without delay and arrive at least three days before the coronation.

At some point around 11
th
April, Hastings takes it upon himself to write to Gloucester informing him of his brother's death.
 

14
th
April 1483

News reaches Ludlow of death of Edward IV and that the young king should be taken to London as soon as possible.

Preparations take place to find the escort to accompany the king.

Duke of Buckingham (the leading noble in the country other than Gloucester) learns of Edward IV's death whilst in Breacon.

16
th
April 1483

Edward IV's body taken to Westminster Abbey for funeral services.

Hastings' letter reaches Middleham informing Gloucester of events.
 

Letters are written by Gloucester to both the queen, giving condolences, and to the council reminding them of Edward IV's desire that he should be
Protector.
In addition, he also writes to Buckingham telling him of his concerns that the Woodvilles would try to prevent him becoming Protector.
 

20
th
April 1483

Gloucester leaves Middleham accompanied by 300 gentlemen of the north.
 

In London, council meets for two or three day session. Debate rages over the date of coronation as the anti-Woodville faction become more vocal. Gloucester's letter to council arrives and his supporters rally further. The Woodville supporters are concerned that as
Protector
Gloucester would gain almost sovereign power. They put forward a proposal that the council would govern but with Gloucester at their head. This motion is voted on and agreed by majority and the coronation date was again confirmed as 4
th
May.

England was at war with France. Sir Edward Woodville (brother to the dowager queen) was appointed Admiral of the Fleet and he set about recruiting forces to protect the shipping in the channel.

Hastings continues to report to Gloucester about events in London.
 

21
st
April 1483

Gloucester arrives in York and holds funeral mass for Edward IV.

Buckingham receives Gloucester's letter and dispatches his agent Humphrey Persivall to give his support to Gloucester.

22
nd
April 1483

Gloucester leaves York heading south.
 

24
rd
April 1483

Edward V sets out from Ludlow accompanied by Earl Rivers and 2000 men.
 

26
th
April 1483

Gloucester arrives in Nottingham.
 

Persivall probably meets Gloucester in Nottingham and informs him that Buckingham will meet him in Northampton. Persivall leaves Nottingham to meet with Buckingham in order to pass on instructions received from Gloucester.
 

Messengers sent from both Gloucester and Buckingham to intercept the king's party and instruct them to meet the Dukes in Northampton.

27
th
April 1483

At some point between the 10
th
April and 27
th
April Dorset removes the royal treasure from the Tower of London and it is split for safety between Elizabeth Woodville, himself and Sir Edward Woodville.