[HPforGrownups] Re: Is Harry a Murderer / Killer!! ?? !! Yeah or Nah??

[puduhepa98 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 151359

 
 
>-Laurel Lei 

>>,<snip>, I have read many posts that have 
touched a  nerve, so to speak. They mention that Harry is NOT a 
murderer or NOT a  killer or that he is not capable of it or that they 
hope he doesn't have to  succumb to the murder of Voldemort via the 
prophecy or even that they would  throw their copies of the entire 
Harry Potter series away if J.K. turned  Harry into a murderer in book 
7... i.e. someone in Harry's stead would carry  out the murder (via the 
veil, another person does it for him, or by other  freakish events he 
just dies...)

>>I may be mistaken in my  interpretation of murder within those poster's 
meanings but... it would seem  to me that, Harry is very capable of 
murder... What about Quirrelmort????  <snip>
What about Voldemort's soul bit in the diary horcrux???  <snip>
Wouldn't Harry's soul be torn by his involvement in the death of  
Quirrel or the "death" of Voldie's soul bit...???
 

Nikkalmati:
I tried to post this a while back but it got lost!  I finally found it  
somewhere in the innards of my computer.  I have tried to update it, but I  may 
have missed some pertinent comments.
 
Thanks for bringing this topic up.  I think many of us listees want  to give 
Harry a pass and excuse or overlook his behavior because he is the hero  or 
because we see events from his POV.  I am not sure JKR wants us to miss  that 
Harry currently is going down the wrong path.
That said, I would make a distinction between killing and murder.   Quirrel 
is both accidental (Harry had no idea why he was burning Quirrel) and  
self-defense.  Quirrel was trying to kill him.  As has been said  already, the diary 
was not a person and the soul was not destroyed.  I do  not believe every 
killing splits the soul.  It depends on intent.  (I  also do not think even a 
murder creates a separate soul piece unless the  murderer plans that in advance and 
probably says a particular spell to separate  and control the piece. However, 
any murder does do harm to the  soul). 

>LaurelLei
>>I also believe that Harry would have killed  Sirius if Lupin hadn't 
arrived. Harry had stated as much.  <snip>
>>And I believe that Harry would have killed Bella in the  MOM 
during/post battle.
Nikkalmati:
Not sure here, although the anger and hatred to do harm is shown.  It  was 
already said that Harry did not know the AK at the Shrieking Shack  and possible 
would have held back.  He tried to Crucio Bella not kill  her.  It also 
appears from the scene in HBP with Snape that Harry just  doesn't have what it 
takes to do an AK (but Snape wisely didn't let him complete  the curse).  A little 
more practice and Harry could get it right.

>LaurelLei
>>And what about Draco in the bathroom and the  sectasempra spell...? The 
spell for enemies... the spell that Snape  "reversed"... had Snape not 
arrived and known what to do (because he was the  "Prince" and possible 
author)...???? Would Harry then have become a murderer  if Draco had 
died? Isn't what he did attempted murder?<snip>
 
Nikkalmati:
Now we come to the real leap into darkness for Harry.  He already at  the 
opening feast wished for another death this year (meaning the new DADA  teacher, 
Snape). I found that shocking in Harry and a sign of his slide  downhill.  At 
the end of the book, he commits an act that could be charged  as first degree 
murder.  I don't see this act as self-defense, but  escalation.  (by the way 
why didn't Harry say something like "what's the  matter? or can I help you? 
when he saw Draco in distress). Draco attacked  first,  but only with regular 
hexes.  Harry responded in kind.   Draco tried Crucio and Harry hit him with 
sectasempra.  Now we know that  the effect of a spell in PV depends on the intent 
and strength of will behind  it.  Harry split Draco open and nearly killed 
him.  He probably  in a Muggle court would be allowed to plead to involuntary 
manslaughter, but the  initial charge would be murder, if Draco died, and it was 
only by good luck that  he did not and probably Snape too because of the  UV.  
 

>>but I found it very difficult to  
explain to my sons that if he were to harm another like Harry did to  
Draco or the others that they wouldn't "just get  detentions". 


I certainly agree there is a problem here.  Harry shows some  immediate 
remorse, but it doesn't last long.  Does he ever go to see Draco  in the infirmary? 
 Does he even ask how he is doing?  Just a touch of  concern could have made 
a difference to Draco or show real remorse.   Instead he is soon complaining 
about what appears to be a very mild  detention for what he did.  Does it 
really matter that he misses  Quiddich when Draco could have died?  Has Snape given 
up on anyone  giving Harry any proper punishment?  Did he even report Harry 
to Minerva or  DD?  Does he know events are too near the climax to suspend or 
expel  Harry?  I don't believe SS is afraid of DD finding out about the book or 
 the spell he created.  Surely, DD knows a lot worse things about SS by now  
and SS can't be held liable for losing a book. The detention SS does give has  
the potentially beneficial effect of showing Harry "you don't want to be like 
 this; you can't afford to be like this; the WW can't afford for you to be 
this  childish; grow up Harry."  Of course, he could just be showing Harry why 
he  disliked James and Sirius so much too <g>. JMO
Nikkalmati














[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]