Seeing as I actually watch the news pretty regularly, and bother to read up on things like foreign legal systems, some clarifications, for both sides of the pond.

First, the generalities.  The main difference between the typical European style systems and the US is indeed presumption of innocence.  In the US, you can only be incarcerated without bail because you are considered a flight risk or a danger, preponderance of evidence, previous actions and means are taken into account.  The standard for arrest is also quite a bit higher than in most countries.  Most of the time, people are out on bail awaiting trial.  The only time they are guaranteed to be locked up is between their initial arrest, and their first bail hearing.  On the other hand, quite a few European countries do not go for circumstantial evidence, we in the US have a few people on death row from evidence you couldn't get a trial with in most of Europe.

The typical European system can however incarcerate more easily, often with far lower requirements than we have here for an arraignment.  You then get to stay there, with evidence standards coming into play in order to keep you there.  Bail for a murderer is not a common thing, as it is here.  Guilt is also typically not beyond a reasonable doubt, the "standard" in the US.  I put it in quotes because we lie our asses off when we lock someone up on purely circumstantial evidence as was the case with Scott Peterson, a guy on death row.

I'm not saying one is better than the other.  Ours would be, were it still pure, but the lawyers run it these days so it's a disaster instead.  Between the evidenciary rules that get people off just because someone didn't dot their I's and all the bullshit they do to hang someone when the media jumps on them, we've got a real cluster fuck going on...

For Amanda Knox in particular.  There was no media support in the US, sorry guys.  Pressure from the US getting her out of a murder rap is just not how it went down.  The chick was pretty much railroaded over here too, they were doing that foxy knoxy crap 24/7, and had her black listed as some kind of sex crazed drug fiend of a devil worshiper.  The cops did the typical cop thing(sorry cops, but you know your type tends to have power trips and run off assumptions till hell freezes over:)), and the prosecutor was crooked enough to try and make it stick and bury evidence that proved his theories wrong.  They convicted her the first time around knowing the main perp lied his ass off about them being there, and that they couldn't have done it.  Our moron media over here was no less idiotic than the local media was, and bought his bullshit, hook line and sinker.

Listen for your door...the next 'knock' will likely be someone with a badge......

....and a telephone book....;p

Forgot to add...

If #51 is too verbose...refer first 3 lines of.... #39 ....;)

I still think you go too far in trying to compare the chief exec of a state to a ship's captain, but the first three lines of your post reply 39 do indeed cover the important part psychoak's reply 51.

This story actually caught the attention of my civics students, and to my surprise and delight, several of them had learned that the Italian-crewed ship was part of a U.S. based corporation. I'd have been even more proud of them if they'd understood the important notion of innocent until proven guilty. At least they nearly all agreed that regardless of legalities, the captain of any ship in distress, especially one with passengers, should stay aboard until everyone else has safely escaped.

p.s. Is it still a threadjacking if one maintains a wafer-thin thematic connection to the OP? 

Don't worry. It's all still fairly connected and the thread really only has the longevity of the story.

As for the U.S. corporation, international laws won't require anyone who wasn't present be held criminally liable given that there were no authorized course changes or avoidable, mechanical failures, so the captain and crew are those likely to bite the bullet in that sense. The corporation as a whole will be liable in a civil manner, but where the cases will be heard (the country/state of incorporation or that of the incident) I am unsure.

Corporations aren't people no matter what that wretched Citizens United decision or Mr. Romney have to say. The thing that will hurt the cruise line owners is the civil suits, especially if they fold together into one or two large class action suits.

They might not be criminally liable, but that doesn't mean they won't bleed funds substantially if the passengers get together the right sort of lawsuits based on things like that captain's evaluation paperwork and the failure to provide safety drills for the passengers within 24 hours of boarding. psychoak's right that lawyers often fuck shit up just to earn money, but that isn't always the case. Sometimes the injustice system actually dispenses justice.

Hopefully, that will happen here--I'm Floridian, and our local economy will suffer if the cruise industry takes too big a hit in the court of public opinion. And by "too big a hit," I mean appearing to get away with negligence and/or failing to offer adequate compensation to the families of people who died because of shoddy management.

Correct. Proof?

Has Texas executed one yet?

That's pretty much what I said.

Not yet, but Enron got close.

Justly busted for jumping on a term without carefully reading the whole post; I typed like you had not mentioned civil suits at all. But I'm still not sure what I think about the overall 'distributive justice' situation. 

I've got old school parts that want the faithless captain keel-hauled, but thinking about pop-psych 'enabler' stuff along with 'corporate personhood' make me hope that upper management pays far more for what happened than does anyone who was actually on the ship. The degree of one's accountability should increase with one's rank on the pay scale, ideally speaking. Alas, that's been rather rare throughout history, and probably prehistory.

Well, that's kinda catchy though. The Vice President busy going over numbers and such can't be on every ship 24/7. If he hired a bunch of loons that did this, I could see him getting his nuts busted, but the Captain has the authority to change the ship's course (as was the case here) and takes responsibility when doing so. The person who originally planned the course was not consulted. Most everyone higher on the corporate ladder was not around to see it happening. It's like Ryat driving for UPS and the CEO of said company being held for manslaughter when Ryat decides to go run over an old lady. There's obviously a point past which you can't pass the buck criminally. That's where civil suits come in and make the company pay as an entity, punishment being a loss on the bottom line and people getting reamed by their bosses on multiple levels.

I'm not so much worried about the company getting torn a new one as much as seeing that this one, rare captain (after all, how many cruise boats have you heard about crashing into rocks?) and his accomplice of a crew getting their just desserts while corporate officials paddle their remaining captains into shape to ensure we don't see a repeat anytime soon.

And speaking of Ryat, I'm waiting to see him tossing boxes of fine china on YouTube.

I'd expect the Company will also be found responsible as you'd expect their choice of competent/responsible 'Captain' was found to be clearly lacking...;)

yes, but only in a civil suit. The specific people, if any, who catch blame within the company are decided by others within the hierarchy.

Not necessarily...if it's demonstrated there was prior knowledge/history of 'incompetence' which was perhaps overlooked/ignored....the legal spider web could easily catch more flies...;)

The Italians should give that coward the Mussolini treatment.

Although true, the black box and other records show that the change in course was purely the captain's. If someone within the company knew they were skipping safety protocols, yes, I can see that being the case, though it will likely be limited to a firing and blacklisting.

I heard on CNN that this was not the first time he's pulled that stunt of deviating to pass closely to the island.... if that's true, and the company did nothing to change his actions, then they're on the hook...

Actually in Italy it IS a crime to leave the boat before everyone else, and its punishable up to two years, however if people die after the captain left the boat the charges get raised per each individual that dies to an extent.

standard maritime law

yes, the question is just what charges and all

History is also littered with the saying "The Captain goes down with the ship.". A military captain would have been the last one off that ship, not the first. Of course the need for self preservation would kick in and a military person is trained to go against that, while a comercial industry captain doesn't have that example to go by.

Well, there is more generic laws around too... like the "duty to rescue"... Here, you can be punish at max with 5 year jail and a fine of 100k euro if you don't assist people in danger... and Italy have similar laws... 

Imagine that. An airline captain, with, at times, hundreds of people's lives in his hands brings down a stricken airliner in a New York river and loses no one. No fatalities and that's on a airplane. A cruise ship has an almost 100% survival rate compared to an airliner. What's that saying about this captain?

Don't give him the controls of a plane....;p

Awww.... too soon?

I heard on radio yesterday that the captain is now saying that he was under orders from the company to sail close to the island and perform a 'salute'.... AND that he was instructed by his superiors to get the f**k out of there before he could be interviewed by the police, press or anyone.

True?  I don't know, but how many times in history has a person acting under instructions from their superiors been abandoned/betrayed.... hung out to dry?

In any event, no amount of finger pointing will detract from the tragedy of this disaster.  All we can hope is that lessons are learned and all future maritime practices are much better.

I'm sure making the call, company instructions or not, will not work in his favor all the same.