WW justice was re I don't expect a complete bloodbath and a Question

[Ali <Ali@zymurgy.org>]

No: HPFGUIDX 49363

Snuffles wrote:

>>Sirius points out that he didn't even have a trial before he was 
sent to Azkaban. I hardly think they would have wasted time with the 
Veritaserum. Basically the MoM wanted someone in Azkaban for the 
crimes. Sirius looked pretty darn guilty on that street. 

( Although there is a mistake in the book - Sirius says he had no 
trial. Dumbledore says he testified at Sirius's trial to the effect 
that Sirius was the Potters' secret keeper--- this has been brought 
up a few times here...)

Maria followed the argument through with:

I have always taken Sirius' words about his not getting a trial 
literally, but maybe we shouldn't do so. It could have been the kind 
of trial Harry saw in the Pensieve, with Crouch both acting as 
prosecutor and judge and yelling all the time. Besides, people at 
that time were so scared that it's ridiculous even to think of the 
jury being objective.


I say:

I do believe that Sirius did not have a trial, and that his word can 
be taken literally.

In PoA, Dumbledore tells Harry and Hermione:

"I myself gave evidence to the Minstry that Sirius had been the 
Potters' Secret-Keeper". P.287 UK Hardback edition

That phrasing is not conclusive evidence that Dumbledore testified in 
a trial, as he could have been giving evidence that was then never 
acted upon. How much evidence is actually gathered for the average 
murder trial which is then never produced in court, and how often do 
cases of miscarriages of justice reside upon evidence "never produced 
at the time of trial?"

Another piece of evidence, Sirius' wand appears not to have been 
tested, or it would have shown that his wand did not kill all those 
innocent Muggles.

I do agree that if Sirius had been tried, he might not have received 
a fair trial as it would have been very difficult to find a jury not 
contaminated by the media influence and general hysteria brought 
about by his case. However, IMHO that remains a moot point.

Wizarding World Constitution:

Maria went on to say:

>>Besides, I don't see this use of truth potions as morally 
acceptable. We don't know anything about the WW Constitution, but I 
assume it contains all the basic civil rights, which IMHO should 
prohibit the use of truth potions in trials. <<

I don't know that it would be safe to assume that the WW has a 
constitution or whether it has what we think of as basic civil 
rights. Muggle Britain does not have a written Constitution and it is 
therefore perfectly possible for me to believe that the WW equivalent 
would not either. Sirius tells us that he was not the only person 
flung into Azkaban without a trial. This suggests the suspension of 
Habeas Corpus on at least a temporary basis. This is perhaps not 
dissimilar to the use of internment during wartime, but it is the 
suspension of a basic human right.

In terms of other human rights, I think that there is at least the 
possibility that opponents were tortured by aurors as Sirius says 
that Crouch gave them the authority to use the Unforgivable Curses.

Finally, with regard to the "trials" that we do see through the 
Pensieve; these seem to have far more in common with the Grand Jury 
System of Medieval England than the (English/Welsh) justicial system 
of today. JKR shows us Bagman being let off, not seemingly because of 
any evidence, but rather because of whom he was.

We definitely see a WW judicial system that is at best hit and miss. 
I am sure however that we can all think of modern day trials that 
appear to defy the rules of law and evidence. JKR is perhaps 
therefore testing our beliefs in judicial systems in general when she 
shows us at least one miscarriage of justice and leaves the 
possibility open for others.

Ali