Italian seismologists convicted of multiple manslaughter.

  • Thread starter Thread starter turbo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Multiple
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conviction of Italian seismologists for multiple manslaughter related to their failure to adequately warn the public about the risk of an earthquake. Participants explore the implications of this legal decision on the scientific community, the nature of culpability in uncertain sciences, and the cultural context surrounding the trial.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern that the conviction may deter scientists from engaging in predictive work due to fear of legal repercussions.
  • Others argue that the legal culture in Italy may hold individuals accountable for deaths not caused by natural events, suggesting a systemic issue in how responsibility is assigned.
  • A viewpoint is presented that distinguishes between the culpability of engineers and seismologists, emphasizing that the latter operate within a field characterized by uncertainty.
  • Some participants highlight the challenges of assigning negligence to scientists when predicting inherently unpredictable events like earthquakes.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of this case for the future of scientific predictions, with concerns that it may lead to overly cautious behavior among scientists.
  • One participant draws parallels to other professions, such as medicine, questioning the standards of negligence applicable to scientists compared to those in more established fields.
  • Several posts reference the idea that the information provided by the seismologists was deemed "inexact, incomplete and contradictory," raising questions about the expectations placed on scientists in uncertain fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the appropriateness of the convictions or the implications for the scientific community. Multiple competing views remain regarding the nature of culpability and the cultural context of the trial.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the difficulty in establishing negligence in the context of scientific predictions, particularly in fields where outcomes are inherently uncertain. The discussion reflects a range of opinions on the legal and ethical responsibilities of scientists.

  • #31
Antiphon said:
Yes. And a secular one at that.

I expected more from Italian culture. The home of Galileo and Copernicus. A lot more.

Borek will hunt you on that comment..
The only Pole of marginal world historical significance (apart from J.S.), and you call him..Italian??
Dear me, you have it coming..
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #32
I wonder if there is a side-effect in play? Basically, every weather forecaster in the region is claiming that Sandy could combine with a winter storm and duplicate or surpass the "Perfect Storm". Why? We have fall storms about every year. There is no reason to hype this one.
 
  • #33
arildno said:
Borek will hunt you on that comment..
The only Pole of marginal world historical significance (apart from J.S.), and you call him..Italian??
Dear me, you have it coming..

:smile:
 
  • #34
Evo said:
But still it wasn't "if an earthquake hits, don't worry". It was "there doesn't seem to be another quake coming, don't worry". Stupid yes, but when an unexpected quake DOES happen, you don't ignore it. Which is what some people said they did. Like that lawyer that said normally they would run outside if a quake hit, but since they were told that a quake wasn't likely, when the quake struck, they decided to stay inside. WHAT? They didn't say to ignore earthquakes!
Maybe a bit more information from nature
New twists in Italian seismology trial:
After the meeting, Bernardo De Bernardinis, deputy head of the Department of Civil Protection, said to the press: “The scientific community tells me there is no danger because there is an ongoing discharge of energy,” a statement that most seismologists consider to be scientifically incorrect.
and
Guido Bertolaso, former head of the Department of Civil Protection and De Bernardinis’s direct superior, had not been indicted and was originally expected to appear as a witness. But a few weeks ago a wiretap revealed that he had apparently set up the meeting to convey a reassuring message, regardless of the scientists’ opinion. He also seemed to be the source of the “discharge of energy” statement. He thus found himself under investigation and, at the beginning of the hearing, he was officially notified that he too may soon be formally indicted for manslaughter.

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/01/wiretap-revelation-could-aid-italian-seismologists-defence.html:
On 20 January the Italian newspaper La Repubblica revealed a taped telephone conversation between Guido Bertolaso, then head of the Civil Protection, and Daniela Stati, an officer of the L’Aquila Provincial Administration, recorded the day before the meeting. Bertolaso can be heard saying, of the seismologists now on trial: “I will send them there mostly as a media move. They are the best experts in Italy, and they will say that it is better to have a hundred shocks at 4 Richter than silence, because a hundred shocks release energy, so that there will never be the big one.”
So even if he didn't said the words (the last words in bold) population got the message.

This of course doesn't explain why the judge gave the same years for scientists. Maybe because they agreed to such a "media move"? Or there is something more. Who knows. There should be more information when the text of full motivation will be available.
 
  • #35
And today Berlusconi has been sentenced to a bit less time, for fraud. There is rather little chance of any of these doing time as it will be dragged out endlessly by appeals. But it is pretty stressful for the innocent. The not quite so innocent are more inured to it.

Also today there has been a quake (not same region). Just one person reported dead, from shock.

Maiani, till recently head of the National Research Council, previously head of CERN, some of you may have heard of him, resigned from the Committee of Major Risks. Italy has several major risks. One is landslides. Another is earthquakes. A third is magistrature and judiciary.
 
Last edited:
  • #36
arildno said:
Borek will hunt you on that comment..
The only Pole of marginal world historical significance (apart from J.S.), and you call him..Italian??
Dear me, you have it coming..

I didn't know Galileo was a Pole. Maybe I'm wrong about Italians then. Although I did grow up in a town that was 80% Italian. Much of what I know was learned there.
 
  • #37
Antiphon said:
...Italian culture. The home of Galileo and Copernicus.

Antiphon said:
I didn't know Galileo was a Pole. Maybe I'm wrong about Italians then. Although I did grow up in a town that was 80% Italian. Much of what I know was learned there.

You are jesting, aren't you? I hope Borek recovers eventually. :-p

Really maybe check out a little bit of history.

Galileo italian

Copernicus Polish
 
  • #38
Antiphon said:
I didn't know Galileo was a Pole.

He wasn't. Hence, poland isn't a very important country.
 
  • #39
arildno said:
He wasn't. Hence, poland isn't a very important country.

Apparently you think you have too many old churches left.
 
  • #40
Borek said:
Apparently you think you have too many old churches left.
Nice one!
:biggrin:
 
  • #41
zonde said:
This of course doesn't explain why the judge gave the same years for scientists. Maybe because they agreed to such a "media move"? Or there is something more. Who knows. There should be more information when the text of full motivation will be available.

Actually, they didn't agree. For the most part, they were unwitting dupes dragged to the conference so they could stand near the government officials making statements. Their only purpose was to lend credibility to the government officials by their proximity.

But, I guess by their silence, they did make the government officials' statements more believable.
 

Similar threads

News Jail time for incompetent Italian scientists
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Seismologists Tried for Manslaughter for Not Predicting Earthquake
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
These imbeciles enjoy spreading false news.
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
News Should the US intervene in world problems?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
11K