Hey, it's the Cousins War, just of the royals/quasi-royals executed, we have:
Henry VI - a possibly demented man killed (even though, AFAIK, Henry VIII had to have a special bill passed to allow for the execution of Jane Parker, Viscountess Rochford, when that lady was deemed mad, because the execution of a madperson wasn't allowed).
Edward of Westminster - a young man, brutally killed on the battlefield (or executed shortly thereafter, depends on the account you believe)
Richard, duke of York - beheaded, and his head set on a spike over the gates of York wearing a blood-soaked paper crown
Edmund, earl of Rutland - a young man, brutally executed shortly after a battle.
The Beaufort boys executed after the battle of Hexham when they were dragged out of sanctuary (in clear violation of that principle)
The earl of Warwick - again, a possibly demented/retarded young man executed for what he represented (much like Westminster and Rutland)
Perkin Warbeck - possibly the duke of York (brother to the queen of England) executed for what he represented. (Katherine of Aragon later attributed her misfortunes to what had happened to Warbeck and Warwick)
And then the Princes in the Tower, killing two innocent little boys didn't do Richard III's reputation any favours.
So, while killing little prince Arthur (all the better if he's known to be sickly beforehand) and stuffing Margaret Tudor in a convent/marrying her to a Yorkist, might nto win Richard of Shrewsbury any parent/brother/son of the year awards, he's hopefully at the end of a long line of people doing the executing. Hoping, like
@BlueFlowwer we don't have a Henry VIII-analogue.