Jesus Christ on Trial in Viterbo

Read about it on CNN or The Volokh conspiracy or The Times of London or even The Washington Times but what happens when you search for the story in Italy's leading dalies
La Repubblica and Il Corriere della Sera. Zip zero nada. Jesus Christ is under judicial challenge right here in Italy and they don't see fit to mention it.

In fact, the top two Italian web references to the case are both from the plaintif's site.

There is also a comment by a user on a blog sponsored by La Repubblica a reference on an obscure TV site which is related to mediaset (think Fox News and multiply by ten) and La Gazzetta di Sondrio

But the so called laical media are hiding this assault on Christ from the public.

The story is simple Luigi Cascioli has denounced father Enrico Righi for abusing public credulity (Abuso di Credulita Popolare) and impersonation (Sostituzione di Persona), because Enrico Righi claims that, get this, Jesus Christ existed. An extremely unamused gup (giudice dell'udienza perliminaria) has to decide whether to indict father Righi. The udienza preliminaria is pretty much an arraignment although I suppose it could also be compared to a grand jury proceding.

The second charge seems to me to be crazy, since Righi is not claiming that he personally is Jesus Christ. The first seems quite solid as a matter of law. The law is there to make it possible to prosecute faith healers, fortune tellers and such. I think it actually is applied occasionally and many such frauds dress up their scams as christianity (Pat Robertson better check on the law before he decides to move his christian theme part to Rome now that Israel is mad at him).

The claim that Jesus Christ is a historical figure is not overwhelmingly supported by the evidence. At least Cascioli is sincerely convinced that there was no such person. Note that Righi can't get off by claiming he never said Christ is divine (which might get him in a spot of hot water with his bishop). Cascioli claims there was no such guy.

Now the burden of proof is on the extremely reluctant prosecution, but this is a preliminary hearing in which the unfortunate magistrate has to say if there is grounds for a trial.

One problem with the absence of reputable Italian language coverage is that I am not sure if this is a civil suit or (more likely) a criminal case. The headline at TGCOM
"'Gesù esiste', prete querelato Viterbo, denunciato da autore libro". Contradicts itself. "Denunciare" is to accuse someone of a crime, querelare is to sue them. I think the case is a criminal case, because it definitely concerns a reato (crime).
English translations are no help.

Now I am very embarassed that I know more about Samuel Alito's college years than I do about what is happening right now in the country where I live, but I think the news is being played up overseas for the usual laugh at Italy reasons and is understressed hear, because it makes the Italian legal system look silly.

The Italian legal system is absurd. On the one hand there are many laws which can not be enforced in a free country. I believe that Righi could denounce Casioli for blasphemy which is a crime. It is also a crime to detract from the honor of the state while in a foreign country, to vilify the President of the Repubblic and to deny the Presidents absolute lack of responsibility for any action of the cabinet (got to watch myself on that one).

Fortunately none of these cases comes to trial. This in spite of the fact that prosecutors are supposed to have no discretion at all. Si riesci a tira a campa I don't know how (hmmm how do you say that in American, in English it is muddle through).

I personally have no opinion about whether there was a historical Jesus (I have no doubt that if there were he wasn't divine). Still I applaud Cascioli, because with a few dozen crazy cases like this, parliament might establish genuine freedom of speach just to end the international humiliation.