unforgiveable charms?

[wildfire_517]

No: HPFGUIDX 79857

>Laura:
(snips)
> shouldn't it be highly improper (if not worth a 
> life term in Azkaban) to use Legilimency on someone without their 
> permission?  Or to access their private thoughts in any other 
manner?

Wyld:

(Ignoring the rest of the potentially controversial post)

   Legilimency is a grey area I wouldn't try to touch, but I will 
take a stab at it anyway.  Here goes...

   It seems to me that Legilimency wouldn't be Unforgivable.  Take, 
for instance, a mother using it on her son (or daughter..must be PC) 
to find out if they are telling the truth about who really turned the 
family dog into a giant clown statue.  I wouldn't look at that as 
Unforgivable.  That would seem to me to be a perfectly legit use of 
such a talent.  Ditto to using it to discover exactly who committed 
this crime or that crime, though that is even more of a grey area as 
how is anyone supposed to know that the person performing Legilimency 
actually saw what they said they saw!  Regardless, I would also look 
on that as being an acceptable use of said talent.

   If we're talking about simply invading one's mind for the sole 
purpose of doing harm, committing a crime, or so on, then that would 
be Unforgivable in my view.  It's still such a grey area, though.  
How is anyone supposed to believe what one person *says* they saw in 
another person's mind, unless there is some sort of joint Legilimency 
that we have yet to see.  It's all quite confusing.

Wyld - walks away mumbling to himself, thinking that unforgivable 
charms just might be called curses, since there is no "curse" class