Fidelius/Priori Incantatem/Unforgiveables

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 161689

Carol earlier:
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/161462>:
> 
> << (Yes, it's possible that he could have seen a note written to
> Dumbledore by PP in a disguised hand, but that's a pretty
far-fetched explanation for his knowledge, and JKR would have to find
some roundabout way to bring it into the plot. And why would PP have
told anybody [except LV] when the whole idea was to keep the Potters'
> whereabouts secret?) >>
> 
Catlady responded:
> I think James and Lily would want their location to be known to some
> people whom they trusted absolutely -- Sirius and probably
Dumbledore and maybe Hagrid, as well as PP -- so that these people
could visit and, well, bring them groceries. <big snip>

Carol again:
The Potters had only one week to live after they made Peter the SK.
Even if they wanted to tell Dumbledore (I can't see them wanting
Hagrid to know), they'd have to arrange for Peter to tell him, and he
in turn would have to figure out a way to do so without revealing his
identity. Polyjuice potion takes a month to brew, not to mention
having to collect one of the ingredients at the full moon, IIRC, and
an owl with a message could easily be intercepted. We know that DD
didn't know who the SK was (he thought it was Sirius Black). I take
that to mean he didn't know the Secret, either, and found it out only
when the Charm was broken. Otherwise, I don't see how he could have
known that the Potters were in danger or dead and Harry was alive. (to
repeat my own view very briefly, I think he had originally provided
the Potters their hiding place in Godric's Hollow, "forgot" the
location once the Fidelius Charm was placed on PP, and woke up
remembering it again when the Charm was broken. At the same time,
Snape woke up feeling pain in his Dark Mark, watched it disappear, and
ran to DD. Putting two and two together, they figured out what
happened, possibly with the aid of DD's instruments. With the charm
broken, DD could tell Hagrid that the hiding place had been in
Godric's Hollow and send him there to rescue Harry, with the
instruction not to turn him over to anyone else. (DD would anticipate
Sirius Black going there to claim the baby as his godfather and
definitely wouldn't want the supposed traitor to have him.)


Carol rsrlier:
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/161513>:
> 
> << What if "Unforgiveable" means something more than a lifetime
> sentence to Azkaban (which would hardly serve as a deterrent after a
> person has cast one Unforgiveable). >>
> 
Catlady responded:
> You're assuming that law enforcement (DMLE) will always be able to
get evidence of that first Unforgiveable. 

Carol again:
Actually, no, I'm not. I'm only saying that the person who has cast an
Unforgiveable knowing that he has sentenced himself to Azkaban if he's
caught (either caught in the act or caught using Priori Incantatem on
his wand) will not hesitate to cast a second or third Unforgiveable.
Once you've cast one, you are in danger of a life sentence, so there's
nothing to deter you from taking the same chance again. (I did it once
and didn't get caught, and all I need is one to send me to Askaban, so
why not cast as many as I like until they catch me? Rather like an
American murderer who's shot one victim, knows he's up against a death
sentence if caught, so has nothing to deter him from killing again.)
Also, it appears that for certain personality types, certain
Unforgiveables are addictive. Bella *enjoys* casting Crucios, which is
why she's so good at it. Mulciber, the Imperius specialist, apparently
enjoyed controlling people, making them commit evil deeds as if they
were his puppets. I'm simply saying that once you've gotten past
whatever scruples or inhibitions that deter you from casting that
first Unforgiveable, fear of a life sentence to Askaban isn't going to
keep you from casting another one. If it did, there would be a lot
fewer Death Eaters, or at least the DEs would fling around a lot fewer
AKs and Crucios.

Catlady:
Maybe the only way to get evidence other than witness testimony is the
Prior Incantato spell, and maybe Prior Incantato can retrieve only the
most recent spell cast by that wand (not the same as the Prior
Incantatem effect). So there would be a narrow window to collect
evidence, only between the most recent Unforgiveable and the next tap
on a teapot to make the water boil or such. 

Carol again:
I don't think so. I think Prior Incantato gives you the last spell
cast and Priori Incantatem gives you all the spells a wand has cast,
up to the point where the judge or Auror casts Finite Incantatem to
stop the spell. Granted, that spell would have its limitations. I
think it can only been used once, and a savvy DE might use it on his
own wand if that's the case, or use someone else's wand or a spare
wand when he plans to commit a crime. But the MoM does monitor for
illegal spells; otherwise, they wouldn't have known about the murder
of the Riddles (and arrested Morfin, finding the evidence on his wand
because Tom Riddle had used it). But they wouldn't have been able to
trace Harry's failed Crucio in the MoM, even if it registered. They
would just know that someone had cast or tried to cast one (and the
one Bella cast on Neville would also have registered). I imagine that
the wands of all the arrested wizards were confiscated and tested. If
so, they must have found at least two Imperios on Lucius Malfoy's, in
which case, he won't be getting off on the charges of breaking and
entering the DoM any time soon.
 
Carol earlier:
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/161633>:
> 
> << We know that Mad-Eye Moody only killed when he had to. We don't
> know that he used the AK when he did it, and I doubt that he ever
> resorted to Imperio or Crucio. >>
> 
Catlady:
> I agree. But is it really more ethical to kill (in self-defense) a
> criminal (who is resisting arrest) with a bullet or Accio'ing
> something to suffocate him, then to cast Imperius on him and order
him to surrender peaceably and come along?
>
Carol:
I suppose it's a matter of opinion (situational ethics). But if you're
an Auror, or a policeman, you know before you choose the career that
it will occasionally be necessary to kill someone who would otherwise
kill you. It would never (IMO) be ethical to compel him by violating
his mind and will, an option not available to RL policemen in any
case. (Stunning, however, is an option available to both, and I wonder
why Mad-Eye didn't choose it. Maybe Rosier was exceedingly good at
anticapting and deflecting spells, rather like Snape in HBP.)

At least Evan Rosier had the choice to fight and die in Voldemort's
service, which is better than forcing him to yield by violating his
mind. But Moody's reasons for killing him may have been more
practical, given that Imperius was authorized. Maybe Rosier could
resist the Imperius Curse. I prefer to think that Moody chose not to
use it because it was the weapon of the enemy, and I still think that
the use of Unforgiveables, even for a good cause, corrodes the soul
and leads to the temptation to use them again and again (witness
Bella, Barty Jr., and the DEs in Hogwarts in HBP).

Carol, wondering where the wizards who escaped from Azkaban got wands,
considering that their old ones must have been confiscated and
possibly broken when they were sent to Azkaban the first time