Seismologists Tried for Manslaughter for Not Predicting Earthquake

[Palmpilot]

If you think the legal system is screwed up in the U.S, look at what the Italians are doing:

Earthquake prediction can be a grave, and faulty science, and in the case of Italian seismologists who are being tried for the manslaughter of the people who died in the 2009 L'Aquila quake, it can have legal consequences.

The group of seven, including six seismologists and a government official, reportedly didn't alert the public ahead of time of the risk of the L'Aquila earthquake, which occurred on April 6 of that year, killing around 300 people, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

But most scientists would agree it's not their fault they couldn't predict the wrath of Mother Nature...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience...riedformanslaughterfornotpredictingearthquake

 

[Fearless Tower]

That's the kind of thing I'd expect to see from the French

 

[Jim Logajan]

I saw that buried in a small article in our local paper.

Good luck on the Italians finding future staffing for their "Great Risks" commission.

I would think that if there was any earlier suggestion or hints by these commission members that they could predict earthquakes, I would assume the appropriate charge would be fraud rather than manslaughter.

If you read other news articles on this, I think you'll find the origin of this nonsense is that there was allegedly one statement made by one of that group that might constitute a negative (rather than neutral) prediction that turned deadly:

An interview with commission member Bernardo De Bernardis, of the national civil protection department, in which he rejects suggestions that the public should worry, is cited in the prosecutor's case.
Asked whether residents should just sit back and relax with a glass of wine, he said, "Absolutely, a Montepulciano doc [a Tuscan red wine]. This seems important."


From: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/26/italy-quake-experts-manslaughter-charge
​

I wonder if anyone will want to seek future funding for research that doesn't yield high probability predictions of earthquakes? In any case, I predict geologists will become mum on the subject.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

That's the kind of thing I'd expect to see from the French

Or Brazilians, except they would try Americans in absentia.

 

[Steve Foley]

Hopefully they've learned to issue an earthquake warning every day. Better safe than sorry.

 

[weilke]

The criminal system in italy is as screwed up as the civil system in the US, basically a free for all.

 

[John Baker]

I'm surprised it happened in Italy instead of right here in the good ol USA, the land of the free, and home of the legal lottery. Heck, didn't we invent "class action"?

John

 

[fgcason]

I wonder what would happen if all the geologists quit their jobs to avoid getting sued next time this kind of thing happens. Go after them for deliberately not doing the job they use to have? Maybe we will find out in california next time it happens.

Hey, I got hit by lightning once, I wonder if I can sue that incompetent local forecaster and his entire organization and the NWS for not predicting that precise lightning strike. Incompetence in the extreme I'm telling ya.

 

[weilke]

Hey, I got hit by lightning once, I wonder if I can sue that incompetent local forecaster and his entire organization and the NWS for not predicting that precise lightning strike. Incompetence in the extreme I'm telling ya.

Cirrus did just that. They tried to sue the federal goverment for not predicting a ceiling height accurately.

 

[Skylane81E]

That's just nuts, they can hide out in my spare bedroom for a spell if they like

 

[fgcason]

Cirrus did just that. They tried to sue the federal goverment for not predicting a ceiling height accurately.

In my country judges would have a lever on their huge desk next to the decision hammer that's labeled "emergency evolutionary correction." It opens a trap door to shaft down to a room far below containing underfed sharks or 5ft long spikes point up, or something similar and effective.

 

[steingar]

Trial goes ahead, good luck finding an Italian seismologist. If I were one, I would either quit or leave. Won't really change anything from the public's perception, I doubt anyone will ever be able to predict an earthquake with any fidelity.

 

[Henning]

That's the kind of thing I'd expect to see from the French

The Italians have always trumped the French on this stuff.

 

[Bravo3]

In 'Merica we got a buncha perpellerhead scientists that try to warn us all about earthquakes but they just get blowed off. [It's true. I saw it on that earthquake movie with Chuck Heston.]

 

[Dan Thomas]

Didn't the whole blame game begin with the (American) book "Sue The Bastards" that was published around 1975? It encouraged folks to take other folks to court to make them pay for whatever misfortunes that might befall them. Sounds like other countries are picking up on the habit. In Canada we're still fairly civil, but we're heading down the blame-game path, too.

I was in Great Falls, MT, last weekend. I find it informative to look through the Yellow Pages to see how many pages are occupied by ads for attorneys as compared to anything else. Lotsa pages for attorneys.

Dan

 

[Palmpilot]

Didn't the whole blame game begin with the (American) book "Sue The Bastards" that was published around 1975? It encouraged folks to take other folks to court to make them pay for whatever misfortunes that might befall them. Sounds like other countries are picking up on the habit. In Canada we're still fairly civil, but we're heading down the blame-game path, too.

I was in Great Falls, MT, last weekend. I find it informative to look through the Yellow Pages to see how many pages are occupied by ads for attorneys as compared to anything else. Lotsa pages for attorneys.

Dan

The Italian action is a crminal prosecution for manslaughter, not a lawsuit.

 

[denverpilot]

In my country judges would have a lever on their huge desk next to the decision hammer that's labeled "emergency evolutionary correction." It opens a trap door to shaft down to a room far below containing underfed sharks or 5ft long spikes point up, or something similar and effective.

Sharks with fricken laser beams on their heads?

 

[fgcason]

Sharks with fricken laser beams on their heads?

Huh??? What are you talking about? Why would a shark need a laser?

Hungry shark. Judge pulls handle. Trap door opens. Food falls into the pool. Shark eats it. Darwin gets to sleep that night.

 

[Dan Thomas]

The Italian action is a crminal prosecution for manslaughter, not a lawsuit.

OK. Charges brought by the state, then. Still, it sounds pretty frivolous. Italy won't have any experts of any sort in its civil service if they keep this up.

Dan

 

[Palmpilot]

OK. Charges brought by the state, then. Still, it sounds pretty frivolous. Italy won't have any experts of any sort in its civil service if they keep this up.

Dan

Amen to that!

 

[Henning]

OK. Charges brought by the state, then. Still, it sounds pretty frivolous. Italy won't have any experts of any sort in its civil service if they keep this up.

Dan

I don't think it's frivilous, Academia spending billions of dollars and not producing results is frivilous. If you're gonna feed off the Gov't teet, you better come through with results... You say "we need 10 million dollars to further earthquake prediction", well, you better come up with $10MM in results. Make the academics think twice when they put in for grant money using scare tactics.

 

[Palmpilot]

I don't think it's frivilous, Academia spending billions of dollars and not producing results is frivilous. If you're gonna feed off the Gov't teet, you better come through with results... You say "we need 10 million dollars to further earthquake prediction", well, you better come up with $10MM in results. Make the academics think twice when they put in for grant money using scare tactics.

Scare tactics??? Since when are earthquakes a made-up danger?

If all research had to guarantee practical results in order to get funding, all research would cease.

 

[Gary F]

I don't think it's frivilous, Academia spending billions of dollars and not producing results is frivilous. If you're gonna feed off the Gov't teet, you better come through with results... You say "we need 10 million dollars to further earthquake prediction", well, you better come up with $10MM in results. Make the academics think twice when they put in for grant money using scare tactics.

Although I am convinced that we are being milked by many researchers I do not agree that they should necessarily be held accountable for lack of tangible results. The Italian seismologists should get a dog.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MFzcl-kZHo

 

[Henning]

Scare tactics??? Since when are earthquakes a made-up danger?

If all research had to guarantee practical results in order to get funding, all research would cease.

Why does a danger need to be made up to use scare tactics to sell a product or service? In fact, having a real and present danger makes it an easy sell. I think the results need to be adjudicated by what you managed. Just because you can be held accountable for manslaughter doesn't mean you can't successfully defend yourself by showing good faith effort and good stewardship of the funding.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

I don't think it's frivilous, Academia spending billions of dollars and not producing results is frivilous. If you're gonna feed off the Gov't teet, you better come through with results... You say "we need 10 million dollars to further earthquake prediction", well, you better come up with $10MM in results. Make the academics think twice when they put in for grant money using scare tactics.

I guess you will define the results?

$10 MM in a field really isn't very much. Suppose you were studying how structural variations in a protein cause disease. Your high field NMR and multiple MS system could cost $1 MM each. That doesn't include the cost of the scientists to run each of them, the infrastructure to support these instruments, or the rest of the stuff (cell culture, protein purification, microscopes, etc). The instruments I help manufacture and sell cost a mere $30-50K a pop.

Last time I looked, fear of earthquakes weren't a scare tactic- you might ask the people of Japan, those living around the Indian Ocean, and Spain, to name a few recent ones. Or would you have us beleive eathquakes are "underground thunderstorms" as postulated by Pliny?

 

[Henning]

I guess you will define the results?

$10 MM in a field really isn't very much. Suppose you were studying how structural variations in a protein cause disease. Your high field NMR and multiple MS system could cost $1 MM each. That doesn't include the cost of the scientists to run each of them, the infrastructure to support these instruments, or the rest of the stuff (cell culture, protein purification, microscopes, etc). The instruments I help manufacture and sell cost a mere $30-50K a pop.

Last time I looked, fear of earthquakes weren't a scare tactic- you might ask the people of Japan, those living around the Indian Ocean, and Spain, to name a few recent ones. Or would you have us beleive eathquakes are "underground thunderstorms" as postulated by Pliny?

Read the post above you. Legitimate research I have no issues with. Even achieving a "negative" result is a result. There are plenty of instances in academia though that are created to bring in revenue, often "names" getting allocated resources that could serve better in someone elses program. If you are taking critical funds on a critical public safety issue, you should be held accountable.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

I don't think it's frivilous, Academia spending billions of dollars and not producing results is frivilous. If you're gonna feed off the Gov't teet, you better come through with results... You say "we need 10 million dollars to further earthquake prediction", well, you better come up with $10MM in results. Make the academics think twice when they put in for grant money using scare tactics.

Why does a danger need to be made up to use scare tactics to sell a product or service? In fact, having a real and present danger makes it an easy sell. I think the results need to be adjudicated by what you managed. Just because you can be held accountable for manslaughter doesn't mean you can't successfully defend yourself by showing good faith effort and good stewardship of the funding.

Read the post above you. Legitimate research I have no issues with. Even achieving a "negative" result is a result. There are plenty of instances in academia though that are created to bring in revenue, often "names" getting allocated resources that could serve better in someone elses program. If you are taking critical funds on a critical public safety issue, you should be held accountable.

I did. Read your own posts- it seems you can't decide what you are saying. You mention earthquakes as a scare tactic, then ask why scare tactics are used to sell a real danger.

 

[Henning]

I did. Read your own posts- it seems you can't decide what you are saying. You mention earthquakes as a scare tactic, then ask why scare tactics are used to sell a real danger.

The scare tactic is to get someone to throw money at them by saying "But we need to protect the people" from some risk. The danger isn't the scare tactic, the marketing method of getting funds is.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

The scare tactic is to get someone to throw money at them by saying "But we need to protect the people" from some risk. The danger isn't the scare tactic, the marketing method of getting funds is.

So indicating risk is a scare tactic? A grant proposal lists "10M people dies of X disease each year. By developing a compound, the risk of developing this disease is reduced by 25%". I'd think that, if the number could be explained, I'd fund this project over one where the reduction is only 10%