World War II code-breaker pardoned by Queen Elizabeth
LONDON — Nearly 60 years after his death, Alan Turing, the British scientist whose code-breaking work helped the Allies beat Hitler and who is considered the father of artificial intelligence, received a royal pardon on Tuesday for the crime of having had sex with another man.
Turing was convicted in 1952 of “gross indecency,” the charge used against gay men in an age when homosexual relations were illegal in Britain. He underwent chemical castration and had his government security clearance confiscated, then took his own life in 1954 at 41, prematurely ending a distinguished career that pioneered the computer era.
In recent years, a campaign to have Turing's name cleared has built momentum, resulting in a government apology in 2009 and culminating with Queen Elizabeth II exercising her royal “prerogative of mercy.”
The decision was hailed by many as long-overdue redress for one of Britain's most brilliant scientists. “Dr. Turing deserves to be remembered and recognized for his fantastic contribution to the war effort and his legacy to science,” Justice Secretary Chris Grayling said. “A pardon from the queen is a fitting tribute to an exceptional man.”
Prime Minister David Cameron lauded Turing's vital work in cracking the Nazis' ingenious “Enigma” code, which had stumped some of the Allies' best cryptographers. Deciphering the German military's secret communications shortened World War II and “saved countless lives,” Cameron said.
His posthumous pardon is highly unusual and possibly unique. Royal pardons normally are reserved for people who are innocent of the offenses they are accused of committing, and they usually are requested by family members or others close to the alleged offender. Neither is true in this case, a departure from protocol that reflects “the exceptional nature of Alan Turing's achievements,” the government said.
But that sits uneasily with some legal scholars. While it's fine to denounce past statutes, such as the one against homosexuality, as retrograde and unjust, critics say, Turing was convicted according to the law of the land at the time, and pardoning him alone could be seen as implying that some people are above the law by virtue of their fame, their accomplishments or their value to the state.
Peter Tatchell, Britain's most prominent gay-rights advocate, said that at least 50,000 men were convicted of gross indecency, and that as many as 15,000 of them are still alive, stuck with criminal records for being gay.
“They have never been offered a pardon and will never get one. Selective redress is a bad way to remedy a historic injustice,” Tatchell said. “An apology and pardon is due to the other 50,000-plus men who were also convicted of consenting, victimless homosexual relationships during the 20th century.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.