Cold Case Reopened: The Princes in the Tower by Mark Garber

had the opportunity. By that stage there would have been no need; Henry Tudor would have committed the deed himself.

    So, My Lady the King's Mother, it seems that you are in the clear.

    So, Henry Tudor, King of England and your wife, Elizabeth of York, the murderer must be one of you. But which one? No-one has ever seriously suggested that Elizabeth of York murdered her brothers, but why on Earth not? Is it so shocking a thing to consider that a young and beautiful girl would commit such a crime against her young brothers?

    We cannot alter the fact that you, Elizabeth of York, had the most to gain from your brothers' deaths. On their deaths you would become your father's heir and have your own claim to the throne of England. This claim was stronger than that of your uncle or the man who became your husband. The person with the most to gain from a person's death is always high on a list of suspects.

    You were also schooled by a mother whose actions illustrated that women could be highly influential at a royal court. You probably rightly believed that one day a woman could rule a country and probably dreamed that you would be that woman (although it was your granddaughters who eventually achieved this). You clearly wanted a crown, and if it was not yours to wear in your own right, then you would be queen to the man that did wear it. It did not matter if that man was your uncle or Henry Tudor. Of course, if your brothers were still alive then your claim would not exist and your value as a bride would plummet. In order to achieve your ambitions then, your brothers had to be dead. Did you order their deaths?

    And yourself Henry Tudor. It takes a man with extreme confidence to legitimise two boys who are ahead of you in the line of succession. Could that confidence have come by the fact you knew the boys were dead because you had arranged it yourself? If this were the case, then the murder would almost certainly have been carried out by Sir Robert Willoughby when he arrived at the Tower of London with the Earl of Warwick just days after Bosworth. Willoughby would have been ordered to make a complete search of the Tower, and if the boys were there then he was to kill them and dispose of the bodies. Blame could simply have been put on your predecessor who was already suspected of their deaths.

    Yet this brings us back to the point as to why the Earl of Warwick had been allowed to live. However, this is simple to answer in your case. The people of England knew Warwick was alive at the time of Bosworth. If he suddenly died then the people would have known that you, Henry Tudor, had your hand in the matter. You had no choice but to let him live. On the other hand, the princes had not been seen for three years; most of the population believed them to be already dead. The murder of two boys, already believed to be dead, would not cause problem, would it?

    As much as I like the theory that you, Elizabeth of York, murdered your brothers, I cannot quite see how you would achieve it. The only way I can see it happening was if you plotted with your uncle Richard III and persuaded him to order it. Yes, you may have managed to arrange a visit to see the boys with your uncle's permission, but would you have the means to kill them during that visit?

    It would not surprise me in the slightest if you, Elizabeth of York, were one day found to be the murderer of your brothers. However, unlike your husband, the opportunity to commit the act doesn't seem to be there.

    So, with Elizabeth of York in the clear, the only suspect that remains is you, Henry Tudor, King of England.

    You had your plan in mind. You would claim the crown of England as your own by right of conquest. Then, after papal dispensation had been granted, you would marry Elizabeth of York, unite the rival royal houses and end the wars of the roses at the altar, not the battlefield. With your marriage any persons who claimed that you did not have the right to the throne in your