Wan Fadhilah Wan Mohd Hanizan – published by permission of student
Jeremy Frey
English 102, Section 167
8 March 2012
Should the Italian Seismologists be Charged with Manslaughter?: An Annotated Bibliography
Beck, Susan L. Tectonics and seismology specialist and Professor at the University of Arizona.
Interview. 7 March 2012.
Susan Beck, who is an active seismologist, claims that the manslaughter charges based on the inaccurate prediction (or lack thereof) of the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake that struck Italy are inappropriate and that earthquake preparation is the most important message to get across when it comes to communicating with the public. Beck supports her claim by highlighting the long history of earthquakes in Italy, the unpredictable nature of earthquakes, and the inappropriate involvement of government officials as the middle person in addressing the earthquake prediction in a “yes-or-no” manner. Beck’s main purpose is to advise officials outside and also within the geological profession that earthquake predictions are complex and can never be addressed in a binary manner in order to increase the stress on earthquake preparations like better building codes and response plans that would have made a huge difference had the residents of L’Aquila been consistently exposed to such procedures. Beck addresses government officials and seismologists who are bound to be under the same circumstances in the future.
I find that this interview can shed the light on another perspective relating to the importance of earthquake preparation measures rather than total dependence on earthquake prediction. The long-term benefit of these safety measures outweighs the reconstruction of the damages due to the earthquake, including loss of life.
Although Susan Beck’s credibility is not questionable, her responses lacked deeper analysis, for example, a good cost-benefit analysis comparing long-term and short-term preparation based on her experience would have supported her argument greatly.
Cartlidge, Edwin. “ ITALY: Quake Experts to Be Tried for Manslaughter .” Science 3 (2011): 1135-
1136. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Tucson. 5 March. 2012. Keyword: Italian
Seismologists Manslaughter.
Edwin Cartlidge, in his article,
“
ITALY: Quake Experts to Be Tried for Manslaughter
” (2011), suggests that accountability for the deaths of the April 2009 Italy earthquake should not be held only by those on trial. He supports his thesis by compiling defensive statements by those directly and indirectly involved in the trial on their thoughts and comments on the manslaughter. The main purpose of the article was to get a holistic view of the matter, to engage the readers in the argument that revolves around this prosecution and have them analyze who should be held accountable. His main audiences are both those who agree with the prosecution, and those who are against it.
I would like to use the comments that are compiled in this article to understand the argument behind this prosecution a lot better and also to have a better idea of what the people on trial have to say about the manslaughter charges and whether they feel that they are fully responsible. Outside opinions that are also included in this article help me understand how seismologists from other countries feel about the matter and how they would have reacted under the same circumstances.
Greenemeier, Larry. “Error and Trial: Italian Scientists Face Prison as Earthquake
Manslaughter
Hearing Resumes This Weekend.” Scientific American. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Tucson.
5 March. 2012. Keyword: Italian Seismologists Manslaughter.

W. M. Hanizan, 2/ 2
Larry Greenemeier, in his article “Error and Trial: Italian Scientists Face Prison as Earthquake Manslaughter
Hearing Resumes This Weekend” (2011), implies that earthquakes are unpredictable by nature and better communication between scientists and the public is the resolution of the case. Greenmeier stresses this idea by explaining the ongoing technological improvements that are made to enhance accuracy of earthquake predictions to a certain extent, and by quoting the official statements that were released to L’Aquila residents.
His main purpose is to highlight public awareness when it comes to earthquake hazards and he also beckons for a better way to communicate and warn the public about it in order to avoid future trials. His main audience are seismologists and the public that could be in the same situation in the future.
This article will prove useful for me as I will gain perspective on how important it is to communicate with the public when it comes to conveying earthquake predictions and warnings. The original quotes from the Italian government officials will also give me the chance to analyze whether the manslaughter charges are reasonable and fitting. The article also included details about the earthquake that hit L’Aquila that will help me with the introduction of the earthquake in my essay. The article also includes the reality that present seismic technologies are not capable of absolute accuracy in determining earthquake times, place, and magnitudes so I can include this in my analysis for evidence against the charges.
Hall, Stephen S. “Scientists on trial: At fault?” Nature. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO.
Tucson. 5 March. 2012. Keyword: Italian Seismologists Manslaughter.
Stephen S. Hall, in his article,
“Scientists on trial: At fault?” (2011), stresses the fact that communication of risk assessment plays a huge role in the emotional impact of a natural disaster. Rather than informing the public about the uncertainty of seismic prediction, Hall establishes a connection with risk assessment specialists on the importance of clear communication by presenting statements from the victims and prosecutors who were disappointed with the lack of advice on how to react in the situation, not with the inaccuracy of the earthquake prediction. The main purpose of the article is to present both sides of the story clearly in order to eliminate biasness when it comes to analyzing the relevance of the prosecution.
I plan to use the statements from the victims and the prosecutors to get their perspective on the matter and construct their argument regarding the issue. These statements will give me the emotional side of the controversy, rather than just the technical rationality of the prosecution that angered a lot of scientists.
Pappas, Stephanie. “
Scientists Worry over 'Bizarre' Trial for Failing to Predict Earthquake.
” Live
Science. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Tucson. 5 March. 2012. Keyword: Italian
Seismologists Manslaughter.
Stephanie Pappas, in her article,
“Scientists Worry over 'Bizarre' Trial for Failing to Predict
Earthquake
” (2011), argues that such prosecution for inaccurate earthquake prediction would not occur in the
United States based on the uncertain nature of seismic data and also protection by the law itself. In the development of her thesis, Pappas includes examples of how earthquakes still remain unpredictable in even the most technologically advanced countries and an interview with a law professor at Brooklyn Law School regarding earthquake prediction in the United States where conviction due to inaccurate earthquake prediction without a direct result of death is not possible. Pappas’ main purpose for writing the article is to convey upfront to the public regarding the unavoidable errors and inaccuracy when it comes to providing earthquake predictions or warnings in order to create opposition against criminalizing such uncertainty. She aims to sway the stance of American supporters of the Italian prosecutors by using a persuasive tone throughout the article.
I would definitely find the legal views in this article particularly useful in helping me explore the irrelevance of such prosecutions in the United States. Stephanie Pappas’ argument is definitely well supported by her evidence. I find that her view on the criminalization of earthquake prediction and her understanding of the

W. M. Hanizan, 3/ 2 complexities of the earth’s tectonic system gives a credible insight on this matter, along with the interviews that she has conducted with professionals.