Comments by "Evan" (@MrEvanfriend) on "Richard III - Guilty or Innocent? Documentary" video.

Regardless of what other theories about the princes in the Tower may be, I find the fact that Richard III had the best access to them AND stood to benefit the most from their deaths far too convenient for any other theory to make any sense.
12
@RenaissanceMan29 You're still ignoring the elephant in the room - those princes were the only thing standing between Richard and the Crown.
3
@balthiersgirl2658 Someone else could just as easily claim that they were legitimate. With them gone, Richard's primary challengers to the throne were out of the way. He needed them dead.
3
@gingerkid1048 Richard got to be King after they were gone. It "allowing for his demonization" mattered to absolutely nobody including Richard himself.
2
@RenaissanceMan29 Could have been for sure, but why risk it? It gets found out, you immediately have a stronger claim than Richard's - and it isn't like his position was overly secure to begin with.
2
@RenaissanceMan29 Sure. But also, people like power. Numerous wars in numerous countries have been fought over "who gets to be king", including several in England. And when an ambitious man who wants the crown has the two people standing between him and the crown in his custody, and they wind up dead/disappeared, the almost certain suspect is the guy who benefits the most - to wit by gaining the Crown - from their demise. You're overthinking this.
2
@RenaissanceMan29 Plausible, certainly. But not a better explanation.
1