Just Broke: Turing Given Royal Pardon!

[ChillDoubt]

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

Not before time!

[DTCwordfan]

Andy, are you twisted? Turing made a major contribution to saving hundreds of thousands of lives and shortening the war. Savile did not. Many others have done/do what Savile has done for charity, one difference being that they are not loud-mouthed about it - and having seen him in action (in Glasgow), he was one of the biggest boors I have ever come across with 'Me' at the centre. Now, although he did do good for charity, his crime is a heinous one and not comparable with the morality of homosexuality - we're talking about child sex, Christ!!! Making your association is wrong, completely wrong, and, I suspect you know it. A good point for shyte stirring on here and as equal, if not more, than my term for the police that you made comment on.

[Zacs-Master]

And let's not forget Saville used his fund raising as an 'in' to many of his victims.

[DTCwordfan]

True, zacs - Happy Christmas by the way.

[Zacs-Master]

Happy Christmas to you and your nearest &dearest too DT!

[jno]

people are totally missing andy's point. He said pardoning peoople retrospectively might allow future generations to pardon Savile, and this would be so ludicrous that it would be better not to pardon dead people at all.

I disagree with him (because Savile had no convictions to pardon) - but I do see what he means.

[anotheoldgit]

emmie

/// because there is a massive difference between a man who sexually grooms young children, then abuses them in all manner of ways, to one who was a adult having a relationship with another adult who happened to be of the same gender,.///

We are not talking about exploitation and the abuse of children, the age of consent in Spain is 13 raised from 12 as late as 1996, and one can marry at 14.

[Mattk]

Alan Turing is the best known case of the time but surely many others would have faced a similar punishment at around that time for the same 'crime'?
Are they not owed a royal pardon too?

[anotheoldgit]

ChillDoubt

/// Homosexuality was decriminalised in 1967. I've a feeling paedophilia will remain on the statute book for the next few centuries at the very least. ///

What is and what is not Paedophilia is governed by the age of consent set out by the laws of the country at the time.

I think what Andy is getting at is almost the same as myself, although I would not have referred to Saville as he did.

My point is that if the age of consent was lowered in this country would all those convicted of having taken part in 'under-aged' sex be then pardoned?

Take the teacher who was imprisoned for running away with his 'under-aged' pupil for example.

[DTCwordfan]

That is fair enough, AOG; like you, I would keep Saville or any of those about to go to court out of this debate.

[andy-hughes]

DT - "Andy, are you twisted?"

I hope we can debate an issue without resorting to nasty personal insults.

It's Christmas Eve for heaven's sake!

Thank you jno for your support.

I will attempt to explain my point once more.

I am not for one minute comparing the actions of Turing and Saville - that is not the thrust of my argument.

My point is not about the actions of the parties, it is about society's retrospective viewing of those actions, based on perceived outweighing of good for society.

Now how you balance those, one against the other is of course, impossible, and that again is the thrust of my argument.

If you pardon one for breaking the law, you must pardon the other in the same way.

So again, in case anyone is in any doubt, I am not comparing punishment for a gay relationship with child abuse, what i am comparing is the inevitable uneveness of balancing one with the other. It's not possible, not should it be possible, so avoid opening a winless argument, it is best to allow that Turing was a victim of a law that was in place at the time, and society has moved on in its attitudes.

So, hopefully I have nailed it home to anyone who is trying to imply that I think Saville should not be vilified if found guilty.

And no, I am not 'twisted'. Feel free to apologise in the spirit of Christmas any time you like.

[ChillDoubt]

I think you're forgetting something AOG.
The case you've mentioned with the teacher, the young, impressionable girl went with him willingly.
I very much doubt Savile's victims did.
Whatever Andy's point was it was poorly made IMHO.
To use Turing and Savile in the same analogy besmirches the record of a man with a brilliant mind who helped save this country from tyranny.

[DTCwordfan]

andy - in the spirit of the season, I'll retract the twisted bit and insert chilli's point that you made the point very poorly and, in doing so, gave the impression of some warped association. Have a drink on me......

[jim360]

Describing this pardon as an insult just seems a bit... odd. I suppose I can see where you are coming from, but on the other hand isn't it more insulting that he was convicted in the first place? Catch-22 for the government there. I think the pardon is more of a symbol today that the idea of treating homosexuality as a crime is no longer viewed as even remotely acceptable, and Turing's pardon is a pardon for all those who were convicted under that law, or treated poorly as a result. We should be grateful that such a pardon is even possible, rather than deriding it as insulting.

[AB Editor]

This is an interesting discussion, please can we try to keep the personal attcks to a minimum and stick to facts and opinions.

//It's Christmas Eve for heaven's sake! //

[andy-hughes]

Thanks DT.

I accept that perhaps my analogy was careless, although I think my point still holds merit - if we pardon people on a scale of contribution to society, then we will have to establish that scale - which is impossible because all instances are unique.

The law was of its time, we no longer live in that time - but Mr Turing did live, and indeed die in that time, I cannot see that a pardon now from the state that prosecuted him really helps anyone.

More appropriate may be appropriate acknowledgement of his undouted contribution to the free world.

[naomi24]

//We should be grateful that such a pardon is even possible, rather than deriding it as insulting. //

Why? Grateful for what? The law was an ass. A 'pardon' implies forgiveness - and there is nothing to forgive.

[jno]

he broke the law, naomi.

[naomi24]

I know.

[jim360]

I don't agree that a pardon implies forgiveness necessarily. An apology has already been made, but by the laws of the time he was guilty so they can't overturn his conviction. This leaves either a pardon or implicitly condemning him as a legal criminal. At least he is no longer a criminal in the eyes of the government, officially as well as otherwise -- and that sends out a message surely about how utterly abhorrent the government finds the idea of his being convicted.

[naomi24]

//that sends out a message surely about how utterly abhorrent the government finds the idea of his being convicted.//

No, it doesn’t. It sends out the message that he broke the law but is now forgiven. An apology, on the other hand, conveys an acknowledgement that the law was wrong.