|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Alan Turing--possible pardon?
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
The British Parliament may pardon computing pioneer Alan Turing, who the gov't drove to suicide for being gay.
About time? Too little, too late?
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
It's a fairly empty gesture, I think. There are probably dozens of men in Britain - maybe more - who were convicted of having underage sex when the age of consent for gay men was 18 or even 21. Let's see them pardoned.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Both?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
The British Parliament may pardon computing pioneer Alan Turing, who the gov't drove to suicide for being gay.
About time? Too little, too late?
Turing was prosecuted for activity that was an offence - at that time. To pardon Turing now, however tragic the outcome of the case, would mean in fairness a pardon to everyone else convicted under the same law (and of others), where such behaviour and/or actions is no longer illegal.
I can't see that happening and so it smacks rather of a government seeking to buy publicity.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
I completely agree, EM. He was tried, fairly, under the law as it existed at the time. If the law is wrong it should be changed (which it was, thankfully). I don't see why Turing should be a special case just because he did some good things with computers.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
If Turing's conviction was solely for consensual gay sex, and he were alive today, he would be able to apply to have the conviction disregarded. According to the UK government's official guidance, "a successful applicant will be treated in all circumstances as though the offence had never occurred and need not disclose it for any purpose. Official records relating to the conviction that are held by prescribed organisations will be deleted or, where appropriate, annotated to this effect as soon as possible thereafter."
So the conviction is not quashed as such but it is treated as if it had never happened.
Personally, I think there's a fine but defensible difference between allowing an act of oblivion for someone with an historic conviction for something that would not now be a crime (because that is addressing, not the conviction then, but the effect of it now), and attempting to write today's standards onto the past in the case of people now dead. If you start with this kind of poisthumous pardon- which is different from a posthumous pardon for someone who was not actually guilty of a crime at the time of their conviction- where do you stop? Do you posthumously pardon everyone who has been convicted of any offence that has now been removed from the statute book? All you can say is that society's values have changed and that- in this case- you are glad that they have.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
3rdFooter
Shipmate
# 9751
|
Posted
I think I would argue for him not to be pardoned and this is why.
-As pointed out above, there is a sense that the 'pardon' creates an assumption that the offence, against the law at that time, never happened and the prosecution is expunged from the record.
-The pardon is irrelevant to Alan Turing now and only speaks to society now and in the future.
-I would argue that such a pardon is an attempt to soothe our own conscience about the implications of historical judgements.
-Whereas if the indictment stands in the record, it stands as a lesson in history and Alan Turing remains a representative for many who were persecuted by the state for being homosexual.
--------------------
3F - Shunter in the sidings of God's Kingdom
Posts: 602 | From: outskirts of Babylon | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Newspaper article last week (I think in the Independent) was calling for him to be given a plinth, not a pardon. I think that's about right, as it would recognise his vital wartime contribution without causing the sort of ethical-legal problems of a pardon which have already been mentioned.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Yes, agreed. There's no particularly importnat connection between the two, after all.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
"Pardoned" implies he did something wrong and society is deciding to let him off. Surely the (secular) point is that he did nothing wrong, so what is required is some kind of official recognition that the law was wrong. I'm not sure we have a process for that.
Of course this would apply equally to other activities that were considered criminal in unenlightened times.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
I'm always bemused by actions like these. The legislature where I serve voted in our most recent session to free a clutch of (originally) African slaves, residents of our state, who have been dead some 300 years.
Yes, I voted for the measure, and yes, I thought it profoundly silly. It's not as though legislatures around the world have a shortage of problems to solve that might alleviate the sufferings of living people they currently represent.
I suppose the symbolism involved serves some small purpose. It makes the affected legislature appear morally thoughtful and temporarily unified. (Our measure had a handful of nay votes first time through; a move to reconsider resulted in unanimity.)
In the case of this measure, why not pardon Oscar Wilde, too? He contributed much to English letters.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I agree, EM: to grant a pardon implies that he committed and offence - which he did, according to the law at the time.
It all boils down to the problem of 20/20 hindsight and trying to judge the past by the standards, laws and mores of today: on the whole trying to sort out one case is going to lead to a myriad other instances of people who are considered equally "deserving" - so then have a mass "pardon"?
And all those agitating for a re-examination of the Turing case and application of today's moral judgements to offences of 60+ years ago consider this: are you one of those who yet thinks the strictures against same-sex relationships and masturbation in the Bible should be enforced rigorously in the 21st century?
More thought, less comment - or let sleeping dogs lie, just acknowledge that the law in general at the time was unfair and out of kilter with more modern values.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
In the case of this measure, why not pardon Oscar Wilde, too? He contributed much to English letters.
I'm a little uneasy about the selective nature of the measure. Gross indecency was a crime. I don't think you should be able to get off that crime because you happen to be good with computers or can write amusing plays, which these posthumous pardons sort of say, in a round about way. Everyone should be equal under the law.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
"Pardoned" implies he did something wrong and society is deciding to let him off. Surely the (secular) point is that he did nothing wrong, so what is required is some kind of official recognition that the law was wrong. I'm not sure we have a process for that.
Of course this would apply equally to other activities that were considered criminal in unenlightened times.
Could the argument be turned on its head and having criminalised certain acts, prosecute those who committed them before the legislation was passed. I believe this has been done exceptionally but not generally.
To pardon Turing and thousands of others looks to me like little more than an attempt to whitewash the actions of an earlier government.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Could the argument be turned on its head and having criminalised certain acts, prosecute those who committed them before the legislation was passed. I believe this has been done exceptionally but not generally.
Courts bend over backwards to ensure that legal changes operate prospectively and not retrospectively. Very clear words are required to alter this presumption. There is also an accepted code of conduct that there are no changes which make criminal actions which had been legal at the time of their commission.
[ 22. July 2013, 12:05: Message edited by: Gee D ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955
|
Posted
The precedent being cited for this is the 2006 pardoning of troops executed for cowardice in world war I - many of whom would have been shell-shocked.
Does anyone know if this was to all troops shot for this or was it limited as specific cases?
I understand pardons are issued by discretion and are not necessarily correcting miscarrages of justice. This doesnt say that Mr Turing was innocent of the crimes under the law at the time, but due to his greater contributions to society this is being legally voided - its forgiveness of the guilty basically.
--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)
Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Checking out the location of this thread with DH Hosts.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
A public apology was given by Gordon Brown in a response to the campaign by John Cumming. I think it was on behalf of the UK Government.
I can't see any point in a pardon. What does it do?
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
A pardon serves the purpose of demonstrating that the government are finally beginning to extricate their heads from their arse in regards to gay rights.
It is symbolic and does Turing no good. But it can do some good for those being messed about still.
Ideally, the conviction would be set aside and a footnote added regarding the lunacy of the charge in the first.
And yes, Turing is a special case. Though no one should have ever been convicted under such a ridiculous law, Turing reduced the suffering and significantly lowered the body count.
[ 22. July 2013, 14:46: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It is symbolic and does Turing no good. But it can do some good for those being messed about still.
Who, in your view, is still being 'messed about'?
quote:
And yes, Turing is a special case. Though no one should have ever been convicted under such a ridiculous law, Turing reduced the suffering and significantly lowered the body count.
How did Turing reduce suffering and lower the body count? I don't quite get this bit.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Presumably by his contribution, through Enigma, to winning the war. It may be, of course, that he just shifted some of the suffering and the body count from our side to theirs, but we should still be grateful to him for that.
Why this means that he should have had special treatment under the criminal law, I don't know.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
If the offense had been jaywalking, would you complain?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Presumably by his contribution, through Enigma, to winning the war. It may be, of course, that he just shifted some of the suffering and the body count from our side to theirs, but we should still be grateful to him for that.
Why this means that he should have had special treatment under the criminal law, I don't know.
Exactly - if you adopt this form of argument (good deeds vs illegal ones ) in this case, then you have to extend it to murderers too, if you intend to act in accordance with justice.
Turing's punishment was his own choice but the nature of said punishment reflected the gravity offence he had committed under the (then) law. This was a relationship of unequal partners in the eyes of the law - whatever we may feel about it today.
IIRC he was convicted on his own admission of committing gross indecency with a man of 19, whilst he (Turing) was over 21. At the time 21 was the age at which you could vote but was also considered as an "age of consent." You couldn't for example borrow money unless you were 21 - so the gravity of his crime meant that he was considered to have corrupted a "minor" as well as participating in illegal acts per se (none of which he ever denied).
The whole thing reeks of grandstanding and jumping on a bandwagon. Can my ancestors who were sentenced to death (later commuted to transportation) in 1830 for stealing sheep (their defence was that they did it because they had no work and their families were starving) now get the pardon and hearing they deserve?
[Btw, Turing was one of a group of people who solved part of the Enigma code. His role can easily be overstated although he was a real genius. My old maths teacher, Shaun Wylie at HRSFC in Cambridge was "outed," in the late 1980's I think, as a co worker with Turing working in the same hut, on Enigma. As 18 y/o A level students we had no idea].
[ 22. July 2013, 15:28: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
I agree with what others have said about the need to pardon everyone else for the same 'offence'.
I also agree what to do so would send out a very powerful message.
I would add that something better than a pardon would be to outlaw all these 'gay cure' 'therapies,' most of them led by evangelical Christians. Turing suffered hormone treatment that made him grow breasts and hindered his athletic prowess. Today's victims of therapy suffer guilt, bad marriages and, somethings, suicide.
I'd reccommend The Man Who Knew Too Much: Alan Turing and the Invention of the Computer by David Leavitt.
[ 22. July 2013, 15:28: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I agree with what others have said about the need to pardon everyone else for the same 'offence'.
I also agree what to do so would send out a very powerful message.
Something similar to the Rosa Parks Act, under which people convicted by Alabama of violating Segregation laws can have their criminal records cleared?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I agree with what others have said about the need to pardon everyone else for the same 'offence'.
I also agree what to do so would send out a very powerful message.
Something similar to the Rosa Parks Act, under which people convicted by Alabama of violating Segregation laws can have their criminal records cleared?
Yes. Because the point is they *didn't do anything wrong* so shouldn't have been criminalised, and shouldn't need to be pardoned.
However, whether it is worth the cost of legislation if it relates entirely to people who are now dead is another matter. It is certainly cheaper to do something symbolic.
Or do you think we should consider legislating in general so that people convicted of something that later ceases to be criminal can have their records cleared? Is there nothing that we might think was appropriately criminal in a different age, but shouldn't be now?
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
But we have that- see my first post on this thread. It doesn't apply posthumously, though, and (again for reasons I briefly stated upthread) I don't think it should.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Yes, a posthumous pardon is symbolic. And?
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Exactly - if you adopt this form of argument (good deeds vs illegal ones ) in this case, then you have to extend it to murderers too, if you intend to act in accordance with justice.
That is ridiculous. So, if your daughter eats a biscuit without permission this is the same as if she sells your properties, empties your accounts and steals your car?
And, yes, your ancestors deserve a pardon.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
I did the tour thing at Bletchley Park today, and the guide mentioned the pardon.
It felt right.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
We're agreed on Host board. The thread is going to Dead Horses.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I agree with what others have said about the need to pardon everyone else for the same 'offence'.
I also agree what to do so would send out a very powerful message.
Something similar to the Rosa Parks Act, under which people convicted by Alabama of violating Segregation laws can have their criminal records cleared?
This might actually be quite salient. I can't find a handy link atm but I seem to recall seeing a couple of articles floating around about living Englishmen with criminal records still active from pre-Wolfenden.
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Oh FFS how many times do I have to say this: we have such a law already, for the living rather than the dead. See here .
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Sorry for tetchy tone of above- a bit distracted- thought better of it, went to delete the 'Oh FFS...', but missed the edit window.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Sorry for tetchy tone of above- a bit distracted- thought better of it, went to delete the 'Oh FFS...', but missed the edit window.
It's a dangerous precedent: the law was the law when the offence was committed. Have we gone back to offer the same terms for other crimes that aren't any more? How about unsafe convictions going back many years - lots of them very personal and unlikely cause celebres? Does it mean that I can get my £7.50 back from 1978 for being fined for having no lights on my bike when I actually had them and it was the PC's word against mine in court as there were no other witnesses?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
No, that's not the same thing. It's saying 'you were convicted - probably quite procedurally properly and, as the law then stood, fairly- of something that was a crime then; now it wouldn't be a crime and actually we don't think it ever should have been a crime, so it is not fair that you should have it on your record'.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sergius-Melli
Shipmate
# 17462
|
Posted
Just a quick, rather silly question (all drunk on the birth of a male into the line of succession)...
Should we reverse this whole process and prosecute people who committed no crimes in the past on the basis that now we think the actions they were engaged in are horrid crimes against basic humanity? (most diehards probably already hold such people as criminals so why not blot their book and make them proper criminals?)
On the actual point, an apology for a misguided attitude of our ancestors would suffice, but to pardon outright would be wrong, he was a criminal, and should remain a criminal...
Posts: 722 | From: Sneaking across Welsh hill and dale with a thurible in hand | Registered: Dec 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
No, that's not the same thing. It's saying 'you were convicted - probably quite procedurally properly and, as the law then stood, fairly - of something that was a crime then; now it wouldn't be a crime and actually we don't think it ever should have been a crime, so it is not fair that you should have it on your record'.
And there are examples of people breaking laws that still stand and getting blanket pardons for various reasons. To take a Godwinesqe example, a few years ago Switzerland issued a blanket pardon to those convicted of helping refugees illegally cross the border from Nazi-controlled territories. Evading Swiss immigration law was a crime then and is still a crime now, but an exception was made for the extraordinary circumstances of the time.
quote:
Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:
Should we reverse this whole process and prosecute people who committed no crimes in the past on the basis that now we think the actions they were engaged in are horrid crimes against basic humanity? (most diehards probably already hold such people as criminals so why not blot their book and make them proper criminals?)
Most jurisdictions have some kind of protection against ex post facto laws. The only notable exceptions that come to mind are also fairly Godwinesque and involve the prosecution of high officials of governments engaged in actions that would be regarded as a criminal conspiracy if engaged in by sub-state actors.
[ 23. July 2013, 14:26: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
And here we are:
quote:
Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing
Computer pioneer and codebreaker Alan Turing has been given a posthumous royal pardon.
It overturns his 1952 conviction for homosexuality for which he was punished by being chemically castrated.
The conviction meant he lost his security clearance and had to stop the code-cracking work that proved vital to the Allies in World War II.
The pardon was granted under the Royal Prerogative of Mercy after a request by Justice Minister Chris Grayling.
Merry Christmas, Alan!
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651
|
Posted
It's 51 years too late, but it is a nice gesture.
I suppose that in the interests of mutual goodwill and forgiveness, that in 51 years time I should offer my forgiveness and pardon to the Christian church for its crimes against gay people... I'll think about it.
Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
In the case of this measure, why not pardon Oscar Wilde, too? He contributed much to English letters.
I'm a little uneasy about the selective nature of the measure. Gross indecency was a crime. I don't think you should be able to get off that crime because you happen to be good with computers or can write amusing plays, which these posthumous pardons sort of say, in a round about way. Everyone should be equal under the law.
If they issued a blanket pardon of all people who were convicted under that law, would you feel differently?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
In the case of this measure, why not pardon Oscar Wilde, too? He contributed much to English letters.
I'm a little uneasy about the selective nature of the measure. Gross indecency was a crime. I don't think you should be able to get off that crime because you happen to be good with computers or can write amusing plays, which these posthumous pardons sort of say, in a round about way. Everyone should be equal under the law.
If they issued a blanket pardon of all people who were convicted under that law, would you feel differently?
Yes, absolutely. I feel that you shouldn't be able to get off on criminal offences because of who you are or what you happened to have done in your non-criminal career. By pardoning only Turing this is, essentially, what's going on. (I appreciate that's rather crudely put, but I think it's accurate.) If society feels strongly that a certain offence ought not to have been put on the statute book, everyone who fell foul of the law ought to be pardoned, not just some of them.
That said, I'm a little wary of posthumous pardons.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Yes, absolutely. I feel that you shouldn't be able to get off on criminal offences because of who you are or what you happened to have done in your non-criminal career. By pardoning only Turing this is, essentially, what's going on.
So you feel that special privilege accorded because of achievement goes counter to the basis of British government, which is based on special privilege accorded because of birthright?
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
That said, I'm a little wary of posthumous pardons.
Is it because of the recidivism rate? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Yes, absolutely. I feel that you shouldn't be able to get off on criminal offences because of who you are or what you happened to have done in your non-criminal career. By pardoning only Turing this is, essentially, what's going on.
So you feel that special privilege accorded because of achievement goes counter to the basis of British government, which is based on special privilege accorded because of birthright?
I'm saying that special privilege because of achievement goes counter to the basis of criminal law as I understand it.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
In the case of this measure, why not pardon Oscar Wilde, too? He contributed much to English letters.
I'm a little uneasy about the selective nature of the measure. Gross indecency was a crime. I don't think you should be able to get off that crime because you happen to be good with computers or can write amusing plays, which these posthumous pardons sort of say, in a round about way. Everyone should be equal under the law.
If they issued a blanket pardon of all people who were convicted under that law, would you feel differently?
That should be the next step.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Yesterday's Radio 4 PM programme had an interview with an 90 year old man whose whole life has been blighted because he was considered not to be 'of decent character'. All because he and a teenage friend, both aged 19 at the time, has done a bit of 'exploring'. he couldn't even get a job as a butler.
Not only a pardon but some sort of financial compensation would seem right.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Not only a pardon but some sort of financial compensation would seem right.
Um, yeah, that's going to happen.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Not only a pardon but some sort of financial compensation would seem right.
Who should pay the compensation? And given that what was done was at that time criminal (it should not have been, but it was) the next question is why? And finally, where do you draw the line?
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651
|
Posted
LilBuddha,
Financial reparations for past wrongs can and do happen. In New Zealand, for example, the government has given a massive amount of money to the Maori people to compensate them from land that was unjustly taken from them in colonial times. I believe many other countries have also gifted land and/or money to their native peoples to compensate for past wrongdoings. Just because you can point to a particularly wrong that has not been addressed or compensated, it doesn't mean this never happens.
Gee D,
Presumably the government(s) would pay such compensation as they are the ones who normally do in such cases. The claim to compensation would rest, I imagine, on the idea that the government systematically violated the human rights of the people concerned (eg as they did against various native peoples). The laws passed by, and enforced by, the government at that time were a violation of human rights, and therein lies the rationale for financial compensation.
Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
LilBuddha,
Financial reparations for past wrongs can and do happen. In New Zealand, for example, the government has given a massive amount of money to the Maori people to compensate them from land that was unjustly taken from them in colonial times. I believe many other countries have also gifted land and/or money to their native peoples to compensate for past wrongdoings. Just because you can point to a particularly wrong that has not been addressed or compensated, it doesn't mean this never happens.
The Maori reparations were based upon Treaty interpretation. Both slavery and the criminalisation of homosexuality were legal and therefore different.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Good. In that case, I'm waiting for the Royal Family to restore the land they've pinched over the last 1000 years.
When I see that then hey, I'm a believer!
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
