Italy, America, anywhere, it should be a crime to abandon whatever you have under your command when the lives of others is at stake. 

We can't have pilots bailing from burning jets full of passengers, or engineers jumping from trains, now can we? 

Don't be rediculous, that principle is observed just about everywhere in the western world, not just in the usa.

This person is a coward and a murderer.

An hour with the cat o' nine, then a good keel-hauling sounds like an appropriate punishment.

It might technically exist in Italy, but not in general practice.  Just ask the Knox family, among others.

Another random country that doesn't practice it is the Netherlands...

http://www.nljo.org/NLJO_Media/Media_Commentary_5.htm

Countries outside of the "western world" don't necessarily observe it either.  You shouldn't assume that you're protected when you travel abroad.

That's an outstanding statement btw Jafo.

What are you talking about, she was incarcerated as she was FOUND GUILTY on the FIRST trial. The second trial overruled the first one so she was freed. Italy is perfectly civil in this regard, actually TOO MUCH, if you ask me.

That is just bullshit. I'm from the Netherlands, and although there certainly are some things wrong in our legal system, but the picture that is painted on that site is more than a caricature than anything else. Besides, I really hope you're not criticizing because you think the American justice system is the pinnacle of perfection?

Arrrr... then 'ung, drawed n' quartered... 'anged frum tha yardarm by 'e's gonads.

  Aye, tha blaggard.... let's 'ave 'e's guts fer garters.

All countries have a law against abandoning ship and most have one that says the Captain is the last to leave the ship, America included. He chose a dangerous path (even I looked at the topography and flinched) and then refused to take responsibility, even violating the orders of superiors (Coast Guard) and the company. There is also evidence that no safety exercises took place before the boat left. I have been on a cruise and went through the safety classes and witnessed our captain make the decision to cancel a stop due to inclimate conditions, which was exactly what his duties demand.

In a command position, cowardice is a crime and a costly one.

You're probably right there.  I don't recall anything about men pushing women and children, but the captain said he was in the lifeboat with his second in command.  If he tripped and fell into the lifeboat as he now claims, how did the first mate get in there with him?  So there appears to be at least two cowards there.

Exactly my point.  She was railroaded in the first trial and spent 4 years in prison before the truth came out.  4 years doesn't sound very civil to me.

No, I said Americans take the presumption of innocence for granted.  I never said it was actually observed here.  In fact, we have innocent people in prison right now as we speak.  Many because of trumped up charges and fabricated or hidden evidence.  The difference here is that fear doesn't compel me to defend our justice system.

"Acidentally fell into a lifeboat"  What?  He was drunk as well?  Or picked up the wrong suitcase and left his sea legs at home?

I was aboard the Fairsky many years ago, and fell into a lifeboat.... was no accident, though.

Had a shared cabin so was looking for somewhere more private to....

Just a quick post, MottiKhan, it sounds like you have a pretty distorted view about the justice systems here in Europe. I never felt Knox was railroaded in the trial here. I'm a bit surprised she got the second chance. Whatever really happened, it was a pretty difficult case.

Most justice systems here I feel are on par or better than that of the US. All have flaws, of course, but the western world in general is pretty well off. Your point about the "innocent before proved guilty" thing just seems really weird to me. It's just a catchphrase, it doesn't really have that much of a practical effect compared to other western countries.

This thread is about the captain of the Costa Concordia and whether he's a criminal as well as a coward.  I've stated my opinion that he's not only a coward, but quite probably a criminal as well.  I've given my reasoning as far as the consideration for his being potentially a criminal at this early stage.  I stand by that and add that the first officer might be looked at in the same light, at least as cowardice goes.

If the 3 of you want to extol the virtues of this utopian justice system you're touting, may I suggest that you open a new thread? I'll gladly join you there.

There [still] are two forms of justice systems which differ in where the onus of proof lies....either to demonstrate one's guilt or conversely to demonstrate one's innocence.  Some European countries' justice systems are defined by the latter.

Both are flawed.

All that aside the OP's 'rant' was pretty baseless as once the reality is understood that [just like the US Pres]....when it comes to Ships' Captaincy "the buck stops here" is THE RULE [not optional] then if or when 'shit happens' there is only one person to blame.

No-one else is culpable as it is the Captain's responsibility to ENSURE his orders/directions are FOLLOWED.

Ja, aber es gibt a difference between theory und praxis.

I wouldn't have twitted you on the point except for your linking state presidents to ship captains. That sort of comparison disses all state presidents because ships at sea are fundamentally simpler to lead than a state in any sort of situation ever is. Ships have are bounded by a hull, a crew, maybe passengers, and they have to deal with geography and weather. States are fuzzy social things where the 'hull' is often a matter of debate, crews are always collections of factions, and what passes for weather includes waves of opinion.

Irrelevant...the absolute 'authority' is identical.

If anything a Captain's is more 'absolute'.  They don't get the option to redefine 'sexual relations'...etc.....;p

Correct, since the sea is by definition an immanent threat at all times. "Captaincy" is even more absolute on a warship, or at its pinnacle during a battle.

First of all, she was incarcerated ALSO for intentionally trying to frame an innocent (which is proven beyond doubt). She had to stay behind bars regardless.

Second: the first trial is a full, legit trial, the second one is intended as a "failsafe" and it doesn't usually reverse the first one's results. It did in this case mostly because of the authorities' fear (imho) of the damages that the case was doing to our relations with the US, since the media there went all for the "American Sweetheart" thing to please their public opinion. If a mistake was made, it was made here, since the net result is that a murderer is roaming free (at least not on our streets, fortunately).

But please get your facts straight before you suggest that we're some sort of barbarians (which we may be, but for different reasons).

IMHO you take on the role of captain in western culture and you are, like it or not, bound to your ship. Every life on that ship is your prime responsibility. If you don't like the rigidity of the rules then don't be a captain. There are plenty of qualified non-cowards willing to do the job. Thi is the way it has always been. I don't think he should get the death penalty, but a few years on prison would hopefully teach this guy a lesson about duty and the consequences of betraying it. 

How wrong is that statement?  Well, on 12/31/11, our "worst president ever"... signed a bill S.1867 and H.R. 1540 into law!

While these bills mostly cover a majority of the defense spending for the U.S. in 2012... it also has passed into law that that the military can detain american citizens indefinitely... without charge... no trial... and no oversight whatsoever!

This is not a joke and is a FACT!  So, be careful... guys we are headed into a dangerous place with this.

narbytrout - of course, the period of "American freedom" is long gone, but unfortunately, some Americans failed to notice. There is a strong shift towards corporate oligo-fascism - the rich players buy politicians, whole parties and order customized laws to further their interests (laws like SOPA or PIPA and their disregard to civic rights and existing law norms clearly prove this).

What is new in the recent development is that those laws no longer respect borders and sovereignty of other nations, presuming that all are just parts of the Great, worldwide empire. The fact that the Megaupload owner was arrested on New Zealand and extradicted speaks for itself. Some of you may have heard about the troubles former World Chess Champion Bobby Fischer had in Japan when he was suddenly arrested at the airport and prepared for extradiction to USA - he was saved only by the fact that he gave up US citizenship and Island offered to offer him a refuge (brave little country).

However a system where the state serves mainly to forward corporate and private interest of some privileged entities or individuals, without respecting the Constitution and existing international/domestic laws is a typical sign of fascism.

The 'Constitution' is a parochial little verbiage that pertains to only one country on this planet...300 mill in 7 bill.  It's actually quite trivial and insignificant globally.

God didn't create it, you know...;)

Actually, fascism is a racial ideology so promoting corporate interests has nothing to do with it.  I'd rather say that America is closer to becoming Ferengi.  Which is much cooler.  We need to elect our first Grand Nagus and we'll be on our way. 

Hmm...I'm trying to find a way to tie this into the topic, but failing.    

Actually you are quite mistaken, sir. Racism is not a mandatory characteristic of a fascist regime - though it was present in case of Germany. What you need is an authoritarian regime that creates a strong line between "us" and "them" - be it nationalism, adherence to a particular religion or system of ideas, etc. , and tries to further "our" agenda against "theirs" by any means necessary.

In fact, a country that forces its concept of "democracy" (whatever it means) to other sovereign states by military invasions and aggressive diplomatic actions fulfills the definition of a fascist regime quite comfortably (that said, the carefully nurtured American hatred towards "red commies" and "towelhead terrorists" speaks for itself).

And yes, we have hijacked the thread. I suggest we discuss this elsewhere, if needed.

There is but one more point to make before going back OT and that is this ......if you're looking for a justice system that actually does its job you'd better find a way to stop the planet so you can leave because one doesn't exist on this one.