TODAY I WILL REMIND THEM that Parliament had no legal authority to execute Charles, and did not even have the consent of the people who they allegedly represented. Most of the elected members of Parliament were removed/arrested by the army or refused to participate. It was a military coup that gave control of the house of commons to a small group of hardline anti-royalists. The house of lords never participated and the trial flew in the face of all established legal precedent. You can defend the removal of Charles and say he was a bad king, but nobody can defend the trial as being legitimate, or parliament at that time as being representative of the people of England in any way beyond a few rich P*ritans that tried banning Christmas because fun is sinful.