The Show Trial that wasn't

Why did the Bosheviks not arrange a trial before killing Czar Nicolas II?

In OTL the Soviet Union did a lot of such trials later on. Previously both Charles I and Louis XVI were both tried before they were beheaded.

I recall hearing that the English revolutionaries made a point of saying something like they had not had killed the King 'in a corner'.


By the way was there anything the Bolsheviks could plausably have brought up in such a trial?

Would such a trial have made any difference either way to subsequent events?
 
The Soviet Union which had all the show trials later on was a far different entity from the nascent Red Russia which was emerging before and during the Russian Civil War (just remember that the show trials were used to kill of the generation which actually lead the fight during the revolution), said civil war would make a show trial absolutely impractical.

In fact, I'd bet at least one fanatic white general would attempt to free the royal family.
 
They didn't put Citizen Romanov on show trial because counterrevolutionaries were approaching Ekaterinberg before the Chekists had the opportunity to do their thing.
 
The early Bolshevik police state wasn't as total as it would become, pace Fanny Kaplan almost offing the big cheese.

Planning a trial for the royals, only for it to be spoiled by lynch mobs, isn't the way for Lenin to show the world his regime is firmly in control. (As for the Whites, they did eventually capture the town the Tsar and his family had died at. Holding the royal family in Petrograd or Moscow might have been the most secure anti-White strategy--but as I said there's the unruly soviets and the great unwashed to contend with in the smoke.)

Also, with a trial you kill Nicholas, possibly Alexandra--but the kids?
No, best to do it quietly, out of the way in a small basement. 'Showtrials' or 'Nights of long knives' are just too cumbersome.
 
I see the practicalities made such a trial hard. Still if Lenin had wanted to what if anything could he have plausably accused Nicky of?

Also would it have made any difference to view of the USSR?
 
if Lenin had wanted to what if anything could he have plausably accused Nicky of?
Khodynka (deadly stampede in Moscow during Coronation of Nikki). Bloody Sunday (shooting at peaceful demonstration in 1905 right before Winter Palace of Tsars in SPb). Extrajudicial executions in 1905-1907 (Lenin did not invent "Troika", he reused Tsarist experience). Lena massacre of 1912. "Treason" during WWI (flimsiest one, but it could stand in show trial).

would it have made any difference to view of the USSR?
Doubt it.
 
Most of those wouldn't be credible unless someone could show the Tsar personally ordering the shooting before the Winter Palace in 1905 or making the decisions for his own coronation(which he may have).

Certainly the treason charge would be worthless. What would be accused of doing? Treating with the Central Powers? Sabotaging the war effort? NOT places the Bolsheviks want to go.

And all this does is make his son the rightful Tsar and with the Bolsheviks admitting they can't accuse him of anything, which leads us back to the quiet slaughter in a basement somewhere.
 
Most of those wouldn't be credible unless someone could show the Tsar personally ordering the shooting before the Winter Palace in 1905 or making the decisions for his own coronation(which he may have).
We're not talking about credible charges, able to stand in proper court of law. We're talking about accusations for show trial and those are sufficient ones (Saddam and Milosovic were tried on much less obvious charges using much more circumstantial evidence than those available to declare Citizen Romanov responsible for Bloody Sunday).

And all this does is make his son the rightful Tsar.
As far as I remember monarchy had been abolished by the Provisional Government long before Bolshevist coup.
 
Grimm Reaper said:
Certainly the treason charge would be worthless. What would be accused of doing?

For him treason doesn't makes sense, even in a court with non-existent standards of evidence.

But for her...

That would be very interesting. Lenin's gang trying to harness populist Russian xenophobia against the foreign Tsarina? If Stalin is the one given responsibilty for the prosecution of the wife, then it's makes a lot of sense.

Perhaps if they'd decided they could let the kids live then two showtrials might have taken place after all.

(BTW, the royals had lost their constitutional powers a good two governments earlier.)
 
For him treason doesn't makes sense, even in a court with non-existent standards of evidence

Er, what I mean is charges of treason stemming from Nicholas' participation in the hostilities of WWI don't make sense.

Charges of treason during the Civil War are another matter.

But charging Alexandra with trumped-up charges of treason relating to 1914/17 are very doable if the new regime have sufficient political needs to meet.
 
Most of those wouldn't be credible unless someone could show the Tsar personally ordering the shooting before the Winter Palace in 1905 or making the decisions for his own coronation(which he may have).

Certainly the treason charge would be worthless. What would be accused of doing? Treating with the Central Powers? Sabotaging the war effort? NOT places the Bolsheviks want to go.

And all this does is make his son the rightful Tsar and with the Bolsheviks admitting they can't accuse him of anything, which leads us back to the quiet slaughter in a basement somewhere.

There's certainly evidence of criminal incompetence on the part of the Tsar, at this point he had lost two wars in a row, and the empire was a ramshackle mess. (Think Russia today)

Treating with the Central Powers by the Lenin was a smart move the war was already lost, and Russia faced total collapse. The Germans wernt in great shape either so any concessions made to them by the reds could be considered temporary.

I also dont think the slaughter in the basement can be blaimed on Moscow it's easy to overestimate the power the central government had over it's splinter groups in the Urals. The evidence suggests to the local Soviets panicked when white forces drew near and acted on their own.

In anycase the chance of the Tsar's son getting crowned were nil as he was far too sick, it's much more likely one Nicky's male relatives would’ve got the throne.
 
Top