5 ms·

A pardon implies that there was, in fact, some kind of a crime. What we should be pushing for is a redaction, and an acknowledgement that the prosecutors were

• elliott99 14y ago
  "However, it is long-standing government policy that pardons under the Royal Prerogative of Mercy should be reserved for cases where it can be established that the convicted person was innocent of the relevant offence, and not to undo the effects of legislation which we now recognise as wrong." In this case, I guess pardon is not appropriate. I think the way we think of pardons at least in the US, is your first sentence, in which case Turing should definitely be pardoned.
• rohamg 14y ago
  Actually, no. In the UK pardons are usually given when there is a presumption of innocence. In Turing's case, he was in fact guilty of a crime according to the laws at the time.
  • teamonkey 14y ago
    In the UK a pardon doesn't necessarily presume innocence. It simply means that you can't be punished for your crime. Although rare these days there were times when a pardon could be won or purchased in exchange for services rendered. It didn't mean that you were innocent of your crime.
• pbhjpbhj 14y ago
  That it was a crime is a matter of historical record. The prosecutors, judge J. Fraser Harrison for example, appear to have been far from moronic. An unambiguous cause for Turing's suicide doesn't appear to be known. Your allegations of ignorance though seem valid.