To Pardon or Not to Pardon

[Guest fountainhall]

One little item of news that I believe remains a continuing stain on the British Government.

 

Considered by most as the father of computer science, the brilliant British scientist Alan Turing also happened to be gay at a time when UK laws prohibited homosexuality. After reporting a break-in at his house in 1952, police discovered evidence of a sexual relationship with another man. He was charged with and found guilty of gross indecency, underwent a chemical castration as an alternative to prison, was stripped of his security clearance and unable to continue with his cryptological work. He soon spiraled into depression and ended his own life by ingesting cyanide in 1954.

 

Turing would have been 100 this year. The British government recently received a petition with 23,000 signatures requesting a posthumous pardon. The UK’s Justice Minister rejected the appeal, stating

 

"A posthumous pardon was not considered appropriate as Alan Turing was properly convicted of what at the time was a criminal offence," the BBC reported Justice Minister Lord McNally as saying when the motion was dismissed in the House of Lords last week.

 

http://www.fridae.as...till-a-criminal

 

This was the second such appeal to be rejected. Former PM Gordon Brown released a long statement irecognising the “appalling” way he was treated, adding –

 

Turing was a quite brilliant mathematician, most famous for his work on breaking the German Enigma codes. It is no exaggeration to say that, without his outstanding contribution, the history of World War Two could well have been very different. He truly was one of those individuals we can point to whose unique contribution helped to turn the tide of war. The debt of gratitude he is owed makes it all the more horrifying, therefore, that he was treated so inhumanely.

 

. . . on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan’s work I am very proud to say: we’re sorry, you deserved so much better.

 

http://www.fridae.as...eer-alan-turing

 

But like his successor, he refused a pardon, the reason being that up to 100,000 people in the UK were found guilty of the similar offence in the 100 years prior to the law being changed. A pardon for one would mean a pardon for all.

 

Especially sad is the fact that had Turing lived, he would almost certainly have risen above the gay issue. That great British actor Sir John Gielgud was convicted under the same law just a year later. Like Turing, he felt humiliated and believed his career was over. Thanks to his friends in the profession, that did not happen and he went on to become an acting legend.

 

Hasn’t the time for the stigma of criminality to be done away with and a pardon given to all?

[KhorTose]

Hasn’t the time for the stigma of criminality to be done away with and a pardon given to all?

 

Yes, but then I have a bias as a gay man. Taking gay out of the issue, I think that anytime a law that made anyone a criminal is thrown out of overturned due to societies changing values, all people convicted under that law in the past should be pardoned. I am thinking of people who married outside of their race, people convicted of felonies for drug offences that are now misdemeanors, minorities convicted of trespassing in an all white store or area, etc.

[Rogie]

Especially sad is the fact that had Turing lived, he would almost certainly have risen above the gay issue.

 

It seems sorry is as far as it goes, at least for now.

 

Although that's not enough for some people, he has been rehabilitated. No longer in disgrace, his achievements are celebrated.

 

Here is a good example:

 

 

The Alan Turing Building, named after the mathematician and founder of computer science Alan Turing, is a building at the University of Manchester . . .

The £43m building was completed in July 2007 . . . It consists of three "fingers", each of which are four stories high. The building is of steel frame construction, with reinforced concrete stair wells, and grey zinc exterior cladding.

 

The northern two fingers are joined by an atrium, which is spanned by a series of bridges. The southernmost finger was designed to hold low vibration laboratories, and is joined by a glazed bridge at third floor level to the middle finger.

 

An 'over-sailing' roof structure connects the three fingers acting as a suspension system for a photovoltaic array/solar shading using thin filmtechnology. This photovoltaic array is designed to produce nearly 41megawatt hours per annum, a saving of 17,000 kilograms of carbon dioxide each year. At the time of completion this was the largest photovoltaic array in North West England, and helped the architects to win an award for "Business Commitment to the Environment".

 

In the 1960s many mathematics departments were housed in high-rise buildings .....These proved completely unsuited to the activities of a mathematics department (and arguably any academic department) as travel between floors in lifts (and uninviting stairways) discourages interaction between mathematicians resulting from chance encounter.

 

Buildings such as the Mathematics Institute at Warwick (at East Site and later the Zeeman Building) and the Isaac Newton Institute at Cambridge are deliberately low-rise and designed to encourage chance encounter.

 

I rather like that idea of the 'chance encounter'. It reminds me of the 1997 film Good Will Hunting with Matt Damon and Robin Williams. If I put my fantasy hat on I could visualise the Matt Damon character bumping into Alan Turing in the atrium sparking a furious discussion after which they decide to collaborate on a regular basis.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing_Building

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119217/

[Guest fountainhall]


he has been rehabilitated. No longer in disgrace, his achievements are celebrated.


 

That is probably true, but only to a certain extent. To me, though, there seems precious little difference between the cases of "alleged" murderers Timothy Evans and David Bentley, and that of people like Turing. Under the laws in force at the time and according to the tainted evidence provided, Evans and Bentley were murdered by the state. Yet, after many years of disquiet and enquiries, both were declared innocent and subsequently pardoned in 1968 and 1968 respectively.

 

In the case of Turing and other homosexual men, the punishment would now be viewed as grossly excessive and totally out of proportion to the nature of the "crime". He was not "caught in the act", as Gielgud was. His 'mistake' was innocently to invite the police into his home to investigate a robbery. I do not know what "evidence" was then discovered (and presumably the police did not have a warrant as they had no idea what they would find), but thereafter he was branded as a serious criminal, humiliated beyond understanding and chemically castrated before killing himself. In my view, the law killed him.

 

Yes, he has been rehabilitated, but in the eyes of the law he remains a criminal. But again I cannot help compare what happened to him with what did not happen to hordes of other openly gay British men. Notable amongst them were two of the most notorious spies the country ever nurtured. Guy Burgess was a mid-level diplomat, known as almost outrageously gay at times, but was never once investigated under the relevant anti-gay legislation. He went on to betray his country and flee to the Soviet Union in 1951.

 

Anthony Blunt, again openly gay, was a member of the UK's MI5 during World War II. Even though he came under suspicion after his friend (some said his lover) Burgess' defection, he remained in his extraordinarily privileged position as Surveyor of the Queen's Pictures until publicly unmasked in parliament in 1979. Yet, Blunt had actually confessed his role as a spy to the authorities in 1964!

 

Blunt, gay, had been placed at the peak of British Society in charge of one of the world’s great art collections since 1945 – and for 12 years he was in the eyes of the law “a criminal”. Overlapping this period, he was unmasked as a spy, but permitted to continue access to the Royal Family and senior government figures for a full 15 years.

 

Burgess, Blunt and a host of others were certainly known to be breaking the ‘gay’ laws. Yet, they remained scot-free. The law, deliberately, was selectively enforced. The case for pardons for those condemned under it remains, in my view, emphatically strong.

[Rogie]

"A posthumous pardon was not considered appropriate as Alan Turing was properly convicted of what at the time was a criminal offence," the BBC reported Justice Minister Lord McNally as saying when the motion was dismissed in the House of Lords last week.

 

Back to post #1: The outcome of the petition was announced in the House of Lords. I'm not sure why it was done that way, it seems rather strange, I'll have to brush up on parliamentary procedure. I also do not know the mechanism by which a petition is dealt with. Sorry to say I do not expect it is done so with much imagination. Possibly given to some junior Home Office civil servant to 'research' and come back with the verdict "what the petition is asking is impossible - we can't do that Minister".

 

The law, deliberately, was selectively enforced. The case for pardons for those condemned under it remains, in my view, emphatically strong.

 

If I had to hazard a guess, I would like to think that in time Turing will get his pardon. Many of the people who are in power, certainly in the House of Lords, lived through a time when homosexuality was still a criminal offence, and even when the threat of prosecution was lifted, prejudice was still rife for many many years. The current crop of younger politicians in power, those now in their forties and early fifties, never lived through those times. They are still going to be influenced by 'older counsel' though. In time a new generation will be able to decide on the issue.

 

During WW1 the usual penalty for desertion was death. I would imagine many of the soldiers who met that fate were indeed guilty. However, many of the yong men sentenced to death were in fact guilty of nothing more than suffering from shell-shock. I cannot imagine what it must have been like for a serving soldier in the trenches, we have books such as Sebastian Faulks's Birdsong, but to actually expereince it yourself? That must have been terible. Little wonder some of the young men reacted in the way thay did. After many years of campaigning posthumous pardons have been granted in certain cases.

 

More than 300 soldiers who were shot for military offences during World War I will receive formal pardons, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed. Defence Secretary Des Browne said he would be seeking a group pardon, approved by Parliament, for the men.

 

It is thought 306 British soldiers were shot for cowardice, desertion or other offences in the 1914-1918 war. Among them was Private Harry Farr, shot for cowardice in 1916 aged 25. His family said they were "overwhelmed".

 

They have been campaigning for years for him to be pardoned, arguing that he was suffering from shell-shock and should not have been sent back to the trenches.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4796579.stm

[Rogie]

As an add-on to post #5, here is an excellent article that weighs up the dilemma that faced the British army in WW!.

Shot at Dawn: Cowards, Traitors or Victims?

 

Britain was not alone in executing its own soldiers. The French are thought to have killed about 600. The Germans, whose troops outnumbered the British by two to one, shot 48 of their own men, and the Belgians 13. In 2001, 23 executed Canadians were posthumously honoured by their government, and five troops killed by New Zealand's military command also recently won a pardon. Not one American or Australian soldier was executed.

 

Five successive British governments have rejected appeals to pardon the soldiers and the Ministry of Defence refuses to re-open the court martial files, even on the youngest troops.

 

I assume that last paragraph was written some years ago before the pardons came through.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/britain_wwone/shot_at_dawn_01.shtml

[Guest fountainhall]

we have books such as Sebastian Faulks's Birdsong, but to actually expereince it yourself?

 

Surely one of the great novels of the 20th century. A love story as sublime as any Impressionist painting, followed by one of the most horrific descriptions of life in the trenches ever written. It's time I re-read it.

[Guest fountainhall]

I should have added earlier for non British readers that Guy Burgess and Anthony Blunt were part of the now-infamous Cambridge University spy ring. In the 1930s, quite a number of students from all walks of life were disaffected as a result of the lack of reform in British life following the horrors of World War 1. They fell for Stalin's propaganda about the Soviet Union being a worker's paradise. Many flirted with the Communist Party for a while. Some even joined, but were then persuaded to drop out so they could eventually become more effective Soviet spies in British Intelligence.

 

For a time, Burgess and another ex-Cambridge diplomat Donald MacLean worked in the UK's Washington Embassy. In 1951, both fled to Moscow as British Intelligence discovered their betrayal. It was rumoured that there had to have been a "third man" higher up the organisation who had tipped them off. Initially this was believed to be John Cairncross who was unmasked soon after. However, in 1963, the then-journalist and 30-year veteran UK Intelligence Officer, Kim Philby. who had vanished during a trip to Lebanon, resurfaced in Moscow. It was assumed he was that "third man" and that the final piece of the Cambridge Spy Ring was in place.

 

Yet the following year UK Intelligence learned, thanks to an American whom he had recruited, that the man who had actually persuaded MacLean to flee was a fifth spy, Sir Anthony Blunt. In return for his confession, he was given immunity and allowed to continue in his role at the height of British Society and retain his knighthood. But in 1979, an investigative journalist published book Climate of Treason with a character named Maurice (from the E. M. Forster novel of the same name) bearing similarities to Blunt. Blunt unsuccessfully tried to prevent publication, and in November Margaret Thatcher decided to go against the civil service agreement with Blunt and publicly expose him in the House of Commons.

 

All five died disaffected and sad characters. Only Philby was honoured with a hero's funeral and awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union when he died in 1988 - ironically just as the Soviet Empire was about to collapse.

[ChristianPFC]

Outrageous!

 

Even the Catholic Church pardoned Galilei, although about 400 years after he had to rescind his claim that earth turns around sun.

 

How to deal with deserters: "A soldier might die, a deserter must die." (my translation, orginal: Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf): „Der Soldat kann sterben, der Deserteur muss sterben“)

 

Or to put it differently: the brave and good die at the front, the cowards survive and f**k the widows of those who died?

[Guest]

I think that anytime a law that made anyone a criminal is thrown out of overturned due to societies changing values, all people convicted under that law in the past should be pardoned.

 

That seems like a very sensible & efficient way to deal with the matter.

I would rather solve current problems and concentrate on applying the lessons of history to current problems, than debate first world war deserters.

[Guest fountainhall]

Turing - a Pardon on the Horizon
 
The UK government signalled on Friday that it was prepared to do a U-turn on the matter of a posthumous pardon for Alan Turing. It seems ready to support a Private Member's Bill advocating the pardon, just a year after the government had declined to consider pardons for any of the 49,000 gay men, all now deceased, who were convicted under the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act. Another so convicted was Oscar Wilde.
 
A senior government spokesman said -
 

The government are very aware of the calls to pardon Turing, given his outstanding achievements, and have great sympathy with this objective … That is why the government believe it is right that parliament should be free to respond to this bill in whatever way its conscience dictates and in whatever way it so wills."

 
In other words, MPs will be able to vote according to their conscience rather than as the parties dictate.
 
Perhaps one reason for the change of heart was a debate in which a member of the House of Lords who worked with the code breakers at Bletchley Park during World War II strongly backed the pardon issue. She said -
 

"I cannot claim that I knew him. However, I am certain that but for his work we would have lost the war through starvation."

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk-news/2013/jul/19/enigma-codebreaker-alan-turing-posthumous-pardon

[Rogie]

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/10536246/Alan-Turing-granted-Royal-pardon-by-the-Queen.html

 

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/24/enigma-codebreaker-alan-turing-royal-pardon

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25495315

[vinapu]

Finally right thing done but too late

[t0oL1]

short of a pardon and apology for their bigoted inane law,

it will have to do for now

[kokopelli]

Her Majesty does have a most curious signature! What does it mean? 

[Rogie]

Finally right thing done but too late

 

True

 

Her Majesty does have a most curious signature! What does it mean? 

 

The signature is that of Christopher Grayling, the Justice Secretary. 

 

As to what it means I guess it means what it says! One or two things strike me as a bit odd, firstly the distinctly old-fashioned phraseology, and second the rather off-putting, browny, colour of the letter.

 

In addition the whole thing looks, in this day and age where more or less anyone with decent software can come up with a fresh imaginative letter or document, very amateurish, and, once again, gives a distinctly old-fashioned appearance. 

 

I suspect the 'style' of this letter has been cobbled together by some junior clerk in the Justice Secretary's Department so as to try and resemble the sort of document that might have been issued following either of the World Wars. Witness this comment:

 

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: "Uniquely on this occasion a pardon has been issued without either requirement having been met, reflecting the exceptional nature of Alan Turing's achievements."

 

 

So I can't see how they can have simply dug out a pre-existing template from a dusty drawer. Hence my cobbling together comment. I hope I am wrong though! Ultimately does it really matter whose signature is on the bottom of the letter, or whether it looks old-fashioned or up-to-date? 

 

Even so, whoever came up with the form of words and general appearance of that letter might have tried a bit harder!

[vinapu]

 Ultimately does it really matter whose signature is on the bottom of the letter, or whether it looks old-fashioned or up-to-date? 

 

 

It does not, may be this is how they do things. What is important is that justice arrived ,too  late , yes,  but at least it did

[kokopelli]

When I saw the signature I first thought it was in Arabic! It would have been a service to humanity and the Empire for her Majesty to have acknowledged Alan Turing 's contribution to the war effort by a personal signature.

 

 Alan Turing should not have been pardoned, he should have been knighted. Maybe someday?