While they may have called it 'unreserved', the apology remained reserved in an important part: there was no pardon. 'Disregarding of convictions' is not the sa

While they may have called it 'unreserved', the apology remained reserved in an important part: there was no pardon. 'Disregarding of convictions' is not the same thing as a pardon, it is what it says it is: it is, simply, 'we will no longer take these convictions into account' (and a db admin gets to run a very rare delete command). A pardon would be recognition that the conviction was in itself wrong, even at the time (the paragraph of law that made sex between men was snuck into a bill of 1885 which dealt with sex crimes relating to young women. It took nearly 75 years to remove). Even if it is impractical to pardon everyone, pardoning Turing would have made a very public statement alongside the 'Disregarding of convictions'. I believe the statement would still be worth making and I would go further to include a few others, e.g. Oscar Wilde. Note also that the bill specifically holds a paragraph to make exactly this kind of pardon possible: 87 Saving for Royal pardons etc. Nothing in section 86 affects any right of Her Majesty, by virtue of Her Royal prerogative or otherwise, to grant a free pardon, to quash any conviction or sentence, or to commute any sentence. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmbills/146/11146.68-74.html http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmbills/14...