Concordia News: Please Post Here

[Uniall]

The Appeals Court in Italy speaks.

 

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Italy+court+rules+Concordia+cruise+ship+captain+unfit+command/6631417/story.html

 

 

ROME - Italy's top appeals court ruled on Wednesday that Francesco Schettino, the captain of the Costa Concordia, was unfit to command the cruise liner which ran aground and capsized off the Tuscan island of Giglio in January, causing at least 30 deaths.

 

In a written explanation of its decision to maintain a house arrest order against Schettino, the Court of Cassation said he had shown "little resilience in performing command functions or in handling responsibility for the safety of persons under his care."

 

Schettino has been accused of wrecking the 114,500 metric tons (126,215 tons) liner by bringing it too close to shore, where a rocky ledge tore a gash in its side and made it keel over and sink.

 

Investigators also accuse Schettino of delaying evacuation and losing control of the operation, during which he abandoned ship before all 4,200 passengers and crew had been taken off the vessel.

 

He has been charged with multiple manslaughter, causing the accident and abandoning ship prematurely. A pre-trial hearing was held in Grosseto, near Florence, in March.

 

The Court of Cassation said Schettino had shown himself unable to manage a crisis and to ensure the safety of his passengers and crew and said there would be a risk of a repeat of the disaster if he were given a command again.

 

That part of the ruling justified the decision to keep Schettino under house arrest at his home in Meta di Sorrento, near Naples in southern Italy, as a concrete danger of a recurrence must be shown for the arrest order to be upheld.

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Italy+court+rules+Concordia+cruise+ship+captain+unfit+command/6631417/story.html#ixzz1v5vYdh1W

 

Hoorah for truth and justice. Schitino unfit for command. Yesssssssssssss

[sidari]

So they say he is unfit to command Now fair enough and was to be expected! but strange how they can say he was unfit to command before without ever coming across the man or knowing him .... :eek:

 

Uniall .... your response makes it seem like you believed Schettino would be allowed to command a ship again! and comes across as something a child would say.

[Uniall]

So they say he is unfit to command Now fair enough and was to be expected! but strange how they can say he was unfit to command before without ever coming across the man or knowing him .... :eek:

 

Uniall .... your response makes it seem like you believed Schettino would be allowed to command a ship again! and comes across as something a child would say.

 

Sidari

 

Your personal remarks directed to me comes mighty close to being a violation of the board's rules of engagement. I'll let it slide since I think you misunderstand my intent and meaning. Unlike Dalaks, I say exactly what I mean and try to avoid being wry or sarcastic.

 

When I posted:

 

Hoorah for truth and justice. Schitino unfit for command. Yesssssssssssss

 

I meant every word of it and every word in it's ordinary daily plebian meaning.

 

John

"The Doctor" is in.

Edited May 17, 2012 by Uniall

[sidari]

And i stand by my post.

[balf]

[quote=sidari;33797521

 

Uniall .... your response makes it seem like you believed Schettino would be allowed to command a ship again! and comes across as something a child would say.

 

Well it doesn't make it seem like that to me, or I guess to most people reading it.

 

Why did you go out of your way to be so unpleasant?

 

David.

[Uniall]

So they say he is unfit to command Now fair enough and was to be expected! but strange how they can say he was unfit to command before without ever coming across the man or knowing him .... :eek:

 

Uniall .... your response makes it seem like you believed Schettino would be allowed to command a ship again! and comes across as something a child would say.

 

And i stand by my post.

 

Sidari

 

May I remind you or the Board Rules:

 

"

The harassment of our members is not allowed.

Cruise Critic is committed to providing an online environment that is free from these types of harassing postings.

Please, don't attack another poster

or group of posters. Do not harass, threaten, embarrass, or do anything else to another member that is unwanted.

This means: don't say bad things about them

, don't keep sending them unwanted Instant Message notes, don't attack their race, heritage, or their sexual orientation, etc.

If you disagree with someone, respond to the subject, not the person. Postings of this nature will be removed from the boards."

If you disagree with me or misinterpret what I have posted you are encouraged to say so. But you are not permitted to say something negative about me.

 

Your comment that my post "comes across as something a child would say", is a violation of the Board Rules. Your reply post that you stand by your comment, despite my objections, indicates to me that your comment was an intentional violation of Board Rules.

 

Uniall

Edited May 17, 2012 by Uniall

[Tonka's Skipper]

So they say he is unfit to command Now fair enough and was to be expected! but strange how they can say he was unfit to command before without ever coming across the man or knowing him .... :eek:

 

 

I agree Sidari..........Have a missed a trial?...or court sessions to determine if he is unfit?......(I agree he is) just asking

 

I don't understand Italian courts..seems the cart is in front of the horse or maybe this is just a legal judgment to keep him under arrest?

 

AKK

[Uniall]

So they say he is unfit to command Now fair enough and was to be expected! but strange how they can say he was unfit to command before without ever coming across the man or knowing him .... :eek:

 

 

I agree Sidari..........Have a missed a trial?...or court sessions to determine if he is unfit?......(I agree he is) just asking

 

I don't understand Italian courts..seems the cart is in front of the horse or maybe this is just a legal judgment to keep him under arrest?

 

AKK

 

The Italian legal system (like many European nations) has a blend of criminal and civil investigations and prosecutions. Some preliminary hearings with oral and/or documentary evidence (including affidavits or depositions) can be used by the trial and appellate courts to reach preliminary decisions that are more civil law but have an impact on the continuing criminal aspect of the case.

 

So, the courts can conclude, based on oral and/or written testimony and/or documents (e.g. black box print outs, etc) that Capt. Schitino was (and is) unfit to command the ship (similar to what we call civil law).

 

Whether he is also guilty of criminal acts (murder or manslughter) remains to be decided.

Edited May 17, 2012 by Uniall

[Tonka's Skipper]

 

The Italian legal system (like many European nations) has a blend of criminal and civil investigations and prosecutions. Some preliminary hearings with oral and/or documentary evidence (including affidavits or depositions) can be used by the trial and appellate courts to reach preliminary decisions that are more civil law but have an impact on the continuing criminal aspect of the case.

 

So' date=' the courts can conclude, based on oral and/or written testimony and/or documents (e.g. black box print outs, etc) that Capt. Schitino was (and is) unfit to command the ship (similar to what we call civil law).

 

Whether he is also guilty of criminal acts (murder or manslughter) remains to be decided.[/quote']

 

 

THANKS........Is this a maritime Court?.or a regular Court?.I ask becuse it question of *unfit of command* seems more a maritime matter to be decided my Maritime experts..not civil judges?.......

 

AKK

[Uniall]

 

 

THANKS........Is this a maritime Court?.or a regular Court?.I ask becuse it question of *unfit of command* seems more a maritime matter to be decided my Maritime experts..not civil judges?.......

 

AKK

 

This is an Italian Court of Justice that hears both civil and criminal cases.

 

They may also have maritime jurisdiction regarding liability of Costa Cruise Line and/or indvidual employees for damages incurred by others.

 

But, the present proceedings focus on the investigation and prosecution of alleged crimes that have been comitted and civil law violations that have a bearing on or are tangental to the alleged criminal actions. So, the court cn make a preliminary finding that the Schitino's actions demonstrated that he was unfit for command and now proceed to the heavier question of whether his actions were criminal.

Edited May 17, 2012 by Uniall

[Ratt]

This is an Italian Court of Justice that hears both civil and criminal cases.

 

They may also have maritime jurisdiction regarding liability of Costa Cruise Line and/or indvidual employees for damages incurred by others.

 

But, the present proceedings focus on the investigation and prosecution of alleged crimes that have been comitted and civil law violations that have a bearing on or are tangental to the alleged criminal actions. So, the court cn make a preliminary finding that the Schitino's actions demonstrated that he was unfit for command and now proceed to the heavier question of whether his actions were criminal.

 

In the original post with the information about the hearing that keep him under house arrest the following statement stuck out to me.

 

That part of the ruling justified the decision to keep Schettino under house arrest at his home in Meta di Sorrento, near Naples in southern Italy, as a concrete danger of a recurrence must be shown for the arrest order to be upheld.

 

What I find interesting is that it says a "concrete danger of a recurrence must be shown". So does this mean that the court found that if he wasn't under house arrest he would try to captain a ship again? Does that mean that the court believes that someone would let him even remotely close to a ship?

 

I understand them finding him unfit to command but the above statement seems odd.

[Uniall]

In the original post with the information about the hearing that keep him under house arrest the following statement stuck out to me.

 

 

 

What I find interesting is that it says a "concrete danger of a recurrence must be shown". So does this mean that the court found that if he wasn't under house arrest he would try to captain a ship again? Does that mean that the court believes that someone would let him even remotely close to a ship?

 

I understand them finding him unfit to command but the above statement seems odd.

 

Perhaps something is lost in the translation from Italian legalese to English. Maybe it's a quantum of evidence required by Italian law to keep someone confined during the investigative stage of the prosection (the two stages are not as separate and distinct as inthe USA) Maybe it's similar, to US rationale of denial af bond because the defendant represents a continuing danger to others. Maybe they want him to agree that he will not sail any vessel and he refuses (Like a refusal to vluntarily surrender a passport to the court in the US)

Edited May 17, 2012 by Uniall

[Ratt]

Perhaps something is lost in the translation from Italian legalese to English. Maybe it's a quantum of evidence required by Italian law to keep someone confined during the investigative stage of the prosection (the two stages are not as separate and distinct as inthe USA) Maybe it's similar, to US rationale of denial af bond because the defendant represents a continuing danger to others. Maybe they want him to agree that he will not sail any vessel and he refuses (Like a refusal to vluntarily surrender a passport to the court in the US)

 

Now that makes sense.

[Max49]

Maybe it's a preliminary admittance strategy from Schetinos attorneys to claim he's not fit to stand trial, insane or whatever.

I'm sure he must be a mess going from hero to zero in a few minutes.

[Uniall]

Maybe it's a preliminary admittance strategy from Schetinos attorneys to claim he's not fit to stand trial, insane or whatever.

I'm sure he must be a mess going from hero to zero in a few minutes.

 

Just like the old adage: "What goes around, comes around". It couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Schitino deserves everything he gets....and then some. Keep the news reports coming.

[Tonka's Skipper]

Maybe it's a preliminary admittance strategy from Schetinos attorneys to claim he's not fit to stand trial, insane or whatever.

I'm sure he must be a mess going from hero to zero in a few minutes.

 

 

Max..now you backed me up.........I was about to say this didn't make sense, as to agree until the end of the trials not to sail, may have gotten him out of house arrest...but your point as merit as you can never trust trial atty's. It indeed could be the start of some *reduced capacity* legal move!

 

AKK

[Uniall]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max49

Maybe it's a preliminary admittance strategy from Schetinos attorneys to claim he's not fit to stand trial, insane or whatever.

I'm sure he must be a mess going from hero to zero in a few minutes.

 

Max..now you backed me up.........I was about to say this didn't make sense' date=' as to agree until the end of the trials not to sail, may have gotten him out of house arrest...but your point as merit as you can never trust trial atty's. It indeed could be the start of some *reduced capacity* legal move!

 

AKK[/quote']

 

Guys

There is an inherent problem for people from countries using the Anglo/American justice system in understanding litigation in countries based upon Napoleonic Codal law. We are used to solid lines of demarcation, like civil vs criminal, investigation vs prosecution, trial court vs appellate court, prosecutor vs judiciary, etc. In Codal countries all these lines are blurred, co-mingled, duplicated, etc.

 

Our system is like a 5 course dinner. Their system is like a big pot of stew.

 

John

Edited May 18, 2012 by Uniall

[Tonka's Skipper]

Quote:

 

 

 

 

Guys

There is an inherent problem for people from countries using the Anglo/American justice system in understanding litigation in countries based upon Napoleonic Codal law. We are used to solid lines of demarcation, like civil vs criminal, investigation vs prosecution, trial court vs appellate court, prosecutor vs judiciary, etc. In Codal countries all these lines are blurred, co-mingled, duplicated, etc.

 

Our system is like a 5 course dinner. Their system is like a big pot of stew.

 

John

 

 

I fully admit your right!

 

 

So this whole next year of trials will be interesting to watch!

 

If it's found he did 1/2 of the things he is accused of..hes got big problems in any court!

 

AKK

[sidari]

Our system is like a 5 course dinner. Their system is like a big pot of stew.

 

John ... that is the reason yours is so expensive with claims paid out that do not reflect reality! unlike the Stew.

 

In time a few of you are going to be in for what may be a suprise where Concordia is concerned, this case is not Black and White or Grey! more coloured.

[Tonka's Skipper]

Our system is like a 5 course dinner. Their system is like a big pot of stew.

 

John ... that is the reason yours is so expensive with claims paid out that do not reflect reality! unlike the Stew.

 

In time a few of you are going to be in for what may be a suprise where Concordia is concerned, this case is not Black and White or Grey! more coloured.

 

 

I totally agree my friend!:D

 

Didnt you just go on a Costa cruise?.......how was it?

 

AKK

[CtheW0rld]

here is a link to an article on cnn. i don't think this particular one has been posted. one thing that caught my eye was this quote:

 

"Once the giant ship has been refloated, it will be towed to an Italian port, probably in Tuscany, to be dismantled and disposed of according to local regulations."

[Uniall]

Our system is like a 5 course dinner. Their system is like a big pot of stew.

 

John ... that is the reason yours is so expensive with claims paid out that do not reflect reality! unlike the Stew.

 

In time a few of you are going to be in for what may be a suprise where Concordia is concerned, this case is not Black and White or Grey! more coloured.

 

I doubt very much I will be surprised by anything concening the Concordia litigation. I was the first American invited to join the, then newly UN chartered, International Prosecutors' Association back in 1995.

 

No legal system is perfect and all have their faults, including your British legal system. While American jurisprudence may allow too many rights of litigants, Anglo jurisprudence allows more restrictions on litigant rights and even their abolition by Parliament. Personally, I'd rather err on the side of more litigant rights than less.

[CruisersNC]

Here's a story posted today on CC about the raising of the Concordia.....seems like most of the information we already knew being stated again...but there are a couple interesting illustrations showing how they intend to right the ship and float it:

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=4838

[rubicondsrv]

here is a link to an article on cnn. i don't think this particular one has been posted. one thing that caught my eye was this quote:

 

"Once the giant ship has been refloated, it will be towed to an Italian port, probably in Tuscany, to be dismantled and disposed of according to local regulations."

 

Unless they already have a contract from a buyer for the hulk, that may change, once the wreck is stripped and inspected, it would not surprise me to see it towed to alang or similar.

 

Plenty of ships are claimed to be heading to western breakers only to be sent to the more economical but less politicaly correct beaches of india and pakistan.

[zahav1]

http://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/7299-diagrams-for-costa-concordia-removal-plan-.html