4 ms·

Italy Orders Jail Terms for 7 Who Didn’t Warn of Deadly Earthquake

81 points by japhyr 14y ago

callmeed 14y ago
I recall hearing of Italy having a poor legal/justice system. Can anyone comment on this verdict as it relates to Italy? Would these scientists be found guilty in Germany, Spain, Greece, etc.?
- napolux 14y ago
  Well, the sentence is not really about "earthquake prediction", but about the fact that some hours before the big earthquake alarms from the INGV (the italian institute for earthquake monitoring, one of the best in the world) were ignored. Of course nobody can predict earthquakes, but in L'Aquila's quake there were strong evidence of "something happening", and they were ignored: that's why they were found guilty. P.s. I'm from Italy
  - danmaz74 14y ago
    There were no "big earthquake alarms from the INGV", that's the whole point. If you have sources that say the contrary, I would be interested in reading them.
- openmosix 14y ago
  Isn't US the nation where companies get sued because coffee is too hot?
  - callmeed 14y ago
    Yes, but that's civil litigation between 2 people or a person and a corporation. No one in the U.S. goes to jail for serving hot coffee.
corin_ 14y ago
Discussion at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4683657 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4683657 (84 comments)
jasonlingx 14y ago
So now every scientist is just going to sound the alarm every time. How does that help anything?
- smutticus 14y ago
  Or more likely every scientist is going to be extremely cautious and cover their ass when making public statements. That's a lot different than sounding the alarm every time. I get the feeling that if these scientists had not been so absolute in their vision of safety they would not have been convicted.
  - viraptor 14y ago
    If covering ass means saying something like "I predict <5% change of X happening" instead of saying it's not going to happen... why not. Maybe publishing more raw data for others instead of just a 2-word summary would be a good solution in general.
makesyouthink 14y ago
I'd be interested in who isn't guilty of this crime. I didn't warn Italy of the deadly earthquake - did you?
gagabity 14y ago
This story actually seems to be more complex than most western media is reporting it, apparently the scientists issued false "everything is ok" messages possibly for political reasons, against what their data actually showed. At least that's what I picked up from the Reddit discussion.
- stefantalpalaru 14y ago
  You're right, they held a big conference to reassure people that everything is OK and they should remain in their houses. One week later the big one came and some of those who listened to the scientists died. Not as outrageous as what the media is reporting, but probably more interesting from the point of view of a scientist's responsibility.
  - TallGuyShort 14y ago
    In fairness to the scientists, you know as well as I do that they could have stated the risk of a big earthquake and nobody would have listened. It happens in high-risk disaster areas all the time. Sure, they should be held accountable for making false statements for political or economic gain, but saying "those who listened to the scientists died" isn't fair.
- gioele 14y ago
  From my long comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4687151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4687151 > The minutes of the 31 March meeting Before that meeting, some of the scientists have been "used" by various politicians and high-level civil servant in their public speeches and interviews with the media. There are records of the director of the nation-wide emergency task-force being being interviewed and saying things like "After these afternoon quakes there is nothing to be feared, I can assure you. My fellow colleague and quake researcher can tell you the same", and one of the convicted scientists cues in "Sure, there is nothing to be feared. Indeed, these small earthquakes have released a lot of energy, making a big earthquake impossible". _Impossible_. That is not correct scientific communication, that is being the wingman of a politician being interviewed by national TV.
- 14y ago
HerrMonnezza 14y ago
(Mostly an edited repost of a comment I made in yesterday's discussion on the same topic.) A blog post on Nature.com about a month ago explains better why they were on trial, which is not the misprediction that an earthquake was imminent: The prosecution’s closing arguments [...] made it clear that the scientists are not accused of failing to predict the earthquake. “Even six-year old kids know that earthquakes can not be predicted,” he said. “The goal of the meeting was very different: the scientists were supposed to evaluate whether the seismic sequence could be considered a precursor event, to assess what damages had already happened at that point, to discuss how to mitigate risks.” Picuti said the panel members did not fulfill these commitments, and that their risk analysis was “flawed, inadequate, negligent and deceptive”, resulting in wrong information being given to citizens. Source: http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/porsecution-asks-for-four-year-sentence-in-italian-seismology-trial.html http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/porsecution-asks-for-fo... If you can read Italian, there are a few online newspapers have comprehensive explanations about the trial matter: [1]: http://www.giornalettismo.com/archives/548491/terremoto-laquila-la-sentenza-la-commissione-grandi-rischi-e-colpevole/ http://www.giornalettismo.com/archives/548491/terremoto-laqu... [2]: http://newrassegna.camera.it/chiosco_new/pagweb/getPDFarticolo.asp?currentArticle=1M75AD http://newrassegna.camera.it/chiosco_new/pagweb/getPDFartico... [3]: http://www.cattivamaestra.it/2012/10/sentenza-processo-aquila-grandi-rischi.html http://www.cattivamaestra.it/2012/10/sentenza-processo-aquil...
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
wilhow 14y ago
So when do we start slapping lawsuits on failing to predict floods and hurricanes?
- dromidas 14y ago
  Why stop there? We just have to look around and find someone knowledgeable about something that just happened and is bad. Then you can sue them for not reporting that it was going to happen. I think I'm going to promptly forget everything I know about computers before I get sued by a local store for not warning them that a virus is in the wild.
darkarmani 14y ago
<5 years later> Italy wonders why there are no leading seismic researchers in the country.

81 points by japhyr 14y ago

I recall hearing of Italy having a poor legal/justice system. Can anyone comment on this verdict as it relates to Italy? Would these scientists be found guilty in Germany, Spain, Greece, etc.?

napolux 14y ago
Well, the sentence is not really about "earthquake prediction", but about the fact that some hours before the big earthquake alarms from the INGV (the italian institute for earthquake monitoring, one of the best in the world) were ignored. Of course nobody can predict earthquakes, but in L'Aquila's quake there were strong evidence of "something happening", and they were ignored: that's why they were found guilty. P.s. I'm from Italy
- danmaz74 14y ago
  There were no "big earthquake alarms from the INGV", that's the whole point. If you have sources that say the contrary, I would be interested in reading them.
openmosix 14y ago
Isn't US the nation where companies get sued because coffee is too hot?
- callmeed 14y ago
  Yes, but that's civil litigation between 2 people or a person and a corporation. No one in the U.S. goes to jail for serving hot coffee.

corin_ 14y ago

Discussion at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4683657 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4683657 (84 comments)

jasonlingx 14y ago

So now every scientist is just going to sound the alarm every time. How does that help anything?

smutticus 14y ago
Or more likely every scientist is going to be extremely cautious and cover their ass when making public statements. That's a lot different than sounding the alarm every time. I get the feeling that if these scientists had not been so absolute in their vision of safety they would not have been convicted.
- viraptor 14y ago
  If covering ass means saying something like "I predict <5% change of X happening" instead of saying it's not going to happen... why not. Maybe publishing more raw data for others instead of just a 2-word summary would be a good solution in general.

makesyouthink 14y ago

I'd be interested in who isn't guilty of this crime. I didn't warn Italy of the deadly earthquake - did you?

gagabity 14y ago

This story actually seems to be more complex than most western media is reporting it, apparently the scientists issued false "everything is ok" messages possibly for political reasons, against what their data actually showed. At least that's what I picked up from the Reddit discussion.

stefantalpalaru 14y ago
You're right, they held a big conference to reassure people that everything is OK and they should remain in their houses. One week later the big one came and some of those who listened to the scientists died. Not as outrageous as what the media is reporting, but probably more interesting from the point of view of a scientist's responsibility.
- TallGuyShort 14y ago
  In fairness to the scientists, you know as well as I do that they could have stated the risk of a big earthquake and nobody would have listened. It happens in high-risk disaster areas all the time. Sure, they should be held accountable for making false statements for political or economic gain, but saying "those who listened to the scientists died" isn't fair.
gioele 14y ago
From my long comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4687151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4687151 > The minutes of the 31 March meeting Before that meeting, some of the scientists have been "used" by various politicians and high-level civil servant in their public speeches and interviews with the media. There are records of the director of the nation-wide emergency task-force being being interviewed and saying things like "After these afternoon quakes there is nothing to be feared, I can assure you. My fellow colleague and quake researcher can tell you the same", and one of the convicted scientists cues in "Sure, there is nothing to be feared. Indeed, these small earthquakes have released a lot of energy, making a big earthquake impossible". _Impossible_. That is not correct scientific communication, that is being the wingman of a politician being interviewed by national TV.
14y ago

HerrMonnezza 14y ago

(Mostly an edited repost of a comment I made in yesterday's discussion on the same topic.) A blog post on Nature.com about a month ago explains better why they were on trial, which is not the misprediction that an earthquake was imminent: The prosecution’s closing arguments [...] made it clear that the scientists are not accused of failing to predict the earthquake. “Even six-year old kids know that earthquakes can not be predicted,” he said. “The goal of the meeting was very different: the scientists were supposed to evaluate whether the seismic sequence could be considered a precursor event, to assess what damages had already happened at that point, to discuss how to mitigate risks.” Picuti said the panel members did not fulfill these commitments, and that their risk analysis was “flawed, inadequate, negligent and deceptive”, resulting in wrong information being given to citizens. Source: http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/porsecution-asks-for-four-year-sentence-in-italian-seismology-trial.html http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/porsecution-asks-for-fo... If you can read Italian, there are a few online newspapers have comprehensive explanations about the trial matter: [1]: http://www.giornalettismo.com/archives/548491/terremoto-laquila-la-sentenza-la-commissione-grandi-rischi-e-colpevole/ http://www.giornalettismo.com/archives/548491/terremoto-laqu... [2]: http://newrassegna.camera.it/chiosco_new/pagweb/getPDFarticolo.asp?currentArticle=1M75AD http://newrassegna.camera.it/chiosco_new/pagweb/getPDFartico... [3]: http://www.cattivamaestra.it/2012/10/sentenza-processo-aquila-grandi-rischi.html http://www.cattivamaestra.it/2012/10/sentenza-processo-aquil...

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

wilhow 14y ago

So when do we start slapping lawsuits on failing to predict floods and hurricanes?

dromidas 14y ago
Why stop there? We just have to look around and find someone knowledgeable about something that just happened and is bad. Then you can sue them for not reporting that it was going to happen. I think I'm going to promptly forget everything I know about computers before I get sued by a local store for not warning them that a virus is in the wild.

darkarmani 14y ago

<5 years later> Italy wonders why there are no leading seismic researchers in the country.