[FredZarguna]

It was, in fact unanulled to all practical effect by Parliament. Those on this thread claiming Titulus Regius is somehow authoritative in this matter are apparently unaware of the repeal passed by the first Parliament convened under the Tudors, which held:

[Titulus Reguius] be void, adnulled, repelled, irrite , and of noe force ne effecte

and...that the said Bill, Act and Record, be annulled and utterly destroyed, and that it be ordained by the same Authority, that the same Act and Record be taken out of the Roll of Parliament, and be cancelled and brent, and be put in perpetual oblivion.

People arguing Richard was somehow justified in murdering his nephews or usurping the throne "by law" want to overlook just how much of a royal instrument Parliament was in the 15th century.

[Sherman Logan]

Yup. I think people project the idea of an independent Parliament way too far into the past. Fifteenth century Parliaments did what they were told to do. Or else.

17th century, not so much. Even Elizabeth had problems with her later Parliaments. Nobody dared to give her Dad trouble, though.