HPforGrownups] Harry and the Cruciatus

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 96809

Sherrie wrote:
<In most jurisdictions, the measure of sanity is the M'Naughton Rule.  
Basically, if the person knew that society considered the act wrong -
whether or not the perpetrator himself thought it was wrong - then
that person is sane.  
Harry DOES know this - therefore, however he justifies himself in his
own mind, he cannot claim temporary insanity.  

Self-defense may be another question - although he wasn't then
directly under attack...>

Carol responds:
OTOH, no one is likely to prosecute in this case since the "victim"
had already cast several successful Cruciatus Curses herself and is
now a wanted fugitive. Also, there will probably be a cover-up of the
whole underage magic question and Harry's attempted Crucio simply
won't come up as a legal issue even if anyone besides Bellatrix knows
about it. As others have pointed out, even if the MoM itself is under
surveillance during off-hours, it would have been impossible for the
MoM officials who were monitoring it to determine who was casting
which spell with the flurry of hexes, jinxes, and curses all occurring
at the same time. (It does seem likely that the wands of the arrested
DEs will be confiscated and held as evidence, with Priori Incantatem
to be performed in court during their trials if those are actually
held, but that's another topic altogether.) 

As for Harry knowing that what he did was wrong, that's certainly
true, but he didn't know the *full* evil involved in the curse--why it
was both illegal and Unforgiveable if successfully cast. Otherwise he
would have known that he couldn't cast it. (His curse had all the
effect of a stinging hex; Bellatrix's scream was probably more a
reaction of surprise and anger than pain.) Bellatrix's words, if he
takes the time to remember and heed them, will provide him with an
understanding that he didn't have before. It isn't just the effects of
the curse that are wrong; it's the state of mind of the caster. Yes,
he spoke the word. Yes, he wanted to hurt Bellatrix. But no, he did
not have the indifference to or enjoyment of suffering requisite to a
proper casting of the curse. A WW court (unless the outcome was rigged
beforehand or the judge and jury were corrupt) would understand that.
They would also understand (I hope) that intent to harm in reaction to
injury (Harry) and willful intent to torture without provocation
(Bellatrix) are two different things--rather like the distinction
American (and possibly British) courts make between premeditated and
unpremeditated murder. I don't know what Barty Sr. would have done in
such an instance, but I'm pretty sure that Madam Bones would not find
him guilty.

A WW court under a fair judge like Madam Bones would also consider
Harry's age: He's not a child but he's not an adult, either. Rather
like a kid who engages in sex, he knows that it's "wrong" without
fully understanding why. If Fudge were in charge, it might be another
matter, but Fudge has his own reasons for a cover-up and I doubt that
Dumbledore has told him everything in any case.

So, IMO, the whole legal question is a moot point as Harry probably
won't be prosecuted and certainly won't be convicted. From a purely
practical (plot) standpoint, we can't have our hero sent to Azkaban
for something he tried (and failed) to do. He has to be at Hogwarts
for his sixth and seventh years, not to mention be available and ready
for the final confrontation with Voldemort. What's important is the
*moral* issue--why he shouldn't have tried to cast an Unforgiveable
Curse and why he must not do so again. I really hope that he comes to
the right conclusions on his own or finds a proper confidant--maybe
Lupin or Dumbledore--to discuss it with him. (I personally am glad
that Sirius isn't available for the job. Given his hatred of Bellatrix
and his own thwarted intention of murdering Peter Pettigrew,
presumably using an AK, he would be the wrong person to talk to on
this very important matter.)

Carol