[HPforGrownups] Re: What would a successful AK mean?/One interesting perspective

[Kathryn Jones]

No: HPFGUIDX 142980

lealess wrote:

> So, what does this make Dumbledore?  An adult who enlists a minor,
> places him in a life-threatening situation for which he proves to be
> largely unprepared, and orders him to contribute to what looks like
> the adult's injury but certainly his incapacitation.  Is any of this
> permissible under military law?  But as I remarked in an earlier
> response, I am not sure our military law, or even our criminal law,
> pertains to the wizarding world, where magical contracts and debts
> seem to have more effect.
> 
> lealess

   KJ writes:

      I rather like Criminal Negligence, which is defined as doing 
anything or omitting to do anything that is his duty to do, thus showing 
wanton disregard for the lives or safety of other persons. This would 
certainly apply to the cave scene where Harry could easily have been 
left alone to deal with the Inferi on his own. He would not have survived.

      There is also Conspiracy to Commit Murder according to the 
conversation held in OotP. "So does that mean that one of us has got to 
kill the other in the end?"
  "Yes" said Dumbledore
      This could also be charged under a different section of 
Counselling to Commit an Offense.

      Then there is Obstruction of a Peace Officer, in OotP when he 
refused to be arrested by the aurors, and again when he jinxed Dawlish 
to prevent him from following on the orders of the MoM in HBP.

      There is also Theft of the horcruxes which come under the section 
for taking something with the intention to deal with it in such a manner 
that it cannot be restored to the same condition it was in when it was 
taken.

      There is Section 335, Taking of a Vessel with the intention of 
operating it without the owners consent with regard to Voldemort's boat 
in the cave.

      Then there is breaking and entering, under the section that 
invovles the actual commission of an offense (theft of horcrux).

      Finally, I would think that Contributing to the Delinquency of a 
Minor would be relatively easy to prove, starting with the invisibility 
cloak and proceeding to the counselling of murder.

      In fact, having given this some thought, I would proceed with 
Snape's defense on the grounds that he was attempting to put an end to 
this one man crime wave. *snicker*
KJ