Discuss as:

Italian earthquake experts appeal manslaughter verdict

April 6, 2009: A magnitude-6.3 earthquake flattens villages in central Italy, killing at least 150 people and leaving thousands injured and homeless. NBC's Stephanie Gosk reports.

Live Science

The six scientists and one government official convicted of manslaughter over statements they made before a 2009 earthquake that killed 309 in the town of L'Aquila, Italy, have filed appeals against the verdict.

All seven met the March 6 deadline for filing, according to Nature News.

Judge Marco Billi sentenced the seismologists and official to six years in prison on Oct. 22, 2012, after a yearlong trial. Three judges are expected to oversee the appeals trials, and in the meantime the prison sentences will remain on hold, Nature News reports.


The prosecutors contended that at a March 31 meeting in L'Aquila, the defendants had downplayed the risks of a large earthquake after a series of tremors shook the Italian city in early 2009. On April 6, 2009, a magnitude-6.3 quake hit, and 29 people who would have fled their homes stayed put, only to be killed when the buildings collapsed. [See Photos of L'Aquila Earthquake Destruction]

At the controversial meeting, one of the defendants, earth scientist Enzo Boschi, noted the uncertainty, saying that a large earthquake was "unlikely" but that the possibility could not be excluded. However, a press conference that followed saw another scientist telling citizens there was "no danger."

The verdict drew ire and condemnation from seismologists and other earth scientists around the globe.

"The idea is ridiculous, to hold scientists responsible for public policy," Chris Goldfinger, a professor of geology and geophysics at Oregon State University, said on the day of the verdict. "First, scientists have almost zero ability to predict earthquakes, and second, have no direct responsibility for public policy. Something has gone seriously wrong in the Italian legal system."  

The defendants' attorneys, in their appeals, are asking for the verdict to be overturned and all charges dropped, Nature News reports. They are arguing that all of the statements made during the March 31 meeting were scientifically accurate, and that political authorities, not the scientific panel, should have the responsibility of informing the public of the risk.

It's impossible to know whether small quakes are foreshocks for a larger temblor, according to seismologists. A 1988 study of other quake-prone Italian regions found, for example, that about half of large quakes were preceded by weaker foreshocks. But only 2 percent of small-quake swarms heralded a larger rupture.

Follow LiveScience @livescienceFacebook or Google+. Original article on LiveScience.com.

Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.