The Trial of Richard III

by Richard Drewett, Mark Redhead

Based on the London Weekend Television Production for Channel 4

A modern trial by jury at the Old Bailey of one of the most famous events in English history.

'The court will rise.'

'The charge is that King Richard III did, in or about the month of August 1483, in the Tower of London, murder Prince Edward, Prince of Wales, and Prince Richard, Duke of York.'

Richard III stands indicted at the bar of history. In this unique work the members of the jury have been invited to deliver their verdict on a matter which has been the subject of fierce controversy and dispute for over 500 years: whether or not King Richard III was responsible for the alleged murder of the two young princes. He himself was killed on the battlefield of Bosworth in 1485 and so is beyond the power and jurisdiction of this or any other human court. The task of the jury is, therefore, to pass historical judgement upon him. Their verdict will stimulate rather than terminate the controversy that has surrounded the deaths of the princes.

Presiding over the case is Lord Elwyn-Jones, the former Lord Chancellor, and he is ably supported by two of Britain's leading criminal Q.C.'s.

A fascinating, powerful, and exciting book copiously illustrated with relevant documents, portraits and other graphic evidence and offering the reader the opportunity to join the jury in weighing the evidence and reaching his or her own verdict before discovering that of the television jury.

Genres: History, Nonfiction

160 pages, Paperback

First published October 25, 1984

Reviews

[Elma Voogdt · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book “The Trial of Richard III” dates from 1984 and deals with the “trial” about Richard III. Richard III was king of England from 1483 to 1485. He was the fourth and youngest son of Richard of York and Cecily Neville. Richard will go down in history as the cruel man who seized the English throne by murdering the two young sons of his deceased brother Edward IV. That is what this lawsuit is all about. Did or didn’t Richard III kill his two young nephews? This lawsuit should actually be seen as an intriguing experiment.

The book contains the unabridged transcript of the Channel 4 show celebrating the 500th anniversary of the Battle of Bosworth and it is clearly much more than a simple court case. Using the excuse of a guilty/innocent tribunal issue, Channel 4 staff made an entertaining and interesting historical documentary about one of the most famous mysteries in the history of the English Monarchy. Witness after witness are presented, interrogated, etc. Here the reader is given the opportunity to learn many details from the forensic analysis performed on historical documents or archaeological finds. The verdict can be found at the end, on a separate page. Whether you agree with the jury’s conclusion is up to the reader.

In addition to the full transcription, the book also includes the entire foreword by the current Duke of Gloucester. Richard III was also Duke of Gloucester and they have the same first name….

In summary: A really interesting approach to the subject, involving contemporary (well, 80’s) experts in various fields with witnesses, a jury etc. to debate the question of Richard III’s innocence or guilt in the murder of the princes in the tower. Despite being a transcription, it is overall very readable. However, it is recommended that you as a reader have some knowledge about the fortunes of Richard III.

[Nonethousand Oberrhein · Rating 3 out of 5]

A royal cold case
The unabridged transcript of the BBC show to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Battle of Bosworth is far more that a simple staged court case. With the excuse of a guilty/not guilty tribunal issue, Channel 4 staff and collaborators build a fun and interesting history documentary on one of the most renown mysteries involving the royal crown. As witness upon witness is presented, interrogated and dismissed, the reader will have a chance to learn a lot of details from the forensic analysis performed on historical documents or archeology findings. A short publication that, not searching for academical approval, allows the “layman” to scholarly glimpse 500 years in the past.

[Gwen Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed the book. Would have loved have seen the TV production.

[Caitlin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really interesting approach to the subject matter, calling in contemporary (well, 1980s) experts in various fields with QCs and a jury to debate the question of Richard III's innocence or guilt of murdering the princes in the tower. I learned some new things I hadn't come across before, and overall found the book very readable.

[Salli LaBelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

Addictive read if you are in to history and Law like me! Read it overnight, couldn't put it down. Great and surprising conclusion.