Harry's Use of an Unforgivable Curse

[Jim Ferer]

No: HPFGUIDX 96032

<Jim> Do you feel Harry should be charged? Maddened with grief,
pursuing his godfather's killer, the torturer of the Longbottoms, the
most sadistic and psycho of Voldemort's followers? </Jim>
Dumbledad: Yes, he should. Sure, if it had been an attempted Avada
Kedavra I'd say he was justified (though Dumbledore sets a very
different role model). But torture? It is very difficult to imagine
portraying torture as a valid form of self-defense. I'm not one for
absolutes, but torture is absolutely wrong."

I disagree. Harry didn't torture; he turned out not to have it in him
to torture Bellatrix.  He only had righteous anger in him, as even
Bellatrix realized. For this he should be exposed to a life sentence
in Azkaban? That would be turning good and evil on its head.

Dumbledad: "I don't think one's lack of skill stands as a defence in
courts. After all, the fact that a criminal is brought to justice
implies that they are less skilled at evasion than others, but that
skill deficiency doesn't get them off."

Agreed, but the issue wasn't a lack of skill, but of malice sufficient
to truly agonize Bellatrix Lestrange, despite having witnessed her
kill his godfather and torture (for real) his friend. Even after all
that, he couldn't muster the cruelty.  I don't think Harry will cast
another Cruciatus Curse; he knows something more about himself,
something I think is positive: there is a sharp line between himself
and the DE's.

Jim Ferer