
Alan Turing’s stolen OBE, doctorate recovered in Colorado - bookmtn
https://www.timescall.com/2020/01/20/feds-seize-alan-turings-doctorate-and-knighthood-medal-after-they-were-offered-to-cu-boulder/
======
ilamont
This tale reminded me of the Totenberg Stradivarius (also known as the Ames
Stradivarius), stolen in the early 80s in Cambridge Mass. and recovered after
the thief, a former conservatory student, died decades later and his wife
(unaware of the provenance) tried to have it appraised
([https://stringsmagazine.com/a-new-chapter-begins-in-the-
tumu...](https://stringsmagazine.com/a-new-chapter-begins-in-the-tumultuous-
life-of-the-ames-totenberg-stradivari/)). The thief kept it hidden at first,
but in the 1990s and 2000s was apparently performing with it in public.

------
catalogia
> _Julia Turing isn’t related to Alan Turing, but she changed her last name
> from Schwinghamer in 1988, according to the complaint. A former biology
> teacher at the Sherborne said Julia Turing claimed she was Alan Turing’s
> daughter when he gave her a tour of the school._

That's pretty nutty. I wonder how often this sort of thing happens.

~~~
cgrealy
I feel sorry for her. It seems pretty clear she's dealing with some mental
health issues.

------
40four
> _federal officials searched Julia Turing’s home in Conifer and recovered the
> items, which are valued at $37,775_

I’d really love to know how this value was determined. Is this like some sort
of ‘Antiques Road Show’ valuation for insurance purposes?

The real answer here, given the historical context, is probably closer to
‘priceless’.

------
HeavenFox
Wow. $37,775 is an insanely low valuation - I wonder who came up with that.

If the Feds are reading this thread and are looking for a buyer, please send
me a message ;)

~~~
da_chicken
It's probably what they were insured for in 1984 when they were originally
stolen. I have to think they're much more valuable now, given the past 10
years or so of history.

~~~
toyg
Turing’s rehabilitation actually started in the late ‘90s in England, through
plays and memorials like the one in Manchester (2001). So it’s more like “20
years or so”.

------
ropiwqefjnpoa
Miss Schwinghamer does not sound like she is sound of mind.

~~~
slg
Even beyond the comment on her mental state, this is an unnecessarily
condescending comment. It both refers to her with a name she no longer uses
and assumes a marital status when none is ever implied. The decent way to
refer to her would be Ms. Turing. Believing she isn't of sound mind should be
an even stronger reason to afford her this tiny kindness of respect.

~~~
flocial
She legally changed her last name to Turing, claimed she was his daughter
despite being of no relation, and stole Turing's possessions thereby
endangering his legacy. What sort of kindness and respect does this warrant? I
don't think the comment violates HN standards, is civil enough and more
importantly quite appropriate considering the crime.

~~~
slg
People have a right to be called what they want. You even admit she legally
changed her name so why not use it? The motivations around her desired name
are of no concern to any of us.

Intentionally refusing to refer to someone by their chosen name is wrong
whether that name is Muhammad Ali, Chelsea Manning, or Julia Turing. I have
certainly seen comments flagged on HN for inappropriateness when they refuse
to refer to Manning by her chosen name.

~~~
p1necone
Julia Turing changed her name _in order to commit fraud_. Chelsea Manning
changed her name because she was transgender. You seem to be ignoring context
in order to make some kind of misguided point.

Are you trying to "gotcha" people who argue for trans rights?

~~~
slg
The items were stolen in 1984 and she changed her name in 1988. It also sounds
like the stolen items were accessible to the public and the claim of being
Alan's daughter was not done for any financial benefit. It doesn't appear that
any fraud was even attempted.

I am arguing for people to be in control of their own identity. It doesn't
matter whether the reason for the change is due to gender like Manning,
religion like Ali, or for someone unknown reason like Turing.

~~~
40four
I’m happy to call this woman Ms. Turing, but I don’t understand why you are
defending her actions, other than the name change.

In no way, does it ‘sound like’ the items were accessible to the public. From
the article,

> _A former biology teacher at the Sherborne said Julia Turing claimed she was
> Alan Turing’s daughter when he gave her a tour of the school._

So, while her name was not legally Turing _yet_ , it sounds like the good
professor rolled out the red carpet for her, based on who he believed her to
be. It’s very certain fraud was attempted, and also successful.

It says these items were tucked away somewhere in ‘a wooden box in a
laboratory’, not sitting in the library in the open for anyone to pick up and
look at.

Therefore, I don’t think the reason for the name change is unknown in the case
of Ms. Turing. I think it is reasonable to surmise that she believed it would
be in her best interest to to acquire the last name, that helped her commit
the crime 4 years prior.

~~~
slg
I'm not defending her actions. I am defending her right to control her own
identity. Committing a crime doesn't result in a person forfeiting all their
basic rights.

Also "a wooden box in a laboratory" doesn't exactly sound like something that
is under lock and key with access limited to next of kin. If access to these
items was truly so limited, their theft would have been pinned on Turing
immediately. In addition, I don't see what benefit she could possibly have
received in changing her name four years after the theft. If anything it would
further endanger her by linking her legal name to the one she gave the people
at Sherborne.

~~~
40four
I’m so dumb. Forgive me, this is clearly a case of the IoB

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22101244](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22101244)

------
slg
We would likely all agree that seizing these stolen items back is the right
decision, but I think it does raise an interesting question. Can a stolen item
be possessed long enough for the person or entity in possession of it to
rightfully be considered the owner? There are countless museum collections
around the globe that are made up of mostly stolen material. At one extreme
you have ancient artifacts that were taken by colonial era archaeologists.
Does the British Museum have an obligation to return the Elgin Marbles to
Greece? What about items that were stolen less than a human lifetime ago?
There have been plenty of examples of art stolen by the Nazis that both have
and have not been returned to the rightful owners. There doesn't appear to be
any consensus on this issue which results in every case resulting in its own
negotiation.

EDIT: I'm a little confused why this is being downvoted. Is it because of the
belief that the stolen items should always belong the the original owner? I
agree with that in a theoretical sense, but I was just commenting on the fact
that this isn't how things operate in practice and seemingly few governments
actually hold anyone to that ethical standard.

~~~
rhizome
IANAL, but I believe the concept you're talking about is called "adverse
possession," and that it's complicated.

Some say yes, the British Museum should return its fruits of conquest, and
other museums have indeed repatriated stolen artifacts. Heck, one recent
example involves the owner of Hobby Lobby:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobby_Lobby_smuggling_scandal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobby_Lobby_smuggling_scandal)

~~~
beerandt
The technical term for recognized squatters rights, for instance, is
"prescription by adverse possession" or "prescription by good-faith
possession". (Obviously varies some by jurisdiction.) The difference is that
the law in most places recognizes fault vs no-fault of the possessor, and so
the requirements for legal ownership are different, usually about 10 years vs
30 years of possession.

Movable property is much more varied and complicated.

------
mcnamaratw
They seized his diploma, maybe? I don't see how a degree can be seized.

------
skunkworker
Title misleading. Should be “Feds seize Alan Turing’s stolen doctorate,
knighthood medal after being offered to CU Boulder”.

I had no idea they were stolen in the first place

~~~
princekolt
Not only that, but also: "He died by poisoning in 1954."

No account of the motive of his poisoning, or his prosecution. When activists
protest against erasure, this is what they're talking about.

~~~
oh_sigh
This isn't a biography of Turing doing that. It doesn't seem particularly
relevant for an article about some documents.

~~~
ineedasername
If the method of death is going to be brought up, the context is relevant. I
would agree with you if all they did was list the year of death. But once they
say "poisoning", they leave entirely too many unanswered questions for
readers.

~~~
JulianWasTaken
I think that's probably poor writing rather than anything malicious, but
perhaps you're (or parent comment is) right.

~~~
dmurray
It looks like the hand of an editor to me. The writer wrote "Alan Turing, who
died after consuming poison in an apparent suicide in 1954...". The editor
told him "we do not editorialize or speculate in this newspaper, stick to the
facts" and it got rewritten. Of course, it should just read "Alan Turing, who
died in 1954...".

~~~
greglindahl
It's not a fact that he's the exemplar of a law forgiving everyone ever
convicted for being gay in the UK?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing_law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing_law)

~~~
dmurray
That's 1) editorializing, since the act isn't officially called that, 2) not
what I speculated the original copy said and 3) needlessly political.

And before you tell me "gay rights aren't a political issue, human rights go
beyond politics": a new law being passed by politicians is literally as
political a subject as it gets.

~~~
greglindahl
Huh. The way I remember it, the government first only forgave him, and then
after a huge public debate decided to forgive everyone in similar
circumstances.

But if you think that's editorial and political if mentioned at all, despite
being endorsed by all sides of the parliament, I guess that's a valid opinion.
It's certainly the case that many people claim that anything objected to by a
single person is political. I usually find that the BBC is more clever than
that.

------
einpoklum
One line summary:

The items were offered in 2018 to the library University of Colorado at
Boulder, by this weird woman who had apparently stolen the items in 1984, then
changed her last name to Turing in 1988.

------
adrianmonk
> _recovered ... Turing’s doctoral degree_

I find this phrasing a bit surprising, but maybe I can learn something about
words here.

I've only ever heard "degree" used as an intangible noun, to refer to the
achievement or title or whatever you want to call it.

Is it common to use it to refer to a physical object? Is it an informal way of
saying diploma? Maybe a British way of saying diploma? I made some brief
checks of online dictionaries and couldn't find that usage.

~~~
OJFord
I'm British, sounds unnatural to me too. I would have said 'degree
certificate' (assuming that's what it is) though, not 'diploma'.

A 'diploma' to me is a 'degree-equivalent' (as determined by government; not,
perhaps, by employers) qualification offered by non-universities.

~~~
alias_neo
Also British; have degree "under my belt", have degree certificate; in a
folder somewhere.

As you said, you can't sieze someone's degree, at best you can invalidate it.

------
chrisseaton
But Turing didn't have a knighthood.

~~~
why-el
That's right, he was an OBE. They probably do get the difference and just
using this colloquially.

~~~
ajdlinux
I've never heard anyone use "knighthood" to colloquially describe lesser
Commonwealth honours. (Here in Australia, certainly, we've gone back and forth
on whether we have knighthoods, and when the Abbott Government briefly
reintroduced knighthoods a few years ago it was a huge deal - and very
distinct from other grades of honours.)

The journalist is American, presumably, and the US doesn't have direct
equivalents to the hierarchical orders that Commonwealth countries have, so
maybe they just assume that knighthood means something much broader than it
does.

------
ggm
An obe isn't a knighthood

~~~
BjoernKW
You're right. Only the two most senior ranks of the Order of the British
Empire entail knighthood (and the formal title Sir or Dame).

Not that it really matters in this case but it's imprecise.

------
Havoc
Not sure it really matters? The name & his thinking is famous...but the
doctorate is well just a piece of paper really.

~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
This is true of many things. The original US Constitution, and Declaration of
Independence, the Magna Carta (do we even still have that?), the dead sea
scrolls, etc. And yet people value these things. Something being "just a piece
of paper" doesn't really affect its value one way or the other.

~~~
skissane
> the Magna Carta (do we even still have that?)

Yes. It was actually issued multiple times (with slightly different wording),
and each issue was in multiple copies. The most famous is the original of 1215
of which four copies survive (all in England).

I've seen the manuscript of the 1297 issue which is on display at the
Australian Parliament. Another manuscript of the 1297 issue is on display at
the US National Archives. I think those are the only two manuscripts outside
the UK; there are a dozen or more manuscripts surviving at various locations
in England.

------
nealabq
Julius Mathison Turing was Alan Turing's father. Julia Mathison Turing lives
in Colorado and sells Turing-related artwork on eBay. It's nice:
[https://www.ebay.com/itm/Alan-M-Turing-by-Julia-M-Turing-
Art...](https://www.ebay.com/itm/Alan-M-Turing-by-Julia-M-Turing-Art-Work-
Collectables-Poster-/201588273703)

I hope they aren't too harsh on her.

~~~
chrisseaton
> I hope they aren't too harsh on her.

According to the article she stole a dead man's medal from a school and then
vanished it out of the country where it is of national importance. Seems like
a pretty rotten thing for her to do and something we need to discourage,
right?

