Identifying with Muggles - The Dursley and 'Terrifying' Abuse

[Kayla Pittillo]

No: HPFGUIDX 158221

> On 9/12/06, Steve <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
> > ...edited...
> >
> > First and foremost, the Dusleys have a legal and 
> > social obligation to look after Harry. Yes, is is a
> > legal and social obligation they can legally and 
> > socially refuse,


I don't know the case in the U.K. but in Texas, in the United States; blood
relatives and guardians have a legal obligation to save the life of family
members in harm's way, while friends and non guardians do not. i.e. if a
mother or aunt sees their child/nephew in danger, they have to try to save
that child's life or be held legally negligent. Simply put, if the Dursley's
lived in Texas, and they didn't attempt to save Harry from say Snape on a
motorcycle, they'd be held criminally accountable if they witnessed the act,
simply because they didn't try to save Harry. I don't know if that's the
case in G.B., but for the sake of argument, I'll assume that it is.
Therefore, from my p.o.v. Petunia, and by extension, Vernon, were legally
obligated to take in Harry because she's his closest blood relative, and
therefore legally obligated in both the W.W. and in the Muggle world, as
Harry would have certainly been killed had they not taken him in. 

for you Snape fans, I don't say him because he's ESE, but because he was the
first one to come to my mind. Personally, I don't know and I don't really
care to know what state of mind Snape has, I'll be more than willing to find
out in the last installment. that's what makes the books fun for me :)

Kayla aka 
McGonigallFan

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