Is Harry a Murderer / Killer!! ?? !! Yeah or Nah??<snipped>

[Len Jaffe]

No: HPFGUIDX 151156

Laurel Lei wrote:

> > my sons questioned why Harry was only given
> > detentions for harming Draco in such a manner?  

See below for my disjointed thoughts on this.

Laurel Lei:
> > Or why he wasn't sent to Azkaban 
> > for "using" an unforgivable curse. 

It was Harry's word against Draco's, and Harry didn't
mantion it to Snape. he was too gobstruck by what he'd
just done. he didn't defend his actions. he ran right
off and got his books (hid the HBP first :-) ), and
took his punishment without comment. 

Sending Draco off to Azkaban would have messed up the
plot arc.

Laurel Lei:

> > Again, just gaining others 
> > perspectives on how they rationalize the death or
> > harm of another.

ET Wrote:
 
> Well there is always the perspective & life
> experiences of the person 
> meting out the punishments to consider.  For
> example, when Harry 
> performed the "cutting" curse on Draco, he was
> caught by Snape who 
> strongly suspected (actually "knew" by occlumency)
> where Harry had 
> learned that spell.  If Snape had given Harry a
> stricter punishment, it 
> might have got the eye of DD & others in a way not
> favorable to himself.

Len:

There is also a laissez faire attitude about kids
jinxing each other in the halls.  Against the rules?
yes. But it happens, and for the most part, it is an
accepted part of life a Hogwarts.

So now here you have the two big dogs at Hogwarts, the
immovable object and the irresistable force, the
Scilla and Caribdes (the Tom and Jerry, if you will),
who periodically lock horns, and up until now have
been treated with a "boys will be boys" attitude. 
They have a go at each other in the school bathroom.  

Enter Snape, he knows where the cuts come from, but he
also knows that Potter doesn't use that kind of magic,
(and taunts him about it as Snape like to bust Harry's
chops whenever possible), and either deals with the
situation as you describe above (CYA), or infers that
Potter had to defend himself in a drastic way against
Draco. 

Draco resents Potter being top dog, and would like
nothing better than to see Potter out of the picture.
Remember that Draco set a dangerous snake on Harry
during their duel in second year.

Why Harry thought to try the "for enemies" spell for
the first time in the middle of REAL duel with his
nemesis, is beyond me, but he describes fighting (the
dark arts) as a combination of intellect and instinct,
so it may just have been instinctive: enemy! must get
enemy!

As for rationalizing the harm of Draco by Harry, it is
clear from Harry's reaction that he had not meant to
cause that kind of harm. Harry typically looks for
disarming and blocking spells, before going on the
offensive.  So we have a case where Harry used
excessive force in his own defense.  Defending
yourself from an agressor who means you harm is not a
sin. I guess we're looking for the point where the
nature of the defense moves beyond reasonable and
violates societal norms.

I'd say that knowing what that spell does, Harry would
be wrong to use it again unless somebody's life (not
just his own) were in jeopardy.  

Len.
This is way more fun than Joyces "Dubliners", though I
like that book too :-)