News Item - UK Denies Alan Turing Posthumous Pardon For Homosexuality

[æonpax]

Recently, over 23,000 people signed an online petition to ask the UK government to pardon Alan Turing for homosexuality, considered the crime of “gross indecency” by the Labouchere Amendment of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885. Yesterday, the motion was dismissed by the House of Lords. Considering that Turing performed stellar and unique service to the British government during World War II, and his work provided much of the basis for the modern computer, this is unconscionable. - http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/02/07/uk-denies-alan-turing-postumous-pardon-for-homosexuality/

In the article, Justice Minister Lord McNally's excuse for not pardoning Turing sounds like the same trite political double-talk I see here in the US.

[darkeyes]

From the point of view of the mundane politicial mind, what the Justice Minister said is fair... yet if it is accepted that a wrong was done, then it is only fair that a pardon be fothcoming..

I do not like the word "pardon" as it so happens when applied to those I believe to have been or have been proven innocent but were convicted of a crime.. the very word infers that there is something to be pardoned for.. the reasoning of the Justice minister is double talk as u say, but from the political and bureaucratic mind it means do nothing.. it is a simple matter to establish the principle that something which is not a crime today yet becomes one tomorrow cannot be made retrospective in law and people prosecuted and punished accordingly..in fact it is so established.. yet if something becomes not a crime, is it fair to for instance hold people in prison or have their names recorded as criminal when that crime no longer exists? We can see the dilemma.. and to offer pardons for those who have been punished under old laws which no longer exist willy nilly does create difficulties and we should not try and minimise just what those dificulties would be.. in the case of the nations which make up the United Kingdom incredibly complex bureaucratic ones because we are old countries whose criminal laws goes back far so much further than your own..

...but I do not believe it to be beyond the wit of humanity to devise a system where those convicted of crimes going back a very long way, which were clearly unjustified, often even in the context of the day, can be granted "pardons". Alan Turing would be a good start.. but there are others.. for instance those executed by the British under military law during WW1 for cowardice and desertion when so many were so plainly shell shocked, ill and in no fit state to do what had been asked of them.. it is no easy thing to do Æon, but that dos not mean that in the interests of justice that we should not out of common humanity make the effort...

[tenni]

Beyond whether Turing deserves a pardon (absolution) or whether the apology of PM Gordon Brown suffices for being found guilty of "gross indecency" and having to be chemically castrated is perhaps a semantic nightmare. What I find interesting if not disturbing is that homosexual acts were deemed "gross indecent" and a crime in 1952. That is not as far back as some might have thought. The societal attitude was still condemning homosexual acts as grossly indecent to society in 1952. Society thought that such acts were so awful that they would stop a person from doing it by chemically castrating them and on top of that all the negative social implications of being "found out". Today, some gays and bisexual youth feel that it is important to "come out"...to stand up against intolerance in society while others are still reluctant.

Would society benefit from this pardon of Turing? Would it reduce remaining social stigma against non heteros? I don't that it would. It is a moote point today as morals are different towards homosexual acts. Those that still find homosexuality indecent and gross are the problem. This may be argued for quite some time but those who still condemn homosexuality won't change their mind by giving Turing a pardon imo.

What great honours have been given to Turing by Britain? Are there knighthoods etc. that might be given to Turing posthumously to recognize his contribution to Britain during the WW2 and his significance to the discovery of computer? Was he not given these honours before because of his homosexuality or did Britain not see his contribution as great as some see it today?

[æonpax]

From the point of view of the mundane politicial mind, what the Justice Minister said is fair... yet if it is accepted that a wrong was done, then it is only fair that a pardon be fothcoming..

I do not like the word "pardon" as it so happens when applied to those I believe to have been or have been proven innocent but were convicted of a crime.. the very word infers that there is something to be pardoned for.. the reasoning of the Justice minister is double talk as u say, but from the political and bureaucratic mind it means do nothing.. it is a simple matter to establish the principle that something which is not a crime today yet becomes one tomorrow cannot be made retrospective in law and people prosecuted and punished accordingly..in fact it is so established.. yet if something becomes not a crime, is it fair to for instance hold people in prison or have their names recorded as criminal when that crime no longer exists? We can see the dilemma.. and to offer pardons for those who have been punished under old laws which no longer exist willy nilly does create difficulties and we should not try and minimise just what those dificulties would be.. in the case of the nations which make up the United Kingdom incredibly complex bureaucratic ones because we are old countries whose criminal laws goes back far so much further than your own..

...but I do not believe it to be beyond the wit of humanity to devise a system where those convicted of crimes going back a very long way, which were clearly unjustified, often even in the context of the day, can be granted "pardons". Alan Turing would be a good start.. but there are others.. for instance those executed by the British under military law during WW1 for cowardice and desertion when so many were so plainly shell shocked, ill and in no fit state to do what had been asked of them.. it is no easy thing to do Æon, but that dos not mean that in the interests of justice that we should not out of common humanity make the effort...

I would respectfully disagree on one point. When it comes to politics and politicians, anywhere, I'm a cynic. The excuse that there are just "too many" people to "pardon" reeks of BS smack. In the US, for example, the government has at least attempted to atone for some of their heinous transgressions against the Native Americans, Blacks and those Japanese interred during WWII. Those people number in the millions. Sorry, I just don't buy into McNally's paltry excuse.

I do however agree that "pardon" is the wrong word to use, as if one needs to be forgiven for being homosexual. The words 'exonerate' or 'absolve' may be better, if such words need to be used at all.

[tenni]

at least attempted to atone for some of their heinous transgressions against the Native Americans, Blacks and those Japanese interred during WWII. Those people number in the millions. Sorry, I just don't buy into McNally's paltry excuse.

aeonpax
I think that a group apology would be most appropriate. If the PM Gordon Brown made an apology in Parliament that should suffice for Turney imo. Better, would be for the present PM Cameron to apologize to all who were found to be guilty of the crime of "gross indicency" for homosexual acts. This should be done in Parliament with descendants of people who were found guilty of a crime for homosexual acts.

[darkeyes]

I'm as cynical as u are, and we know governments never like admitting to past mistakes.. neither do I accept that there are too many people to "pardon".. ever.. but a block pardon for all those who have been convicted of for instance, the crime of gross indecency does not quite fulfill what you and I wish to see.. for such a crime does not simply take in homosexual offenders and covers a far greater variety of crimes, sometimes justifiably criminal such as than two guys having it away in their own home and being caught.. it is this more complex variety which often has nothing whatever to do with homosexuality and acts between two consenting individuals which would be bureaucratic... the reality of who to pardon would be difficult and would be bureaucratic but it should be done as far as is humanly possible.. it can and should be done but not at the expense of exonerating those who do not deserve exoneration... but only after careful and proper investigation... the fact that they are likely to be dead does not remove from governments or society the obligation to remove the unjustified slur on their name...

..when discussing exonerating those accused and convicted of a crime of long ago, based on old statute isnt quite the same as what occured to Native Americans, or to the Japanese who were interned in the US.. we too had internment for enemy aliens and some of those were actually British citizens.. but we too have had through historical imperial adventure many things for which we should apologise and pay restitution and to be fair in some instances have.. not many but some.. sometimes it has taken a court of law to make that happen, but it is a simpler matter to identify outrages against much more easily identified groups of people than individuals convicted of crimes which existed in the distant and not so distant past.. for some, even homosexual and bisexual people will have been guilty of what you and I consider a crime within the context of that offense, such as exposing gentials to children or simply what you and I might refer to nowadays as "flashing".. but often very much worse.. the crime of gross indecency was and is a kind of catch all offence.. and within it are whole range of different crimes for which people could be prosecuted.. it is that which makes it difficult..

I dont disagree with u in the slightest not really, but nor do I think it is a task that we think will be easy.. justice isnt and never will be.. nor should it be.. but that it happens, is...

[darkeyes]

aeonpax
I think that a group apology would be most appropriate. If the PM Gordon Brown made an apology in Parliament that should suffice for Turney imo. Better, would be for the present PM Cameron to apologize to all who were found to be guilty of the crime of "gross indicency" for homosexual acts. This should be done in Parliament with descendants of people who were found guilty of a crime for homosexual acts.I dont think an apology is sufficient Tenni but would be a step in the right direction.. nothing short of expunging the criminal record against the name of those who have been so unjustly punished is sufficient.. but while ensuring that we do that we should ensure that as far as possible the historical criminal record of those who were justly tried and punished should remain intact.. it is a vastly complex issue... hundreds of offences are stricken from the statute book every year and replaced or abolished completely.. where do we begin? It is a bit of a minefield and it is something that should be looked at and done to rectify injustice as far as we can.. however, there are far more pressing things facing the world than the historical injustice against one man, or a group of people and if I am active in the campaign about Alan Turing, it doesnt take up that much of my time because so many other more important live issues affecting live people do... but injustice is injustice and we should never let it be forgotten or cease trying to do something to rectify it..