Alan Turing: Scientists call for pardon for codebreaker

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20722581

by jgrahamc • 14 years ago

54 40 14 years ago

bbc.co.uk

EiZei• 14 years ago

How about a blanket pardon for anyone ever convicted of consentual homosexual relationships?

elssar5• 14 years ago

Alan Turing's contributions to science and the war time effort were immense, and immeasurable. However, granting a pardon to him and him alone won't mean much. He was guilty. The law which he broke was draconian, no doubts about it, but it was the law at that time. I do not think he was the only Briton who was oppressed because of that particular law.

If there is a pardon, and there should be one, it should be granted to everyone who was convicted under that law.

brnstz• 14 years ago

I agree any pardon should be a blanket one. I wonder about semantics though. Is someone really "guilty" of breaking an unjust law? It's like saying someone is "guilty" of freeing a slave. An unjust law is no law at all, and usually people have to break it before it is changed.

darkarmani4• 14 years ago

> He was guilty.

That the only time a pardon is needed.

nicholassmith• 14 years ago

The most sensible thing to do with the situation is the blanket pardon, but I can't see it happening. I think they've made blanket apologies before (slavery springs to mind), but never a blanket pardon.

Nursie• 14 years ago

I can't see that happening right now. The PM has announced that Gay Marriage is going to become a thing here imminently.

It's a weird bill because it actually forbids the state church from performing homosexual marriages, not even leaving it open for the church itself to decide, but it does allow other churches to make their own decisions and civil ceremonies to take place.

This is a major step (IMHO) but it has had the usual backlash of small minded folks spouting on about family values and how their rights are being eroded (?!) so politically a blanket, retroactive pardon seems very unlikely.

Baby steps...

_stephan• 14 years ago

Or better: retroactively declare the old law null and void and pay compensation to all victims that were prosecuted under it.

meaty2• 14 years ago

This is exactly what they should be doing, but they will downplay it as all the publicity will actually detract from the current ruling elite's appearance (even if it wasn't them who made the law up).

Crake• 14 years ago

They probably all committed suicide. It's a really common end for GLBT, unfortunately.

7952• 14 years ago

Or create a memorial. It is in fashion at the moment in the UK. If all you are offering is a gesture, it may as well be something tangible.

jgrahamc2• 14 years ago

As people on HN probably know I'm opposed to this: http://blog.jgc.org/2011/11/why-im-not-supporting-campaign-f...

Most importantly I find the following line from the letter disturbing: "To those who seek to block attempts to secure a pardon with the argument that this would set a precedent, we would answer that Turing's achievements are sui generis." They are arguing that Turing uniquely deserves a pardon because of his genius. That itself would set a terrible precedent because it would appear that the eminent Lords believe that being a great man puts you above the law.

elssar5• 14 years ago

In that blog post you point out that there was a legislation in the British parliament that would roll back convictions of gays, and that it was close to becoming a law. Whatever happened to it?

meaty2• 14 years ago

I think they got bored and continued to roll out more draconian surveillance laws instead which are obviously of more interest to the political elite...

I have very little faith in the government to do the right thing.

jgrahamc2• 14 years ago

It became law on May 1, 2012 when it received Royal Assent. http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/protectionoffree...

laumars2• 14 years ago

I'm inclined to agree. I really wish that things could have turned out different for Turing and think the law was -at best- completely idiotic. But pardoning someone for a law in force at the time sets such a dangerous precedence. Not least of all because -as great a man as Turing was- every other victim of this law would them equally deserve a pardon too (and you know what's going to happen next; some of the less reputable descendants of the aforementioned will no doubt sue the government for an absurd amount of damages).

This is one of those instances where I think the government are in a no-win situation. Either option is crappy.

yock• 14 years ago

There is a third option, and that is to extend the same privilege to all on record who ever violated the unjust law.

darkarmani4• 14 years ago

> every other victim of this law would them equally deserve a pardon too

That's not exactly how pardons work. There is no reason to suggest additional people should then be pardoned. When Presidents pardon people, they don't pardon every single person in the country who committed the same crime.

brendn• 14 years ago

Turing should be pardoned as a human victim of an unjust law, and his genius should have nothing to do with it. That said, there are more important fights for equality that affect living people right now than whether the British government officially pardons a dead man.

UnoriginalGuy• 14 years ago

He shouldn't be pardoned. To pardon him is to just try and sweep the whole business under the rug and to pretend like all the bad stuff that happened to him and others (who incidentally won't get the pardon) didn't occur.

I equate pardoning him to trying to pretend that the holocaust didn't occur. It is better in both cases to remember the mistakes so we won't repeat them in the future to others rather than putting our heads in the sand and pretending they never occurred at all.

I'm all for gay rights in 2012, that's why we shouldn't hide/bury our mistakes in 1954.

darkarmani4• 14 years ago

> That itself would set a terrible precedent

Pardons do not set precedent.

Svip2• 14 years ago

Led to his suicide? I think that is assuming too much. I've read plenty of material suggesting his suicide was an accident, considering his new experiments with drugs, while generally appearing content to the people around him.

Now, obviously, he could have been masked this whole thing by playing a game, and the experiments was purely a cover for killing himself. But that doesn't make sense to me; why didn't he leave a note? Why would Alan Turing kill himself without letting the whole world know what happened?

The lack of clearcut evidence (and what seems like a strange way to kill one self; there are plenty of easier choices) leaves me to believe that his death was accidental and not a suicide.

Jtsummers• 14 years ago

Re contentedness: I said this last time this topic came up. It is not uncommon for suicidal people to seem happy or at peace once they've committed themselves to the act. The stress that causes the desire has been in some sense resolved, they know it will be over soon.

Re note: Not everyone leaves a note. None of the people I've known who killed (or attempted) themselves left notes, though most of us could guess at why. What would he have said in a note? A quick google search suggests that only about a quarter of suicides leave a note.

EDIT:

Re method: People kill themselves with all sorts of methods. A poisoned apple could've struck him as ironic, poetic, or perhaps easier to use than pills or a gun.

Overall though, suicide is a messy business. Method, motive, behaviour of people who commit or attempt it is all over the map. Sometimes you can (in retrospect) say that it was obvious, many times you can't. Some people are good at acting happy or at least not sad. Others pass it off as just being tired. Some will plan out their methods in detail (like a poisoned apple may have been), others will see a bottle or a gun and use it that instant before they can reconsider.

However, since some evidence wasn't examined at the time it's impossible to rule out an accident. On the other hand, nothing in the narrative easily dismisses the notion of suicide. This was 60 years ago, any attempt at this point to rewrite it is based on speculation from second hand accounts and has no ability to examine physical evidence to prove the theory.

darkarmani4• 14 years ago

> Led to his suicide? I think that is assuming too much.

You mean cutting him off from all of his research and shaming him to all of his peers is assuming too much??

tubelite2• 14 years ago

Pardon? Pardon, a pardon?! An apology is what he deserves and what he got. To use words like 'pardon' and 'forgive' carries the very strong connotation that what he did was wrong, and we're being nice by forgiving his mistakes.

I mean, half the great men in the history of the last century have had the honour of being jailed by the British. Imagine the Queen issuing a posthumous "pardon" to Gandhi. I can scarcely imagine a worse insult to his memory.

Svip2• 14 years ago

I thought pardons - even posthumous ones - were about undoing a false conviction based on later evidence (or good connections). Of course, the pardon of Nixon does not fall into this category.

Then again, I agree with your analogy of pardoning Gandhi.

tubelite2• 14 years ago

Undoing a false conviction is fine, but they really ought to use a better word. Exonerate. Vindicate. Absolve.

(Then again, I don't understand the idea of the President 'pardoning' a turkey either. What's the turkey done? Headed a Wall Street investment bank?)

peeters• 14 years ago

Pardons are not, nor have ever been, about undoing a false conviction based on later evidence. You don't need a pardon in that case; you need an appeal which will overturn your conviction. That's not to say a pardon couldn't be used for this purpose; but the judicial branch can ordinarily handle it itself.

Pardons are usually an executive power to to absolve someone (clear their record). Commutation is similar, where you do not negate the guilt but reduce or eliminate the punishment. Both are tools used for various reasons.

In Canada, many minor crimes are pardoned years after a criminal has been reformed to clear their record. IMO this is in general a good thing, but then there are cases like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_James_(ice_hockey)#Pardo...

Pardons and commutes are also used to balance out a flawed justice system or one that has its hands tied (e.g. with mandatory minimums). This can include people being sent to prison for years for minor drug crimes, etc.

Alan Turing: Scientists call for pardon for codebreaker

Related Stories