Joined: May 25 2002 Posts: 37704 Location: Zummerzet, where the zoider apples grow
rumpelstiltskin wrote: I have a hell of a lot more sympathy for the soldiers who were hammered for months on end in the trenches, before cracking, and then having to face the final ignominy of a Firing Squad consisting of soldiers from their own regiment.
They have already received posthumous pardons.
The whole Turing thing is a empty gesture, rather than a pardon (that doesn't change his "guilt"), why not an apology?
The older I get, the better I was
Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't
I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."
cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
Joined: Feb 17 2002 Posts: 28357 Location: MACS0647-JD
Why is he being pardoned? It seems like a decision that, while he was correctly convicted under the law of the land as it stood, nevertheless he did some outstanding work and so is being pardoned in light of his services to the country.
That would explain why just he is pardoned and not others convicted under the same law. Is it really what the campaigners wanted though? I get the feeling that what they really want is the impossible, some sort of retrospective setting aside of his conviction so that his criminal record is somehow expunged. That is never going to happen as there are simply no grounds.
An apology is inappropriate as this government or any government today would not countenance such a law, and it is futile and pointless apologising for laws duly enacted in the past. Most people TODAY would agree it was a bad law, but it wasn't (and isn't) by any means the only one.
Why is he being pardoned? It seems like a decision that, while he was correctly convicted under the law of the land as it stood, nevertheless he did some outstanding work and so is being pardoned in light of his services to the country.
That would explain why just he is pardoned and not others convicted under the same law. Is it really what the campaigners wanted though? I get the feeling that what they really want is the impossible, some sort of retrospective setting aside of his conviction so that his criminal record is somehow expunged. That is never going to happen as there are simply no grounds.
An apology is inappropriate as this government or any government today would not countenance such a law, and it is futile and pointless apologising for laws duly enacted in the past. Most people TODAY would agree it was a bad law, but it wasn't (and isn't) by any means the only one.
Joined: May 10 2002 Posts: 47951 Location: Die Metropole
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Why is he being pardoned? It seems like a decision that, while he was correctly convicted under the law of the land as it stood, nevertheless he did some outstanding work and so is being pardoned in light of his services to the country.
That would explain why just he is pardoned and not others convicted under the same law. Is it really what the campaigners wanted though? I get the feeling that what they really want is the impossible, some sort of retrospective setting aside of his conviction so that his criminal record is somehow expunged. That is never going to happen as there are simply no grounds.
An apology is inappropriate as this government or any government today would not countenance such a law, and it is futile and pointless apologising for laws duly enacted in the past. Most people TODAY would agree it was a bad law, but it wasn't (and isn't) by any means the only one.
See the David Allen Green article, which I linked to earlier.
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Why is he being pardoned? It seems like a decision that, while he was correctly convicted under the law of the land as it stood, nevertheless he did some outstanding work and so is being pardoned in light of his services to the country.
That would explain why just he is pardoned and not others convicted under the same law. Is it really what the campaigners wanted though? I get the feeling that what they really want is the impossible, some sort of retrospective setting aside of his conviction so that his criminal record is somehow expunged. That is never going to happen as there are simply no grounds.
An apology is inappropriate as this government or any government today would not countenance such a law, and it is futile and pointless apologising for laws duly enacted in the past. Most people TODAY would agree it was a bad law, but it wasn't (and isn't) by any means the only one.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
