The New Evidence Concerning The Princes In The Tower: What Does This Mean?

In 1483, the nephews of the future King Richard III, the future King Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, went missing. Even during the time period, the concept that two royal princes could just disappear into thin air was absurd, and because a previous heir apparent had been found dead under mysterious circumstances, the worst was assumed by the public. Richard III would only reign two years, dying at The Battle Of Bosworth in 1485, causing the House of Plantagenet to lose power for the first time since the 12th century. With the years following the disappearance, fingers pointed to Richard for having caused and concealed the deaths, yet in the 20th century, an organization dedicated to rehabilitating Richard's name (aptly named The Richard III Society) began proposing that someone other than Richard- if anyone had at all- had destroyed his nephews. After the success of the Finding Richard Project in 2012, the RIII Society was taken more seriously, and they vowed to find his missing nephews next. 

However, a few days ago, what some are hailing as "damnable" evidence was found: a relative of the infamous Sir James Tyrell, who was accused by King Henry VII and Queen Elisabeth of York as having done the deed for Richard III, was found to be in possession of a "Cheyne which was Yonge kynge Edward the Vth.” As those who believe Richard III was usurping tyrant celebrate this find, we should look into what this means as an article of history. 

First of all, lets look at what the document is: the new information comes from the 1516 will of Lady Margaret Capell, who was half sister to Sir James Tyrell's wife. In her will, Margaret wrote: 

“I bequeath to my sonne Sir Giles his fadres Cheyne which was Yonge kynge Edward the Vth.”

Now, at face value, this looks pretty bad: why does James Tyrell's family have ANYTHING of Edward V's? Yet, it was very common for kings and princes to gift trinkets and jewelry to people who had done them some service. Tyrell had been knighted in 1471 by King Edward IV, later entering the service of Richard, then Duke of Gloucester. Once Richard assumed the throne, Tyrell became High Sheriff of Cornwall. Yet, things would come crashing down with the untimely death of the king, and the coronation of Henry VII, who needed to prove that his brothers-in-law were dead. This meant that he needed some proof that there were no other claimants, and so he imprisoned Tyrell with the hopes that he would confess, which he did. 

So, James would have been, under most circumstances, near the Royal Household. This gives us three options as to how Tyrell became the owner of Edward's chain:

Theory 1: Tyrell did something worthy of honor and Edward gave him a token of gratitude. 

It wasn't uncommon for kings to give away pieces of jewelry and trinkets to people who do some good for them. Although the late Middle Ages were steeped in record keeping, it seems that there isn't much from the Royal Household during this time period. It could be that, like the will, any documentation of the sentiment was lost, or at least yet to be found.

Theory 2: The chain was for Tyrell's role as High Sheriff of Cornwall.

One of the things I think were overlooked when this document came to light is that Tyrell and Edward held the same office: Edward was granted the title as an infant, while Tyrell was granted it in 1483. This means that, under the circumstances at play, Tyrell could have been given Richard's chain, which very well might have also belonged to Edward. When the will was written, Richard III was not someone you wanted to have ties to: people thought very poorly of him for how he came to the throne and how he died. This could have led Margaret to gloss over Richard's ownership of the chain and emphasize more on Edward's ownership. This would also allow them family to distance themselves from their involvement with Richard III, and align themselves with the newly crowned King Henry VIII. 

Theory 3: James Tyrell kept the chain as a trophy for the crime he committed. 

This theory relies heavily on the concept of Ocam's Razor: that the simplest reason for something is what happened, or that Richard did away with his nephews with the help of James Tyrell, and he kept the chain as a memento for his crimes. This doesn't really explain everything, but it is a possibility, I guess. 

What do you think happened? Is Richard innocent? Is the chain just a happenstance?