# Scientists Convicted of Manslaughter



## J-Sun (Oct 24, 2012)

W...T...*F*...?!?

Article.

Can you say "crazed decision" and "chilling effect" and "screw you, we just won't say anything at all from now on"? I knew you could.

I sure hope Italy has a higher court yet to appeal to.


----------



## Boneman (Oct 24, 2012)

Yeah, that Michael Fish has a lot to answer for... (For those overseas, or too young: Weatherman Fish said on National TV "A woman has phoned to say she'd heard a Hurricane was coming. Well, there isn't." That night the worst hurricane hit Southern Britain, causing incredible damage, and incredibly, considering its magnitude, only a few deaths.)

The blame culture has gone crazy. In future they'll say 'there's a chance of an earthquake some time this year; we're not sure where and we're not sure when, but leave your houses and live in the open for the duration.' then they'll be prosecuted when the earthquake doesn't arrive!


----------



## mosaix (Oct 24, 2012)

First, I agree the conviction is barmy but the reporting I've seen so far isn't exactly accurate. They didn't 'fail to predict the earthquake' they actually, specifically, when asked after a series of minor shocks predicted 'that there wouldn't be one'. Not quite the same.

If ever there was a justification for the European Court Of Human Rights then this is it.


----------



## Bowler1 (Oct 24, 2012)

The outcome that should really worry the Italians is that people working in any civic job that is there for their safety, will now think twice. The risk of not being told about an earth quake, because there are no staff to monitor and make public announciments has gone from 0% to a good chance. This is not a good result for anyone. There is no real way of predicting nature, that is just common sense, or is it?

As above, sending M Fish to jail would be the only exception to the rule, he just looks guilty...


----------



## allmywires (Oct 24, 2012)

Earthquakes are famously impossible to predict. You can forecast them but you can't say exactly when or where they will occur, or what order of magnitude they will be. Sets a silly precedent but from what I hear it was more that they said everything would be fine, rather than failing to predict it.


----------



## Parson (Oct 24, 2012)

I am flummoxed by this! This is so far down the stupid meter, that any hint of reasonableness has just flown the coop. Manslaughter?! Six years!!! The worst that should have come to them would have been some sort of official reprimand for saying that a quake wasn't likely when obviously no one knows. Maybe one day we can predict earth quakes, but its almost as likely that we will never be able to do this.


----------



## Bowler1 (Oct 24, 2012)

allmywires said:


> Earthquakes are famously impossible to predict. You can forecast them but you can't say exactly when or where they will occur, or what order of magnitude they will be. Sets a silly precedent but from what I hear it was more that they said everything would be fine, rather than failing to predict it.


 
This is going to sound a little harsh, but all these people were living in a quake area so you'd expect them to act correctly in the event of a quake. If a building is shaking all around me, I'd be off. If I'm standing on the street moments later looking a little silly, then fine. Saying, I stayed in a shaking building because some clever guy on TV said it was all ok, is rubbish. Use the brain in your head to make decisions.

Just for the record I'm not ranting at you, allmywires, just the blame culture that has brought these charges in the first place. Rant, rant, fume and grrr.


----------



## Vertigo (Oct 25, 2012)

Agreed this is crazy. The end result is unlikely to be no one working in forecasting things like earthquakes but rather, everytime there is the slightest tremor they'll just tell everyone to evacuate. Then after a few of those people will start ignoring the evacuation notices and when the big one comes the scientist will be able to say, "well, we told you so".

That is essentially already happening. I live in a flood alert area and since it was so classified I have had about 7 or 8 flood warnings at a level that I should, apparently, be taking immediate precautions; sandbagging and moving everything upstairs. On none of those occasions have the fields next to the river even had pools of water in them. Now I do very little when I get these warnings. Which of course leaves me exposed to the one time when I really do need to do something.

Getting a balance in this sort of thing is always going to be difficult or impossible but this sort of decision just encourages a cry wolf mentality which is ultimately just as dangerous.


----------



## allmywires (Oct 25, 2012)

Oh, don't worry, Bowler, I think it's absolutely ridiculous and as a geophysics student myself it does set a worrying precedent for people like me in the field.


----------



## Abernovo (Oct 26, 2012)

On the subject of who said what, the scientists allegedly dispute that they said that there was no risk. That was said by the public official who was also jailed.

However, as Bowler points out, the town is in an earthquake zone, and a reasonably active one at that. People who live in places prone to earthquakes know that, in the event, you drop everything else, grab the kids/dog, and get out - if you have the time. Unfortunately, when the big quake struck, it appears that buildings began to collapse before many of them had chance to get out of bed and out the door.

From what I've seen, this smacks not just of the blame game, but of officials passing the buck for poor building code enforcement. There were probably many factors involved.


----------



## Bowler1 (Oct 26, 2012)

The ‘cry wolf’ scenario is the more likely, if there is a chance of anything going wrong public officials will protect themselves and issue warnings. Human nature being what it is, like Vertigo, the warnings will be ignored after a time. Then, when the big event happens, they go to jail for issuing too many warnings and abusing the safety procedures put in place. Who wants this job, no-one – problem fixed, no more warnings issued ever again. 

Thinking about this even more, I don’t know if I should be associating with allmywires. As a finance professional I shouldn’t mix with known criminals, and as allmywires career choice now involves a stint in the slammer, well, I don’t know…


----------



## Abernovo (Oct 26, 2012)

Ahem, Bowler, it's too late. I'm telling everybody that you're my pal, too!

I've consulted on habitat changes for a larger study on climate change. Oh, and gave a site safety report in regards to slope failure - I said it was within currently acceptable limits.

Actually, that last is something I would seriously worry about doing if I worked in Italy. You're right, I wouldn't want to give an opinion. But, returning to my earlier point, Bowler's a great guy! Top notch.

However, finance professional? Choose such descriptions carefully. Some might think 'banker', and they're certainly not the flavour of the month.


----------



## AnyaKimlin (Oct 26, 2012)

To be fair Michael Fish was correct we can't get a hurricane in our country as that is a tropical storm.   It was a storm with very high speed winds. 

What concerns me is if it sets a precedent - especially if the European Court upholds it - because we could have scientists all over the place only giving worst case scenarios and we will be constantly preparing for disasters that don't happen.


----------



## Bowler1 (Oct 26, 2012)

Abernovo said:


> Ahem, Bowler, it's too late. I'm telling everybody that you're my pal, too!
> 
> However, finance professional? Choose such descriptions carefully. Some might think 'banker', and they're certainly not the flavour of the month.


 
NNnnoooooo...

I'm no banker, but thats not going to get me a lot of brownie points. The irony is, the bankers have pushed the world into a recession and court cases have still not been brought by any country. It's a mad world.


----------



## allmywires (Oct 27, 2012)

Bowler1 said:


> Thinking about this even more, I don’t know if I should be associating with allmywires. As a finance professional I shouldn’t mix with known criminals, and as allmywires career choice now involves a stint in the slammer, well, I don’t know…



Ack, I've been found out!


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 27, 2012)

Abernovo said:


> From what I've seen, this smacks not just of the blame game, but of officials passing the buck for poor building code enforcement. There were probably many factors involved.


One could argue that poor building code enforcement was due to others, others who would possibly react unfavourably to being threatened with imprisonment.


----------



## allmywires (Oct 27, 2012)

I don't think it was about the state of the buildings, but the advice itself. This (from RT.com) should make it a bit clearer:



> Following a series of minor tremors in the central Italian city of L’Aquila in March 2009, the previous Serious Risks Commission head Franco Barberi told the media that there is "no reason to believe that a swarm of minor events is a sure predictor of a major shock."
> Several days later a 6.3 Richter-scale earthquake killed 309 people.
> On Monday, Barberi and six other senior scientists in the emergency services were jailed for six years for manslaughter (two more than the prosecutor demanded) for giving a “misleadingly reassuring statement” and causing at least 29 people who wanted to leave the town to stay instead.


----------



## Parson (Oct 27, 2012)

allmywires said:


> I don't think it was about the state of the buildings, but the advice itself. This (from RT.com) should make it a bit clearer:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In some ways this makes it worse. Isn't what he said precisely true? Certainly a swarm of minor events is not a *sure* predictor of a major shock. What's going on here anyway?


----------



## Ursa major (Oct 27, 2012)

I agree with Parson: if those were the exact words, there can be no case to answer as they're completely true. Thay may not be that helpful to those trying to decide what to do, but what else could he have said? (Frankly, the only other valid option would be to say nothing at all, but presumably they'd have been then accused of taking public money and providing no public good with it.)


----------



## allmywires (Oct 27, 2012)

You are right, but we know that the Italian judicial system is often...less than judicial, let's say. They won't go to prison until the case is reviewed, so let's hope it gets thrown out before they're thrown in the slammer.

It does make a mockery of the whole science of hazard management. And what's worse is that without all our seismic monitoring, I imagine many more than 309 people would have died in that earthquake. Now if Italian seismologists are too wary of speaking out in the future, what if in the future there's a worse earthquake and more people die? Will they be prosecuted for not saying anything? Lunacy.


----------

