Jailed for an incorrect prediction...

[SckizoBoy]

I'm not sure if this was posted here, and though it's about a week old, here goes:

BBC article herein... [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20025626]

So, back in 2009, there was a mag6.3 earthquake in Italy that killed 309 people. Seismologists studied the quakes that preceded the main one and didn't see anything untoward. They have now been convicted of manslaughter. According to Italy's courts, they were negligent in their analyses.

Thoughts? Outrage? Justice?

 

[TheIronRuler]

I made a thread about that, over here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.391894-Italy-convicts-Scientists-for-not-seeing-into-the-future-BBC].

I am shocked and outraged that this happened. I think that this shows the state of Italy's justice system. Many in that thread agreed with me.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Technically their prediction wasn't wrong. They said it was unlikely that anything would happen, not that there was a 0% chance of something happening.

It's like the meteorologists and the chance of rain. Even if it says 90% chance of rain but it doesn't rain, they ain't wrong.

 

[Fappy]

Way to go Italy. Didn't realize their justice system was in such a sorry state D:

 

[dyre]

Yeah, I was pretty upset when I heard this. I'm pretty sure they'll do an about-face when scientists decide not to make predictions on the next earthquake...

I wonder though, if one judge is the only guy making the decision, do they pick a scientifically knowledgeable judge? Or does the defense have to actually teach the guy seismology and why it's an imprecise art (in which case they run the risk of the judge thinking "you're only saying those things 'cuz you don't want to go to jail")?

So, the scientists get six years in jail because their predictions were wrong. Meanwhile, Berlusconi's four year sentence for tax fraud was reduced to a single year so prisons wouldn't be overcrowded. LOL.

 

[BrassButtons]

I wonder though, if one judge is the only guy making the decision, do they pick a scientifically knowledgeable judge?

I don't think so. Based on what I've been hearing, both from the news and from a friend of mine who is a geologist (and thus has a better-than-average knowledge of seismology) the scientists who were tried did nothing wrong scientifically. If the judge were scientifically knowledgeable then I doubt he would have ruled like he did.

I really hope this gets turned over on appeal. Those scientists do not deserve to go to jail for this. Though even if it is overturned it won't undo the damage to seismology (and possibly science as a whole) in Italy. If there's a chance that incorrect predictions could result in a court case scientists will have to factor lawyer costs in along with all the other costs of their work. And geologists barely have any money as it is. This could very well kill seismology in Italy.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

Yeah, I was pretty disgusted when I heard this too, especially as it's kinda established that there really is is no way of accurately predicting earthquakes. It's not like a weather system that you can see coming your way, of a volcano that starts to become gradually more active before erupting. Earthquakes just... happen. Even in places where they happen all the time, like in Japan or the California, they still haven't figured out how to accurately predict an earthquake any significant amount of time beforehand, so why should these scientists have any more intuition.

It just strikes me as blame culture gone mad. Nothing can just be an 'accident' in this day an age. Or, hell, this wasn't even really an accident, just a freak occurrence; but no matter, somebody must always be held to account otherwise people aren't satisfied.

 

[Baron von Blitztank]

Well the Mayans are fucked then aren't they?

Anyway. REALLY?
Imprisoned for manslaughter for getting the counts for an Earthquake wrong when there are a number of different factors which could have changed in the time it took for the quake to hit Italy? Admittedly, I know nothing about seismology and earthquakes so I could be talking complete bollocks but still. You don't lynch the weather man just because he said it's going to be a sunny afternoon but it starts pissing down!

Spoiler: I might aswell throw this in, just incase someone else tries to...

 

[TotallyNotABot]

Technically their prediction wasn't wrong. They said it was unlikely that anything would happen, not that there was a 0% chance of something happening.

It's like the meteorologists and the chance of rain. Even if it says 90% chance of rain but it doesn't rain, they ain't wrong.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. They said they made a PREDICTION, not that what they said was fact.

If people would be prosecuted for having incorrect assumptions, EVERYONE would be in jail.