Oscar Wilde was convicted at the Central Criminal Court on 25 May 1895 and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment with hard labour.

The conviction followed a failed libel case against the Marquess of Queensberry, the father of Lord Alfred Douglas. Wilde had gone to court as the complainant. When the case collapsed, evidence raised there helped lead to his arrest and prosecution.

By then Wilde was one of the best-known writers in London. His plays were being performed, his conversation was reported, and his public style was part of his fame. That visibility made the case larger than a private dispute. It turned the charge into a public test of reputation, sex and respectability.

The offence was ‘gross indecency’, a charge created under the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 and used against sexual acts between men. The wording was broad. It allowed the law to reach conduct that could be treated as criminal even when the evidence did not fit older legal categories.

Wilde’s fame did not protect him. In court, it made it easier to publicly punish him. The same society that had admired his wit and theatre could now treat him as a warning. His work, clothes, friendships and manner were all drawn into a case about law and morals.

The sentence was severe. Two years’ imprisonment with hard labour meant prison, physical strain and public ruin. It damaged Wilde’s health and ended his place in the London world that had made him famous. His money, career and standing all fell away after the conviction.

This should not be reduced to a scandal. The case shows how Victorian criminal law could turn sex between men into prosecution, and how quickly admiration could become exclusion when reputation was judged to have gone too far.

On 25 May 1895, Wilde lost more than a trial. He was punished by a legal system and a culture that could reach well beyond the courtroom.