Speaker 1: Thinking Sideways. I'm stories of things we simply don't know
Speaker 1: the answer too. Well. Hi there and thanks for joining
Speaker 1: us again. This is Thinking Sideways the podcast and I
Speaker 1: am Steve as always joined by Joe Hello and Devon Hey,
Speaker 1: who I like to introduce uh it for ourselves? No, no, can.
Speaker 1: I always remember my own name. So that's a good thing.
Speaker 1: A micro manage this stuff. But you know what, we
Speaker 1: need a micro manager, Yeah we do. Okay, Well, today
Speaker 1: we're going to get into a story that I've I've
Speaker 1: been really looking forward to to sharing with everybody, as
Speaker 1: that you two know, but our listeners probably don't. Recently,
Speaker 1: I was in England. It's such a long time, but
Speaker 1: yeah it was. It's such an extended amount of time.
Speaker 1: But when I was there, I of course was touring
Speaker 1: around London and I got the chance to go to
Speaker 1: the Tower of London and was reminded of a story
Speaker 1: that I had heard of but it never really thought
Speaker 1: much of until I actually got to see the site
Speaker 1: where a bunch of the action happened. By the way,
Speaker 1: just as in the side. I was the first time
Speaker 1: I saw the Tower of London myself, I was kind
Speaker 1: of surprised because I was expecting an actual tower. It's
Speaker 1: like a fortress, you know. It's a Yeah, it's very cool.
Speaker 1: But where's the tower. There's several of them. Yeah, they're
Speaker 1: they're short towers. They're short squat towers. They don't really
Speaker 1: look like towers. I just remember how giant the ravens are.
Speaker 1: The ravens. Oh, yes, they are disturbingly big giant there. Well,
Speaker 1: they're hand fed, basically. Yeah, it's seven of them. There
Speaker 1: has to be seven on the grounds at all times
Speaker 1: or the monarchy falls. Is that what the legend is? Yeah,
Speaker 1: they not know about this, this particular story. Yes, I
Speaker 1: I seven might not be the right number, but I
Speaker 1: know that they maybe it's nine, but they have to
Speaker 1: have them on the grounds. And they're they're big. I
Speaker 1: mean like ravens, you see how kind of like when
Speaker 1: you are hiking here, not crows. But ravens are not
Speaker 1: as big as these things. And maybe it's because I
Speaker 1: was a kid when I saw him, but like I
Speaker 1: remember them being giants. Yes, European ravens. That's that's a path, Yes,
Speaker 1: were going down the path. So anyway, the story that
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about is the princes in the tower.
Speaker 1: This is a story about two young princes that we're
Speaker 1: in the Tower of London, thus the name creative job.
Speaker 1: So our story takes place in three and at that time,
Speaker 1: the people that we're gonna be talking about our aristocracy.
Speaker 1: So they have really fancy titles to go with everybody's names,
Speaker 1: and they're all the same names, and they're all the
Speaker 1: same names, which makes it a little rough to keep
Speaker 1: straight and tell. So I'm gonna preface this episode right
Speaker 1: now with saying I'm gonna use everybody's more commonly known names.
Speaker 1: In other words, the first king that we're going to
Speaker 1: talk about is Edward the Fourth, so I'm going to
Speaker 1: refer to him as Edward the Fourth, not his full title,
Speaker 1: just for simplicities reasons. Otherwise, even I'm going to be confused,
Speaker 1: and I could never keep track of all that stuff
Speaker 1: to this day, and I sure, I'm sure I could
Speaker 1: have found out, like say, why, why, prince what's his
Speaker 1: name is called the Prince of Wales. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: these the Prince of Wales. I'm sorry, but Wales is
Speaker 1: like another country over there, you know what, You're the
Speaker 1: Prince of Wales. Okay, Yeah, so there you go. Some
Speaker 1: of that stuff is just I'll explain it to you later, Joe, Okay,
Speaker 1: just not now, okay, okay, all right, So let's go
Speaker 1: ahead and get into the story itself, which is on
Speaker 1: April nine three, King Edward the Fourth, the King of England,
Speaker 1: dies unexpectedly sick for a couple of weeks and then
Speaker 1: just up and dies. It did happen a lot in
Speaker 1: those days the king and somebody wanted your throne. Well,
Speaker 1: he did leave airs. He had two sons. They were
Speaker 1: they were by his wife, yes, so they were not,
Speaker 1: you know, from a mistress. They were from the woman
Speaker 1: who were married. You know that that question did sort
Speaker 1: of pop up that you're going to talk about. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we're gonna we're gonna get there. Um okay. So we
Speaker 1: have Prince Edward, who is referred to as Edward five
Speaker 1: and then and he was thirteen when this happened, so
Speaker 1: he's a boy king. And then there is his little brother, Richard,
Speaker 1: who is because he doesn't have an official number title,
Speaker 1: we're gonna just refer to him as Richard, the Duke
Speaker 1: of York. He's nine. Can we call him Richie? You
Speaker 1: can call him Richie? Alright, So we cool, I mean
Speaker 1: you're nine years old and you have to be duke.
Speaker 1: I think he was duke from the day he was born. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's the way it works. Well, what happens, of course,
Speaker 1: is their father dies and their uncle, whose name is
Speaker 1: Richard the third. Yep, it's already getting confusing. He is
Speaker 1: declared the Lord protector of the boys by the king
Speaker 1: before he dies. Now this isn't recorded officially anywhere, but
Speaker 1: everybody presumes that that's what happens, because he takes him
Speaker 1: and he goes to take the boy back to London
Speaker 1: to reside in the Tower of London, because the Tower
Speaker 1: of London is traditionally where the king would stay until
Speaker 1: the coronation. His coronation, the coronation of our young King
Speaker 1: Edward the five was originally supposed to take place on
Speaker 1: the fourth of May. Then it was pushed back to
Speaker 1: June that year. Before the coronation could take place, their uncle,
Speaker 1: Richard the Third, began to cast outs on the validity
Speaker 1: of the marriage between the deceased king and his wife,
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Woodville. And at the time she was alive, she
Speaker 1: had she was still alive, she had several daughters at
Speaker 1: the as well. They had I think a total of
Speaker 1: nine children, not all of whom survived child but yes,
Speaker 1: nine kids. I believe it was nine children. Evidently the
Speaker 1: church got behind this idea that the marriage was invalid,
Speaker 1: and this was actually brought to the front. Let's see here.
Speaker 1: It was the twenty two of June, like six days
Speaker 1: before the coronation. Three days before the cornation, the preacher
Speaker 1: at St. Paul's Cross claimed that Richard had was the
Speaker 1: only Richard the third was the only legitimate heir to
Speaker 1: the crown because they were saying that his brother, Edward
Speaker 1: the Fourth had initially been engaged to another woman and
Speaker 1: then married the mother of these two young princes. That's
Speaker 1: the weirdest thing I ever heard in life. It's it's
Speaker 1: very weird. I think it's something to do with I
Speaker 1: don't know if it's contractual is the way that is
Speaker 1: the right word for it, But I don't know exactly
Speaker 1: how they treated engagement back in those days. Yeah, basically
Speaker 1: claimed that because he was engaged with someone else, he
Speaker 1: couldn't get married to her the way he did. Surprising
Speaker 1: nobody noticed until this particular moment. And there's there's some
Speaker 1: doubts as to whether or not he was actually engaged
Speaker 1: the woman that they said he was engaged to. Which
Speaker 1: was she like a queen or princess of a different
Speaker 1: place or was she No, she was, she was she
Speaker 1: was English royalty. But yeah, was It was really really weird.
Speaker 1: So what happens is this, this sermon happens, and then
Speaker 1: on the twenty five of June, which at this point
Speaker 1: I believe the coronation has already been shoved back again,
Speaker 1: though there's no official date for it to happen. Now,
Speaker 1: a group of and I quote lords, knights and gentlemen
Speaker 1: petitioned Richard to take the throne. Everybody's changing their allegiance
Speaker 1: from the current king, who has not yet been crowned
Speaker 1: and who's thirteen years old, and they're throwing their weight
Speaker 1: and their beliefs over to Richard the Third, who's an adult.
Speaker 1: And these guys probably just saw which way the wind
Speaker 1: was blowing. I mean, when he heard the news about
Speaker 1: the declaration about the marriage, they knew what was happening.
Speaker 1: And it's hard to say in in the history, it's
Speaker 1: hard to get a clear sense of who's first started
Speaker 1: casting these doubts about Edward the fourth and his wife.
Speaker 1: We don't know if it's Richard the third. If it
Speaker 1: was somebody else, how this whole thing happened, We're not
Speaker 1: exactly positive. It's kind of lost in the sand, yeah,
Speaker 1: but basically, obviously enough, Richard takes the throne and he
Speaker 1: is now the king. The issue at the church with
Speaker 1: the validity of Edward the Fourth's marriage actually gets passed
Speaker 1: into an act by British Parliament the next year. It's
Speaker 1: called Titless Regius I believe it's how you say it,
Speaker 1: the Titles Regius Act, and that stated that their marriage
Speaker 1: King Edward the fourth and Elizabeth Woodville was invalid. So
Speaker 1: therefore those boys could absolutely not be king, and none
Speaker 1: of their children were had any claim to the throne
Speaker 1: at all. So these little guys are kind of left
Speaker 1: out in the cold. Yeah, but they're still family, right,
Speaker 1: so you can kind of assume even if you know
Speaker 1: the uncle is like, well, they've got a mother who's alive,
Speaker 1: and they're separated from their mother. Their mother had initially
Speaker 1: gone into hiding when her husband died. And then the
Speaker 1: boys didn't come to the tower at the same time.
Speaker 1: The young king came first, and then later his brother
Speaker 1: came and joined him. They found him well basically what
Speaker 1: happens Joe's kind of hitting it is that the two
Speaker 1: princes were seen on the grounds of the Tower of
Speaker 1: London in the spring of four three, and then, according
Speaker 1: to some writings, they just up and disappeared, and some
Speaker 1: others they were seeing less and less and were moved
Speaker 1: into the rear apartments of the castle, and then they
Speaker 1: were gone and they were never seen again alive. I
Speaker 1: wonder if maybe the mother kind of knew what was up, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, why does a woman go into hiding when
Speaker 1: her husband, Yeah, it dies from totally legitimate causes, ostensibly right,
Speaker 1: with two sons who have totally legitimate again ostensibly claims
Speaker 1: to the throne. And it is I've read some accounts
Speaker 1: of what she could have been thinking, because the thing is,
Speaker 1: she does eventually sort of give some allegiance to Richard
Speaker 1: the third, and then later on she then shifts her
Speaker 1: allegiance to the next king, which is Henry the seventh.
Speaker 1: So I think that, to steal the words out of
Speaker 1: Joe's mouth, she saw the writing on the wall, she knew,
Speaker 1: she knew that the only way her family was going
Speaker 1: to survive was to play ball. Yeah, because she had
Speaker 1: more more more children, and also, you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: who knows. Maybe he was holding the kids still and
Speaker 1: she was being blackmailed, although more likely the kids were
Speaker 1: already dead. Maybe she thought decided, now I'll just protect
Speaker 1: what's left with my family. Maybe she thought they were
Speaker 1: still alive. Well, let's jump forward. Yeah years. Oh no,
Speaker 1: no, no no, no, two hundred years. We're gonna get the
Speaker 1: time machine. Okay, two hundred years have gone by. It
Speaker 1: is sixteen seventy four. We are still on the grounds
Speaker 1: at the Tower of London, and we're at the White Tower,
Speaker 1: which is one of several towers on the grounds. And
Speaker 1: there's some workmen digging under the stairs in the tower
Speaker 1: and they come across a wooden box. And now I
Speaker 1: imagine these guys, Hey, there's a big wooden box buried
Speaker 1: under the stairs. They crack it open. Not gold. It's
Speaker 1: got the skeletons of two children in it. Have you
Speaker 1: noticed that it's always workmen who find the skeletons. That's
Speaker 1: why I don't want to be a workman. I haven't
Speaker 1: found fun yet. I'm really happy about it. But no,
Speaker 1: they find this box and this the remains that we're
Speaker 1: in this box are widely believed to be the remains
Speaker 1: of these two princes who went missing at ages thirteen
Speaker 1: and nine. Again, I've I've seen accounts that say that
Speaker 1: there was velvet wrapped around them in the box, which
Speaker 1: would lead credence to the theory that, yeah, they probably
Speaker 1: were royalty because common people didn't have velvet. They're very
Speaker 1: expensive fabricle crazy expensive at that point in time. It's
Speaker 1: still expensive now and we can like mass produce it
Speaker 1: my velvet jumpsuit. Oh my god, I don't want to know. Alright,
Speaker 1: So back to the story. I'll okay. The remains that
Speaker 1: they found were later on, I would say within a
Speaker 1: month or so. We're placed in an urn and were
Speaker 1: interred in Westminster Abbey by King Charles the Second. But
Speaker 1: there was some analysis done of the bones. This was
Speaker 1: done in three I don't know why, but the royalty
Speaker 1: actually agreed to open up the urn and let somebody
Speaker 1: examine it. So the burn they didn't burn, the bones
Speaker 1: and the ashes it was actual. Yeah, And it's weird
Speaker 1: to me whatever I think, and I know this is
Speaker 1: confusing to some people. I think of an urn, and
Speaker 1: I think of a little urn that's got ashes. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's big ERNs too, so that's something to clarify. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure why they would choose an urn to put
Speaker 1: bones in. I'm guessing they piled them up. I don't
Speaker 1: think they had temper were. Yes, So the analysis was
Speaker 1: done on the bones and the guy who did it
Speaker 1: again history has gone back and people have really chewed
Speaker 1: up his analysis of it. But he said, yeah, they
Speaker 1: could both be boys, but I can't tell that for sure.
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure one of them is about twelve or thirteen,
Speaker 1: and I think the other ones around ten. They were
Speaker 1: then sealed back up and no one has ever been
Speaker 1: allowed to get at him again. You think with modern
Speaker 1: technology we could just use Yeah. And you know, I
Speaker 1: gotta say, in a way, I kind of agree with
Speaker 1: the Royalty in this situation because there's been a lot
Speaker 1: of coverage of it here and there, and there's a
Speaker 1: footnote on this story that explains why it became so
Speaker 1: popular again. But they said, you know, okay, well you
Speaker 1: could do all this work and you could go ahead
Speaker 1: and check it out, and you could figure out if
Speaker 1: they are indeed the bones of those princes, and well,
Speaker 1: two things are gonna need to be figured out then, One,
Speaker 1: if they're not what are we supposed to do with
Speaker 1: the bones? Where do we put them? And to dfill
Speaker 1: and to it doesn't solve the mystery. No, we still
Speaker 1: don't know who or why who killed them and specifically
Speaker 1: why that happened. So it does nothing to solve the mystery.
Speaker 1: So I can kind of understand, you know, for out
Speaker 1: of respect reason. Yeah, And I would assume that they
Speaker 1: just kind of have come to terms with it at
Speaker 1: this point, right, I mean you can kind of see
Speaker 1: how maybe in the thirties, you know, it's been a
Speaker 1: couple hundred years, is maybe somebody in the royal family
Speaker 1: deeply connected with this story for whatever reason, so they
Speaker 1: were very interested and very curious to know if you know,
Speaker 1: this was a valid claim. And and you know, I
Speaker 1: think since then maybe it's just family has decided well
Speaker 1: that's just it. Yeah, Yeah, you don't shake it up,
Speaker 1: you don't shake up behind let it go. That. And
Speaker 1: the other thing too, is at the royals. I mean,
Speaker 1: they've got all kinds of people buried in places like
Speaker 1: Winds Mr At Westminster Abbey, and you know, it's kind
Speaker 1: of questionable and maybe maybe not everybody buried in there
Speaker 1: was part of the royal family, something that was brought
Speaker 1: up as well. Now we're gonna have to do everybody
Speaker 1: can of worms. If you exhumed all of their corpses
Speaker 1: and a lot of extensive DNA testing on all of them,
Speaker 1: you might find a lot of them were like like
Speaker 1: not actually the children of the kings. Everybody thought that
Speaker 1: were the children of all kinds of things like that.
Speaker 1: It wouldn't look like I said, a big can of worms.
Speaker 1: It's just not a good thing. So because like, for example,
Speaker 1: you know, imagine that there was actually a break in
Speaker 1: the lineage somewhere like a couple of hundred years ago,
Speaker 1: and our present royal family doesn't actually have any legitimate
Speaker 1: claim to royalty anyway. I mean, that's entirely possible, and
Speaker 1: that would be a giant scandal. Yeah, well and think
Speaker 1: about it. Think what that would do to the housewives
Speaker 1: of America who they got to obsess over. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's true. So now we're gonna go ahead and we're
Speaker 1: gonna get into the theory section of everything, And I'm
Speaker 1: gonna kind of break this up into two subsections. Sure
Speaker 1: that or not a theories they were murdered or they worked.
Speaker 1: So we're going to start with they were murdered, So
Speaker 1: who could have done it? Who could have killed them?
Speaker 1: Colonel Mustard Candlestick exactly, all right, So our first and
Speaker 1: most obvious culprit is Richard the third one. Okay, well
Speaker 1: but and and well you might like some of the
Speaker 1: stuff that's in this theory then, because there's holes in
Speaker 1: this theory, I think the problem. What do you got? Well,
Speaker 1: it just seems like he had a pretty solid grip.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's not like there were a bunch of
Speaker 1: people running around saying no, you don't have a legitimate claim.
Speaker 1: You know, the Church was behind him, Most of the
Speaker 1: powerful people in England were behind him. Parliament later passed
Speaker 1: a thing that said, yeah, I know these boys don't
Speaker 1: have any claim. Their mother was on the run. Which
Speaker 1: was a great argument for why they wouldn't have been
Speaker 1: legitimate sons is that if you have royalty that potentially
Speaker 1: could somehow revalidate their claim to the throne. That's a threat.
Speaker 1: But they're not always going to that's true. But if
Speaker 1: they if they disappeared too, that's kind of like that's
Speaker 1: kind of like an implicit acknowledgement on your part, if
Speaker 1: you're Richard the Third that they are the legitimate airs
Speaker 1: if you felt that that their claim was so strong
Speaker 1: that you needed to kill them. Well, and the thing
Speaker 1: is is that there were all these rumors about the
Speaker 1: boys having been killed, and he never responded to any
Speaker 1: of those. And he also never opened an investigation as
Speaker 1: to where were the boys. That's kind of funny that
Speaker 1: you think somebody would be asking those questions. I mean,
Speaker 1: they sort of go away, and well, it was everybody,
Speaker 1: it was. It was rumor. Everybody's we haven't seen the princes, Well,
Speaker 1: they must have been killed, on and on and on.
Speaker 1: So it's hard to say. But here's here's the problem
Speaker 1: with saying, well, Richard must be the one who's responsible
Speaker 1: for this. In history, it's always written by the people
Speaker 1: who win the wars. And Richard was only on the
Speaker 1: throne for I believe two. Yeah, he died in August
Speaker 1: or Foive, so he wasn't there very long. And this
Speaker 1: is the time when we're going they're going through the
Speaker 1: War of the Roses, which is a giant battle between
Speaker 1: two sides of the family. They got really down and
Speaker 1: dirty the his Richard, the third side of the family,
Speaker 1: lost out, and history was written over them. There's things
Speaker 1: about Richard, that aren't exactly true, that are just accepted
Speaker 1: commonly is having to be the truth, such as like
Speaker 1: a lot of a lot of the propaganda the year
Speaker 1: fed today, you know, in the media out there. And
Speaker 1: the thing is is that one of the things that
Speaker 1: you hear is that he had a humped left or
Speaker 1: right shoulder. In other words, he was physically deformed. And
Speaker 1: there are paintings of him where he's got a humped shoulder. Uh.
Speaker 1: They've actually done X ray analysis of those paintings and
Speaker 1: they were altered at some point after the fact to
Speaker 1: match that description. Although when they actually discovered his core
Speaker 1: or his bones on his corps, they just as I'm
Speaker 1: sure you're aware, you're gonna tell our listeners, they discovered
Speaker 1: his corps recently, excuse me, his bones again underneath the
Speaker 1: car park. He did have his back and he had
Speaker 1: severe scoliosis. So it's quite possible, is that his portrait,
Speaker 1: Sure that was done while he was king. It was
Speaker 1: like tactfully he was actually readjusted to look normal. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: and then somebody went back and said, we'll really make
Speaker 1: this look like Yeah, that's that's very very likely a possibility. Uh.
Speaker 1: The other thing is that Richard lost the battle and
Speaker 1: was killed. It's the Battle of bosworth Field is where
Speaker 1: he's killed, and Henry the Seventh takes over. He was
Speaker 1: on the Tutor side of the family, so again the
Speaker 1: opposite side that didn't like his side, and Henry the Seventh,
Speaker 1: over the course of his reign systematically went through and
Speaker 1: wiped out the majority of the people that were on
Speaker 1: I believe the York side of the lineage. We don't
Speaker 1: know how much of the information that's out there that
Speaker 1: says that Richard the three is guilty in the one
Speaker 1: who ordered it's true, because it could be propaganda. Absolutely, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, And again I say that like they're they're
Speaker 1: thirteen and nine, and I think I don't know a
Speaker 1: thirteen year old that, like, you know, their father died
Speaker 1: of natural causes. Everybody says, you don't have a legitimate thing.
Speaker 1: You just like take him in and you treat him
Speaker 1: really well and give him a lot of land. The chances,
Speaker 1: you know, treat him like your own son, the chances
Speaker 1: of him coming back and saying, no, I'm the rightful king.
Speaker 1: I just don't feel like they're that big. And maybe
Speaker 1: maybe they are. Maybe they were. Maybe he was showing that.
Speaker 1: But then you kill both of them. Why because if
Speaker 1: you kill the elder, the younger becomes Yeah, you're right,
Speaker 1: and nine year olds are really really good at holding grudges.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I think that especially. You know, you got
Speaker 1: to look at the royal the royals of yourpe, the
Speaker 1: royal families, they were basically crime families. Yea, they're they're
Speaker 1: like you know, yeah, they were like the corleonest they
Speaker 1: and so the backstabbing, you know, in fighting and fighting
Speaker 1: wasn't and deadly and continually and deadly. So the idea
Speaker 1: that Richard could have taken him and treated him like
Speaker 1: just treated them just one like his own, like his
Speaker 1: own kids, and they would never come back at stabman
Speaker 1: the back and try to take the throne away. Of
Speaker 1: course they would. That is the way it's done, its
Speaker 1: way business is practice. So the next up on the
Speaker 1: list is a fellow by the name of James Tyrrell.
Speaker 1: I believe it's how you pronounced his name. He was
Speaker 1: a loyal knight to the House of York. He served
Speaker 1: under Richard the Third. Evidently he was quite loyal to Richard,
Speaker 1: though eventually he did leave England and went to France
Speaker 1: and when he came back, he was leading a revolt
Speaker 1: against the monarchy. He came back in fifteen o one,
Speaker 1: which it was the tutors at that point. So we've
Speaker 1: got Henry the Seventh is on the crowd and his
Speaker 1: rebellion doesn't go so well, and he's captured, and back
Speaker 1: in those days and in his in terror gation, which
Speaker 1: is actually tortured. Oh man, No, it's more than that though.
Speaker 1: In those days, like we do these days, like whatever,
Speaker 1: we do some really horrible stuff. But what they did,
Speaker 1: I gotta say, if I had to choose between that
Speaker 1: and water boarding, I mean, I'm not gonna watch. I
Speaker 1: gotta wine about water board. Yeah, well, that's a pretty
Speaker 1: civilized torture. Well, during his his interrogation, he supposedly confessed
Speaker 1: to killing the princess. I would have to if somebody
Speaker 1: were doing that to me right now, I would be like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I killed them, Yeah, I don't care. Yeah, I'll confess
Speaker 1: to anything. Hell yeah. So that's the problem. And you
Speaker 1: know the thing is is that we know that information
Speaker 1: gotten out of torture is not reliable. And the other
Speaker 1: issue with it is that there's only one writing or
Speaker 1: one recording of this confession, and it was written thirty
Speaker 1: years afterwards. It was a fellow by the name of
Speaker 1: Thomas Moore wrote this and said that this is what
Speaker 1: came out of it. But he's the only one to
Speaker 1: ever write it, so we don't again have a whole
Speaker 1: lot of support how true it is. There weren't official
Speaker 1: transcripts of the interrogator that. Well, they didn't use their smartphones.
Speaker 1: Come on, man, I know it is. However, from the
Speaker 1: writing of that confession, at least from what I can gather.
Speaker 1: When you hear the story told, and you hear the
Speaker 1: murder of the princess told, it tends to go that
Speaker 1: they were smothered with a pillow in their sleep. So somebody,
Speaker 1: three men went into their room and smothered them. Takes
Speaker 1: three of them, three grown men better, I mean, that's
Speaker 1: herol here. He said that he and two other men
Speaker 1: were the ones who did it, upon the orders of
Speaker 1: the then King Richard the third. And did he give
Speaker 1: a time frame for that? Uh? No, was it before Richard?
Speaker 1: Well it was, it was. It was in It was
Speaker 1: that first year, that first summer that they were in London. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: he also couldn't say where the boys were buried, which
Speaker 1: is an issue. He said somebody else just took care
Speaker 1: of the bodies, was his way of saying of getting
Speaker 1: out of having that piece of information. And that's actually
Speaker 1: a legitimate I mean, in a sense a little. And
Speaker 1: I'm not so sure that the bones found in the
Speaker 1: tower are the princes, because it would actually make a
Speaker 1: lot more sense to get rid of the bodies and
Speaker 1: transport them far away or burn them or something, or
Speaker 1: buried them under a set of stairs so nobody finds
Speaker 1: them for two hundred years. Yeah, but obviously they were found,
Speaker 1: whereas by the time they were found, it was it
Speaker 1: didn't affect anybody who was alive. But where they found,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, were they found like just like chilling under
Speaker 1: the stairs, or where they encased in like rock, or
Speaker 1: like they were burying in the dirt and they were
Speaker 1: in a box. They were in a box in the
Speaker 1: dirt is right next to the Thames. If they had
Speaker 1: just taken them out and pitch them into the river
Speaker 1: and they you know, they would have been, that would
Speaker 1: have been. But that nobody would bat an eye and
Speaker 1: those days that a corpse floating down the Thames. True,
Speaker 1: but people would see you leaving with the corpses of children,
Speaker 1: which were not things that usually left to the tower grounds.
Speaker 1: So there there's an issue with that. I know where
Speaker 1: you're headed with it, and I like it, and it
Speaker 1: makes sense, it's simpler. But I can also think we
Speaker 1: don't want any witnesses at all because people just never
Speaker 1: stop talking about things they see. We just don't want
Speaker 1: to talk about, especially in England. But yeah, but the
Speaker 1: whole thing about it is I'm not I'm not saying
Speaker 1: you just walk out with the corpse slug over your shoulder.
Speaker 1: You stuff them at a barrel or something like that first,
Speaker 1: you know, and then you put them on bring out
Speaker 1: your dead. They put them my stuff in a barrel
Speaker 1: and put them on a hand truck, you know, and
Speaker 1: just wheel them out to the front gate and says
Speaker 1: I'm going to take back this empty and get us
Speaker 1: a full one, and then nobody nobody's true. It's yeah,
Speaker 1: I know that that is a possibility, but it doesn't
Speaker 1: seem to be the way it happened. So let's move
Speaker 1: on to our next suspect, which is a guy by
Speaker 1: the name of Henry Stafford. Stafford at the time this
Speaker 1: is again three was another very popular supporter of Richard
Speaker 1: the third. He then very quickly changed allegiances and is
Speaker 1: said to have tried to mount a rescue for the princes,
Speaker 1: and upon discovering that they were already dead for some means,
Speaker 1: I don't know what that is, switched his allegiance then
Speaker 1: over to Henry Tutor Henry the seventh, and he was
Speaker 1: quite quickly captured and executed. In so he has considered
Speaker 1: a possibility for the murderer, yes, because it's it's possible
Speaker 1: that he went ahead and he's the one who actually
Speaker 1: killed the boys to weaken Richard the third stands because
Speaker 1: oh look at this guy, we want this guy as king.
Speaker 1: He killed children again to undermine his reputation. But for me,
Speaker 1: the timeline on this doesn't work because he was executed
Speaker 1: for treason on November two, so that even if he
Speaker 1: did supposedly try to mount this rescue, that would mean
Speaker 1: the boys had to have been dead months prior to that,
Speaker 1: so basically June they had to have been killed right
Speaker 1: around the time that Richard said I'll take the throne,
Speaker 1: well pretty much when they arrived. So now, if if
Speaker 1: this guy was the killer Henry Staffory Stafford, okay, so
Speaker 1: if this guy, Henry Stafford was the killer then and
Speaker 1: he mounts this raid, so obviously then he killed them
Speaker 1: months before. He stashed the body somewhere, so he wanted
Speaker 1: to like mount this raid, go in, find about it
Speaker 1: of the children, you know, put out theatrical show shock
Speaker 1: and dismay and everything like that, Right, and then that
Speaker 1: will discredit Richard the third and strengthened his side. Is
Speaker 1: that is that the idea behind this theory. No, the
Speaker 1: theory is that he was going to mount a rescue
Speaker 1: and rescue the princes to restore them to the throne. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but when they he found out that they were dead,
Speaker 1: he turned around and supported Tutor. No, but the theory
Speaker 1: of him killing oh yes, yes, yes, you're that That
Speaker 1: is one way that that theory has gone is that
Speaker 1: he went in and had them killed to then mount
Speaker 1: the supposed rescue and discover them corpses. But yeah, there
Speaker 1: is one big flaw with the logic of that theory.
Speaker 1: How do you know they're under the stairs exactly? How
Speaker 1: how exactly you know where to look with their little corpses? Yes,
Speaker 1: there is a gigantic issue there. Yeah. So so next
Speaker 1: up on the lineup, and I admit this is a
Speaker 1: very tenuous, tenuous theory that Shakespeare No, no, Shakespeare is
Speaker 1: actually the reason that Richard the third kind of is
Speaker 1: also revered as a villain, but he is not considered
Speaker 1: one of the people who could have killed princess. So
Speaker 1: now this one is uh, Margaret Beaufort. She is the
Speaker 1: mother of the future King Henry, the seventh King. Henry
Speaker 1: is a tutor. Yes, people say that it is possible
Speaker 1: that she from Afar orchestrated and ordered their deaths in
Speaker 1: order to help solidify her son's claim to the throne.
Speaker 1: It makes sense accepted that if you think about if
Speaker 1: you see the way that how far away from the
Speaker 1: throne Henry was at that time, It really seems like
Speaker 1: a serious stretch to me. I don't know, He's at
Speaker 1: the throne like a couple of years later, right, So
Speaker 1: his claim couldn't have been that week, wasn't He didn't
Speaker 1: have the strongest claim in the world. And really, by
Speaker 1: having killed the king and asserted himself as king and
Speaker 1: taken power is sort of how he would have had invalidated. Well,
Speaker 1: I guess that's it's he who holds the crowd, So
Speaker 1: I guess, you know, if we're going to look at
Speaker 1: this in terms of, you know, it's one thing to
Speaker 1: like go into like actual battle with a king that
Speaker 1: is a grown man. It's another thing to like murder
Speaker 1: two children. So if you're going to say, Okay, what's
Speaker 1: the best way to get this person off of the
Speaker 1: throne and reassert our family's claim to the throne, Well,
Speaker 1: you vilify the current king and at the same time,
Speaker 1: two birds one stone get rid of the actual legitimate
Speaker 1: claim to the throne of these sons. So you murder
Speaker 1: the son's and frame it like it was Richard the
Speaker 1: third and then, you know, so there will be a
Speaker 1: certain public there will be a certain like voice in
Speaker 1: the back of people's head thinking like, well, they disappeared.
Speaker 1: Maybe he them. He he's the kind of guy who
Speaker 1: would have killed That's exactly why she's on the list.
Speaker 1: I just personally find it to have too many convenient leaps.
Speaker 1: And you know what, it's weird that I like this
Speaker 1: one more than I like Richard. You've just got a
Speaker 1: soft spot in your heart for Richard, that's all it's.
Speaker 1: I think it's because I would have probably done what
Speaker 1: Margaret did. Could she could have been part of an
Speaker 1: overarching conspiracy to bring Henry the Seventh to the throne.
Speaker 1: But so the question is, is like, let's say she
Speaker 1: had a hand in it, so it could it could
Speaker 1: go a couple of different ways. Her her agents could
Speaker 1: murder the princes and then dispose of the bodies, so
Speaker 1: they effectively had disappeared. And so at that point, doesn't
Speaker 1: Richard mounts like a little search, a little search and
Speaker 1: rescue inside the tower to find the kids and find
Speaker 1: out where the hell they went to. Doesn't he like
Speaker 1: start interrogating and and torturing all the various people who
Speaker 1: would have had access to them, You would think, but
Speaker 1: if he worried about that, but we never heard of
Speaker 1: that happening, well, you know, but seriously, you know, he's
Speaker 1: he's he may not he might not be sad and
Speaker 1: sorry that the kids are gone, but he recognized it
Speaker 1: that their death presents a serious problems, or their disappearance
Speaker 1: creates a serious issue. I wonder if he just assumed
Speaker 1: that like their mother came and got them up from school,
Speaker 1: had a note, I mean, obviously not that right, but
Speaker 1: that somebody helped. I don't know, you would think that
Speaker 1: somebody would have somebody would have noticed and somebody would
Speaker 1: have so so so again, if said they were murdered
Speaker 1: their little corpses were found there, then Richard could like,
Speaker 1: I guess that's in a Sanchia kind of putting a
Speaker 1: turd in his pocket because you got in. He murdered
Speaker 1: the kids, left their bodies there, and now Richard, Richard
Speaker 1: and his agents look at that and saying, well, everybody's
Speaker 1: gonna be looking at us. I guess we should like
Speaker 1: sweep the sound of the rug. Maybe yeah, I don't know. Maybe.
Speaker 1: I mean people didn't tend to come out and cry wolf,
Speaker 1: Well you did air that longer, So let me just
Speaker 1: you know, play Devil's advocate here, right. So, Okay, Richard
Speaker 1: does mount very like a secret search, right because he's
Speaker 1: not going to be like, ah, we lost the princes.
Speaker 1: Oh no, because that's a bad idea for publicity. So
Speaker 1: anounces the search. He finds out they've been murdered, and
Speaker 1: he says, there's literally no way I can spend this
Speaker 1: so that people believe it wasn't me. Yeah, probably, so
Speaker 1: let's just ignore it and just you know, I think
Speaker 1: that's the that's the way that you kind of have
Speaker 1: to do with something, and that brings us to our
Speaker 1: final potential culprit, the man himself, Henry the seventh. So
Speaker 1: people say that it is possible that Henry the seventh
Speaker 1: had the boys killed from afar much This runs in
Speaker 1: the same vein as the theory that his mother did.
Speaker 1: It's because he was in exile in France at the time,
Speaker 1: or there are theories that when he took the throne.
Speaker 1: So this is five, this is two years after the
Speaker 1: boys went to the Tower of London, that it is
Speaker 1: possible that the boys were still alive but secreted away
Speaker 1: in the tower and he had them killed because he
Speaker 1: didn't want them to have the legitimate claim. And the
Speaker 1: reason that the theory states that maybe they were still
Speaker 1: alive is that in July of five there was a
Speaker 1: regulation issued by Richard the third Household that stated the
Speaker 1: children should be together at one breakfast. Doesn't say what children,
Speaker 1: It doesn't make any reference to where or who, But
Speaker 1: people have construed that to say possibly the boys were
Speaker 1: still alive and just secreted away could mean that could
Speaker 1: mean anything else too. Yeah, I mean there were children
Speaker 1: because there were children living in the tower, right, Yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: people lived there. People lived there, they had families, they
Speaker 1: had children, But maybe all he was saying was that
Speaker 1: the children should all be at the children's table and
Speaker 1: not pastor in the adults at the big table. Yeah,
Speaker 1: maybe he had them alive for a couple of years
Speaker 1: to kind of suss out if you know Edward was
Speaker 1: going to be like I am, I'm thirteen. I know
Speaker 1: I'm thirteen, but I'm the king, So let's get this
Speaker 1: going again, because there's different temperaments. Yeah, there definitely is
Speaker 1: a tradition of these kids coming back and like murdering
Speaker 1: everybody else. But you know, maybe he keeps them alive
Speaker 1: for a couple of years and then decides to know
Speaker 1: they actually are a legitimate threat, let's kill them. Maybe.
Speaker 1: I don't know what did what did Edward die of?
Speaker 1: Didn't they die of like like acute a cute lead
Speaker 1: poisoning or something? I don't know. You know, he was
Speaker 1: sick for three weeks, and I could never find that
Speaker 1: it wasn't like a sickness. He was sick. I mean,
Speaker 1: it was ill, but I can never find exactly what
Speaker 1: he could have been. It could have been poisoning. I
Speaker 1: mean that that kind of stuff happened all the time
Speaker 1: back in those days. I guess that question leads to
Speaker 1: don't know if you have this theory of um, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe they just had what he had and we do
Speaker 1: have something to go along with that, so we'll get
Speaker 1: to that. I do have one little footnote here for
Speaker 1: Henry the seventh, which is kind of funny, is that
Speaker 1: do you remember that act that I talked about that
Speaker 1: was passed by parliament that said the boys were not
Speaker 1: legitimate regius. Yeah, something like that. Well, Henry the seventh
Speaker 1: repealed that and he took the throne. Interesting now, some
Speaker 1: people say that he did that because he didn't agree
Speaker 1: with what Richard had done, But then there's also the
Speaker 1: fact that he was courting and was going to potentially
Speaker 1: marry one of their sisters, one of the young Prince's sisters,
Speaker 1: to bring the houses together. And indeed he did eventually
Speaker 1: marry somebody from the York side of the family and
Speaker 1: end the War of the Roses via blood. And obviously, yeah,
Speaker 1: if you want that kid to have that that that's
Speaker 1: super lineage, then you have to re establish the legitimacy. Yes,
Speaker 1: and that's he did it so that they were legitimate again.
Speaker 1: So then when he married, there was none of these
Speaker 1: issues again. But so that that brings us to the
Speaker 1: end of they were murdered. So if the princess weren't killed,
Speaker 1: then what happened to him? Okay, well they were. They
Speaker 1: were misplaced and they still haven't found them. The longest
Speaker 1: game of hide and seek happen to be all the time.
Speaker 1: You know how many times today? Just my glasses? Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: here we go. So it's known that the young King
Speaker 1: Edward the five was suffering from an illness, which is
Speaker 1: where you were headed just a minute ago, Devon. I
Speaker 1: don't know what that illness is. I couldn't find detail
Speaker 1: of what it is. So it's quite possible that he died,
Speaker 1: either from his illness or from whatever from whatever treatment
Speaker 1: he was getting for that illness. The treatments were pretty
Speaker 1: back in those days. Yeah, I was like, oh, let's
Speaker 1: put some slugs on and we'll see what happens in
Speaker 1: their head. Yeah, So we don't know if that's you know,
Speaker 1: that could be how he died. Yeah, and those you know,
Speaker 1: those diseases especially are fairly communico he had, like the
Speaker 1: plague for instance, He probably didn't because everyone have the plague.
Speaker 1: But if he had, you know, the plague, his little
Speaker 1: brother definitely would have gotten it from him, right, and
Speaker 1: then they just but we know that he was ill.
Speaker 1: So that leaves us with his brother, Richard, the Duke
Speaker 1: of York. Now, I know all of our listeners are screaming,
Speaker 1: but Steve, what about the theories where he survives? There
Speaker 1: aren't any. I haven't come across any solid theories that
Speaker 1: say that the young King could have possibly survived and
Speaker 1: escaped the Tower of Lund. Now you're talking. You still
Speaker 1: are talking, correct, Yes? Yes, well you know if obviously,
Speaker 1: boy King, if you're listening to us years later, all right, well,
Speaker 1: there are theories that young Richard escaped on his own
Speaker 1: or with help, we don't know, and that he fled
Speaker 1: the country. This was something that actually plagued Henry the
Speaker 1: seventh because in four eight seven, man by the name
Speaker 1: of Lambnert Lambert Simnel claimed to be Richard came forward
Speaker 1: and was claiming to be the young boy they now
Speaker 1: would be the legitimate boy king. Uh. He then eventually
Speaker 1: changed his story to say that no, he wasn't the
Speaker 1: the young King, he was just another royal named Edward Plagenet, Plantagenet, Plantagenet,
Speaker 1: Edward Plantagenet. So what what back? In those days was
Speaker 1: the penalty for impersonating royalty. It was usually pretty bad,
Speaker 1: yea death. But he was very very young when this happened,
Speaker 1: when he made these claims of appropriate age, he was
Speaker 1: very close to it. Yes, so it was possible that
Speaker 1: it could have been him, well, Henry. They obviously arrested him, Henry.
Speaker 1: It sounds like took pity on him and pardoned him
Speaker 1: because he was pardoned, and he was allowed to work
Speaker 1: in the royal kitchens until he died four or fifty
Speaker 1: years later. He worked for the royal family for the
Speaker 1: rest of his life. Huh, Well that was that was
Speaker 1: very nice, unusual but yes, yeah, for for a guy
Speaker 1: like Henry, that seems really kind. Yes, yeah, I'm not
Speaker 1: sure if I was Henry, if I won't to have
Speaker 1: that guy preparing my food? Yeah yeah, who knows exactly
Speaker 1: what the circumstances were. But not too long after that,
Speaker 1: So now we're jumping ahead another four years, we have
Speaker 1: another person coming forward and claiming to be Richard. And
Speaker 1: this was a man who eventually was discovered to be
Speaker 1: named Perkin Warbeck. And he went to Ireland. He went
Speaker 1: all over, but he went to Ireland, and that's where
Speaker 1: his story really gained traction and he got a bunch
Speaker 1: of support, and he got an army together, and he
Speaker 1: came back to England to take the throne back. That
Speaker 1: didn't go so well. His army was routed, he was captured,
Speaker 1: he recanted his story, and then they executed him. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so that seems like Ireland at that time would have
Speaker 1: been a really easy place to be, Like, hey, I
Speaker 1: have some kind of vague claim against some people. A
Speaker 1: lot of people convinced he had royalty, offering their daughters
Speaker 1: to him for marriage. I mean, this guy was evidently
Speaker 1: a pretty good con man, real deal or he was
Speaker 1: a real deal. But the only other theory about what
Speaker 1: have happened to if one of them escaped is that
Speaker 1: they escaped and they lived out their life unknown. Unlikely,
Speaker 1: doesn't It does a little bit. But actually, you know,
Speaker 1: when you think about it, uh yeah, you would think
Speaker 1: that they would have come out of the closet sooner
Speaker 1: or later. I mean, I mean, essentially after the reconciliation
Speaker 1: between the two sides of the family. I could see
Speaker 1: why they would stay hidden until then. Yeah. But but
Speaker 1: what's interesting to me as the pretenders, the two pretenders
Speaker 1: pretended to be Richard and not Edward the Fifth, Yes,
Speaker 1: because it could just as easily have been Edward who
Speaker 1: escaped the tower. And so why people would pretend to
Speaker 1: be Richard instead of Edward is kind of beyond me,
Speaker 1: I use less dangerous. Well though, I actually think it's
Speaker 1: because he was the younger and so he therefore is
Speaker 1: harder to I d in his paintings because he's still
Speaker 1: a boy. He's still a very young boy. His facial features,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean you look at somebody, Yeah, you
Speaker 1: take a picture of somebody at nine, and you take
Speaker 1: a picture of him at twenty, and they look similar,
Speaker 1: but you couldn't say that it was this guy, or
Speaker 1: maybe the guy sitting next to him in a restaurant
Speaker 1: was actually who that nine year old was. So I
Speaker 1: think that it's because he was so young that was
Speaker 1: easier and not as recognized. People didn't see him as much. Well. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and also like if you say, hey, I am Richard,
Speaker 1: I'm not the oldest son, I do believe that you
Speaker 1: may have a better claim than me. That's much safer
Speaker 1: than saying I'm Edward and that's my throne, right, very possible,
Speaker 1: but that unfortunately ladies and gentlemen's where the story ends.
Speaker 1: Those are the theories that we've got, except for the
Speaker 1: part where we solved the mystery. Okay, it's Joe's mystery solving,
Speaker 1: all right, So let's let's get out your magical mystery
Speaker 1: book and tell me, Joe, who which one of these
Speaker 1: theories do you you're back? Which do you think it is?
Speaker 1: Actually none of them? Really, Let's get back to the
Speaker 1: early part of the story of the Ravens. How big
Speaker 1: they are, could easily have carried away a couple of
Speaker 1: small kids, right, except the Ravens are always incageous. They
Speaker 1: didn't escape. No, no, let me thank, let me thank
Speaker 1: any other ones? So, uh, what do you got? Which?
Speaker 1: I like Henry's mom yea for it because I think, yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know why I have this particular fondness in
Speaker 1: my heart for women of that era doing particularly treacherous
Speaker 1: things to further their son's goals in life, but I do.
Speaker 1: That's like one of my favorite things because there's a
Speaker 1: there's a good documented history of this kind of thing
Speaker 1: happening where women would have a son and they would
Speaker 1: think this guy, he's got a legitimate claim to the throne.
Speaker 1: I'm going to do something about it. And I think, yeah,
Speaker 1: so I like her. I like her killing the boys
Speaker 1: or them being sick and dying, and Richard being like, well,
Speaker 1: maybe we should just sweep this underthrock. Yeah, SIPI dad, Richard.
Speaker 1: You know probably at that point in time, you know,
Speaker 1: you got you got a twelve year old kid who's
Speaker 1: now the king, and you're in this have a turmoil.
Speaker 1: Maybe the kids sick too. Maybe time for me to
Speaker 1: pull a few strings and do some bit of stuff
Speaker 1: and take over the throne. And like you said, maybe
Speaker 1: she did had the kids murdered not only as a
Speaker 1: part of the scheme to bring Henry back, but also
Speaker 1: to discredit Richard. She's got kind of two for there.
Speaker 1: I a good reason. I like that one. I personally,
Speaker 1: I think the one that I back, which still has
Speaker 1: its holes. But I think that James Tyrrell might possibly
Speaker 1: have been telling the truth because he was known to
Speaker 1: be a pretty you know, he really followed every order
Speaker 1: he got from the king at the time, essentially well,
Speaker 1: but we don't know, see, And this is something that
Speaker 1: I came across in some of my reading, is that
Speaker 1: it might have been that Richard could have simply said
Speaker 1: I wish I didn't have to deal with those brats anymore.
Speaker 1: I wish they just weren't. They just weren't in the
Speaker 1: way he goes, oh that was a secret wink wink,
Speaker 1: order and take care of things. Or he was just
Speaker 1: like I like to do anything to make my master happy. Yes, yes,
Speaker 1: or perhaps he just really enjoyed murdering children. Quite possible. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So yeah, this is uh my, my, my thing with
Speaker 1: this is again, history is written by the winners, and
Speaker 1: that's what makes this one difficult. There may have been
Speaker 1: a lot of details that were known at the time
Speaker 1: that didn't get recorded, or got recorded and destroyed. So no,
Speaker 1: I'm sure if you know, if they all kinds of
Speaker 1: people wandering around the tower, and there must have been
Speaker 1: all kinds of people who saw the kids and had
Speaker 1: some inkling of what had happened to them, and a
Speaker 1: lot of people could have said, you know, well it
Speaker 1: was about this time that the kids just sort of disappeared,
Speaker 1: and all those little details, like you said, are just
Speaker 1: lost there. Unless somebody uncovers the manuscript one of these days,
Speaker 1: it will probably be some workmen, you know. Uh well, yeah,
Speaker 1: well I gotta say too that those those those bones
Speaker 1: of those kids. They may or may not be the
Speaker 1: two Princes, but there's a lot of there's a lot
Speaker 1: of other stairways in the Tower of London, and there's
Speaker 1: probably all kinds of bones hidden in that place there
Speaker 1: all over the ground. They've done that and accidentally found
Speaker 1: lots and lots of bones and lots and lots of places. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that they have not yet uncovered the two Princes if
Speaker 1: they're still in the town. The tower of the grounds
Speaker 1: of the Tower of London are chucked full of corpses
Speaker 1: because right outside the Tower of London is where they
Speaker 1: used to hang in behead everybody and then they bring
Speaker 1: him inside and bury them, and they there's so many
Speaker 1: stories about corpses being found everywhere in that place. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I guess say, I don't want to be there during
Speaker 1: the zombie apocalypse. Yeah, Well, ladies and gentlemen. That is
Speaker 1: the end of today's story. Now, as always, the research
Speaker 1: links for this particular story will be up on the website.
Speaker 1: That website is Thinking Sideways podcast dot com. If you
Speaker 1: have any thoughts or comments, you can go ahead and
Speaker 1: do that right on the website, or if you want,
Speaker 1: you can also go ahead and send us an email.
Speaker 1: Are email address is Thinking Sideways podcast at gmail dot com. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and we actually have some listener mail. I know, we
Speaker 1: do actually get a good amount of listener mail, but
Speaker 1: sometimes we get suggestions or you know, things stick out
Speaker 1: at us and we just want to read them. So
Speaker 1: I really love going out to our email box. It's
Speaker 1: almost like you know when you were a kid and
Speaker 1: you'd run out to the mailbox at your house every day.
Speaker 1: I'm like, click on it. Yes, yeah, And actually you
Speaker 1: don't do what the intern does that well, you know
Speaker 1: in our comments on our website go there too, so
Speaker 1: we need to check all that stuff out. But this
Speaker 1: one is from a guy named Tom Williams and he's
Speaker 1: from London, which is super awesome, and he says, hello,
Speaker 1: Sideways Thinkers. I've been listening to your podcast for a
Speaker 1: long time, with one of my favorite episodes being the
Speaker 1: Blue Signal. Yeah, that's why you want to On the
Speaker 1: subject of signals, have you guys ever thought about the
Speaker 1: the miss Wow signal sent back from outer space in
Speaker 1: ninety seven and we have, Actually we were just talking
Speaker 1: about this. I've been uh. We the listener suggestions we
Speaker 1: get are always the like really big ones, you know,
Speaker 1: they're always the really giant mysteries that you want to
Speaker 1: invest a lot of time. And so I have been
Speaker 1: investing sometime in this one, and we will be recording
Speaker 1: one soon, you know. I gotta admit It's It's funny
Speaker 1: is when we look when we're looking for stuff, I'm
Speaker 1: so aware of the Wow some of the crosses. So
Speaker 1: many times it didn't even come up on radars. Is
Speaker 1: what I'm I'm doing searches or whatever to try to
Speaker 1: find topics. I know that one and that one is
Speaker 1: so cool that I just automatically go, oh, the while
Speaker 1: signal keep going because and not to say that I
Speaker 1: don't want to do what I'm just it's just so
Speaker 1: embedded in my brain and for me, the Wow signal
Speaker 1: and you know, a couple other ones have been kind
Speaker 1: of on my radar for a long time, even since
Speaker 1: the beginning of us talking about doing the show. But
Speaker 1: I just have always thought that so much research, there's
Speaker 1: so much stuff out there on this to do it
Speaker 1: is just going to be a huge undertaking. Yeah. It's
Speaker 1: also the other thing about the wild signal is not
Speaker 1: not to say that we're not going to do it,
Speaker 1: because of course we will we'll tackle this and we'll
Speaker 1: solve this damn mystery. But it's one of those things
Speaker 1: that you see so often, and I try to find
Speaker 1: the more obscure little mysteries like those you like the
Speaker 1: big ones. Yeah, there you go, but sweet but yeah,
Speaker 1: good suggestion. Wow is all I can say. Ha ha ha.
Speaker 1: You can listen to the episode right on the website
Speaker 1: as well, or most likely you're downloading it from my tunes,
Speaker 1: which is where most people get it. If you're on iTunes,
Speaker 1: go ahead and take the time to subscribe and leave
Speaker 1: us a rating. Those kind of things really great to know,
Speaker 1: and they let other people find out about us. If
Speaker 1: you forget to download a show and you're run around,
Speaker 1: you realize there's gonna be a new one out. You
Speaker 1: can always listen to us on Stitcher from your mobile phone.
Speaker 1: You can just stream it right there, easy as that.
Speaker 1: And last, but certainly not least, go a head and
Speaker 1: uh find us on Facebook. I know we've got a
Speaker 1: bunch of people have been tracking us down on Facebook lately,
Speaker 1: and we're getting a ton of activity, which is awesome.
Speaker 1: We're gonna have some really good conversations with folks about
Speaker 1: some really cool things so definitely definitely go ahead and
Speaker 1: find us on that. And uh, with that, ladies and gentlemen,
Speaker 1: we're gonna go ahead and sign this one off. We
Speaker 1: appreciate it, and we'll talk to you next week. Everybody,
Speaker 1: Bye bye,