This is a story I've hoped I'd be able to follow up on, with good news, for some years now.
And some good news is what we have.
An appeals court has cleared seven experts charged with failing to adequately warn residents of the risk before an earthquake struck central Italy in 2009, killing more than 300 people.
The court in L’Aquila, the city struck by the quake, on Monday overturned guilty verdicts against the seven saying no crime had been committed.
The convictions two years ago sent shockwaves through the scientific community, which argued that the charges represented a complete misunderstanding about the science behind earthquake probabilities.
The linked article is short; this is indeed breaking news.
I wrote about the original trial and its ridiculous verdict in 2012 and about a year and a half prior to that in 2011. The case came about after a major quake occured in central Italy, near the city of L'Aquila. The quake was the largest of a sequence, a series of smaller quakes had caused worry and concern in the region in the weeks and months prior. People wondered if they should leave their homes and from that great public concern came misunderstandings. Reassurances were made, of a type, and people stayed in their homes.
Then the big quake struck and hundreds died. And then, later at trial, "The seven were judged to have provided "inexact, incomplete and contradictory" information about the danger of the tremors that were felt ahead of 6 April 2009 quake"
I've noted that while the old part of the city, with its unreinforced masonry walls and heavy tile roofs performed terribly in the quake, so too did modern buildings. Dozens died in the collaspe of a number of buildings. Italy is a seismically active nation and its history is peppered with quakes that have killed hundreds of thousands of people over the centuries. It bothers me a great deal that to this day I've not come across any hint of an investigation as to whether allegedly strict building codes were actually used in L'Aquila, and my concerns for big cities like Naples are not lessened. The number of modern buildings that failed in the series of quakes that shook the Po Valley in 2012, moderate quakes at that, also was upsetting to see (and that the quakes may have been induced is beside the point; that region of Italy may have been classed as low-risk, but history says otherwise, going back a couple millenia).
Buildings kill people when they fail.
I've also noted that it is not yet possible to predict earthquakes. I have serious doubts as to it ever being possible, and although every year someone comes up with a way to predict earthquakes (along with their own conspiracy theory as to why it's not being used) they are all quackery. At best we can forecast. That is what earthquake probabilities are. They're a forecast. They are not a prediction. And no one should be tried and convicted for getting a forecast wrong. Ever. Kudos for the Italian justice system for finally fixing this. For the most part. Because while six of the seven scientists sentenced to jail had their sentences overturned, one--a hydralic engineer has not. His sentence has been reduced to two years.
The six now acquitted are: the commission's then–vice president Franco Barberi, a volcanologist at the University of Rome (Roma Tre); Enzo Boschi, a geophysicist at the University of Bologna and at the time of the earthquake president of Italy's National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology (INGV); Gian Michele Calvi, a seismic engineer at the University of Pavia; Claudio Eva, a seismologist at the University of Genova; Mauro Dolce, a seismic engineer and director of seismic risk at Italy's Civil Protection Department (DPC); Giulio Selvaggi, a seismologist at INGV.
The court did not acquit Bernardo De Bernardinis, a hydraulic engineer who in 2009 was deputy head of DPC, but reduced his sentence to 2 years. Just ahead of the 31 March meeting, De Bernardinis had given an interview in which he said that the tremors posed “no danger” and that “the scientific community continues to confirm to me that in fact it is a favorable situation.” De Bernardinis became widely known in Italy for the response he gave when his interviewer asked whether L'Aquila's inhabitants could relax and pour themselves a glass of wine: “Absolutely,” De Bernardinis answered, and suggested they take a Montepulciano.
His words were perhaps really irresponsible, but I personally do not feel they're worthy of a prison sentence. I completely understand that there are some pretty big differences between our justice system and theirs. I have to wonder if he's being made a scapegoat. You can read some
more coverage here. Is he responsible for those deaths? I don't know.
UPDATE
I should also note that in the Italian legal system, this is not the final step. The lawyers of the families of those who died will challenge this verdict in Italy's Supreme Court of Cassation. This is the highest court in Italy, so while this verdict is good news, it may not be over.