Do you believe Richard III killed the princes?

Yes, I think he very probably did. In the seventeenth century, building work on the Tower of London unearthed two skeletons of children.

Sure, he did. Why shouldn't he? Also he had the opportunity and power and reason for doing so.

Yes. He had means, motive, and opportunity, and he had already proved himself a ruthless man willing to do anything in his pursuit of power. He is by far the likeliest person to have done away with the princes. He was not a good Uncle.

Evidence of any important political event of those times can be so skewed that any pronouncement must be "personal". In that context, Shakespeare has a lot to answer for! But he was basing the story on a biased historian's opinion.

I think henry VII killed them, richard had declared them bastards, the government agreed and gave him the throne, he had nothing to fear from them, they could not have the throne, but henry had a very weak claim to the throne and may have thought that at any time the government could have changed it's mind and declared the boys legitimate, it was a big risk for henry to take, he could have easily hired someone to kill them.There are lots of books on the princes in the tower, go on e bay or other sites and pick a couple. Take no notice of the play richard III by shakespeare, he wrote that to suck up to the tudors, he made richard a villain and we have thought that he was one ever since.

Yes and I known nothing more than what has already been written,

People during the reign of Richard III, before his death at Bosworth Field in 1485, widely believed he'd killed the Princes and demanded that he produce them. Had he been able to show them alive publicly it would have saved him a great deal of political trouble, enough to have avoided Bosworth and saved his throne.

Yes. There were MANY people at the time demanding that Richard III produce the Princes publicly, including close royal relatives in Europe, like a sister or Aunt who was like a Duchess of Burgundy or something who were calling him a "murderer". People were loudly demanding that he show the Princes alive and it strongly seemed he could not. In fact, leading up to the Battle of Bosworth Field, people widely believed that he'd murdered his nephews and it was causing dissent in his kingdom and powerful aristocrats were turning away from him and siding with the upstart Henry Tudor who had a much weaker claim to the throne, so Richard III would have been an idiot not to have shown the Princes if he could.

I recommend Josephine Tey's book, The daughter of Time. It's written in 1951, and combines a fictional story of a policeman recovering in hospital with what the author found as facts. Very quaint and of the period, so if you like period detective stories as well as wanting some facts this hits the spot. I'm still undecided on who the culprit was though. Someone beat me to it!!!

Josephine Tey wrote a great book where her detective investigates and finds that Richard III didn't kill the princes. Shakespeare used that idea in a play, which solidified it in people's minds, but there's no historical evidence to support it.