Statute of Secrecy

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 106824

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ariston3344" 
<ariston3344 at y...> wrote:
 
> when Harry casts the Patronus in OotP to save himself and Dudley, 
> why does the MoM make a big deal about the fact that he did this 
in front of a Muggle (Dudley)?  This is mentioned in the letter he 
gets from the MoM, and Fudge even goes out of his way to emphasize 
this at the hearing.
> 
> Ordinarily, of course, wizards aren't supposed to do magic in 
front of Muggles, but throughout the books there are exceptions for 
the immediate family of wizards.  Hermione's parents go to Diagon 
Alley,  and Justin Finch-Fletchley's parents read his DADA 
schoolbooks.  When Fred & George give Dudley the ton-tongue toffee, 
Mr. Weasley  doesn't mention breach of secrecy when he scolds them; 
furthermore,  he himself tried to come by Floo powder, and he uses 
magic to fix  Dudley, and the Dursleys' living room, without 
apparently modifying  their memories. <snip more evidence>

> -ariston


Valky:
Hi Ariston! Welcome.
I haven't seen this question before and it never really bothered me 
personally, either. 
I think that this is because I simply saw it as the ministry, well 
Fudge especially, were orchestrating a contrivance of interpretation 
of the statute to fit the purpose of discrediting Harry and only 
that. 

Underage magic, I suppose, was not thought to be enough of a 
transgression to fully undermine the credibility of the 'boy who 
lived' so all relevant legislation was roped in and construed 
slantways and longways etc in pure aim to deconstruct faith in Harry.

Its just evidence of Fudges corruption to me.
Great to have you on the List!