tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post5487625503950942733..comments2024-03-28T09:08:50.733+00:00Comments on Law and Lawyers: The burial of King Richard III - a judicial reviewObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-80539382969878615642013-09-04T01:08:04.245+01:002013-09-04T01:08:04.245+01:00Richard III, the last YORKist king, of the House o...Richard III, the last YORKist king, of the House of YORK, raised at Middleham in YORKshire, under the banner of the Sun of YORK. His little boy is buried in the little parish church of Sheriff Hutton, near YORK. Richard ordered a chapel to be built to hold his own remains in York MINSTER....<br /><br />How on earth could anybody plug Leicester -- of all places -- over YORK!! Is it really true, that the Leicester camp effectively want him buried there because that's where he fetched up? And because he was thrown in a hole there for 500 years? That, believe it or not, is the only connection Richard the Third has with Leicester.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-24753647901135976142013-08-16T17:54:56.050+01:002013-08-16T17:54:56.050+01:00Not Leicester. Not York. The Abbey. And in the Ear...Not Leicester. Not York. The Abbey. And in the Earl of Richmond's chapel, to put two fingers in the eyes of that Welsh usurper. The chapel where he is buried is of surpassing beauty and splendour.<br /><br />He is described in works of History, which is written by the winners, as Henry VII. In fact that title belongs to his son, the one with six wives, who succeeded in 1503 on the death of his mother, Edward IV's daughter Elizabeth, although he was kept out of his inheritance by his father until he died in 1509. <br /><br />That of course would make the Virgin Queen Elizabeth II and our present Sovereign Lady would be the third Queen of her name on this side of the Border; but she was proclaimed as Elizabeth II and that is conclusive. <br /><br />Here endeth the Rant of the Day.Andrew Thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17273362558325263161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-29750966520237665092013-08-16T14:56:38.189+01:002013-08-16T14:56:38.189+01:00I don't wish to be rude, but that's one of...I don't wish to be rude, but that's one of the most idiotically stupid decisions I have come across. The JR application was five months late, the granting of a licence was plainly within discretionary powers, and the archaeology took place under the conditions of the licence, which had never been challenged. <br /><br />What is even worse is that the judge had granted a protective costs order. So as a taxpayer I am paying for this. As well as court time being wasted.<br /><br />The judge even throws in the Human Rights Act as a possible ground. In relation to a burial 500 years ago.<br /><br />Disgraceful decision.Court No. 83https://www.blogger.com/profile/02744727165331309889noreply@blogger.com