The Statute of Secrecy

[Ken Hutchinson]

No: HPFGUIDX 158971

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> wrote:
>
>  Ken:
> > 
> > The issue isn't the use of magic, the issue is that Dumbledore
> > in this scene is doing the same things that any conniving 
> > Muggle schemer would do. He uses a forged document 
> 
> Pippin:
> AFAIK, it's not forgery if there's no intent to defraud. Mrs. Cole is
> not cheated of anything. That the same methods could have
> used  to cheat Mrs. Cole is irrelevant. 

Ken:

That is an interesting attitude but I am quite certain that 
forging an official document is in itself a criminal offense
in most cases. Dumbledore uses his forged document to
deceive Mrs. Cole into releasing a minor child into his 
guardianship. How is that not fraudulent? How is that not
a serious crime? As it happens Dumbledore is a real 
teacher at a real school that really is offering Tom an 
education but that does not justify the means he used to
obtain Mrs. Cole's assent. He is using the methods a 
pedophile might use to gain access to a child.

> 
> It's Mrs. Cole's decision to drink while on duty, also. We don't
> even know that it's against the rules of the orphanage. Probably
> not, things were looser in those days. 

Ken:

I am well aware that Mrs Cole bears the greater share of the 
blame for her drinking problem. Dumbledore used her problem
to his advantage and that is simply shabby. A man of his 
intellect and charm does not have to use such a method to 
present a win-win proposal to Mrs Cole. A man of his moral 
standing should not use such methods.

> 
> Ken:
> > 
> > Remember that I brought this up because I think it is a scene
> > where Dumbldore truly does show that he is human after all.
> > I don't mean to discredit him. I believe that he does not have 
> > to be perfect to be the epitome of goodness. A perfect 
> > Dumbledore would be boring, unbelievable, and would have
> > solved all the WW's problems by now
> 
> Pippin:
> But JKR called him the epitome of goodness because she
> was making the point that she doesn't consider goodness 
> boring. He is not boring, IMO, not because of his flaws
> but because he is forced to cope with the flawed world. Of
> course if there were closer cooperation between Muggles
> and Wizards then there would be an official procedure
> for dealing with cases like Tom's. But there's not, so
> Dumbledore improvises. 

Ken:

I shifted gears here slightly without making that plain I suppose.
When I said a perfect Dumbledore I meant a *perfect* Dumbledore.
The entire conflict with LV that we see playing out in the HP books
is predicated on the fact the DD took no effective action against 
him during those long years he was in limbo. There really is no
plausible reason why LV would have any horcruxes left at the time
we meet Harry in the first book except DD's failings to deal with 
the matter. Convincing Slughorn to part with the crucial memory
surely would have been easier while LV was apparently gone 
from the scene for an indefinite time. A perfect DD would have 
done all that and left us without the central conflict of the series.
He had LV at his complete mercy for a decade and did very little
with the advantage. Goodness isn't boring but perfection is.
 
> Pippin:

> They are not going to repeal the statute of secrecy or
> implement the rules you suggest just because Dumbledore
> thinks it might be a good idea. He could  magic them into
> it, maybe.  But that is what you object to in his treatment of 
> Mrs. Cole, is it not?
> 

Ken:

No repeal of the statute is necessary and I have never proposed it. 
I never suggested that DD would have solved his ethical dilemma 
by acting unethically towards the officials of the WW either. DD may 
or may not have had an official MoM policy he could have used to 
accomplish his mission with Mrs. Cole. We simply do not know and
I rather doubt the author has thought much about the issue. We don't 
have to know to say that he acted unethically and possibly criminally 
in this situation. DD could have tried to convince Mrs Cole to release
Tom to Hogwarts' care without using a forged document or a bottle
of gin. He certainly could have obtained an offical document from
Hogwarts making the offer. Such a document did not have to 
mention anything about magic. If the attempt failed, it failed. DD 
could have reported the failure to the MoM and suggested that 
cooperation with the PM's office would be helpful in such cases.
They may or may not have taken his suggestion. It is entirely 
plausible that they would follow up on a good idea from a field
agent. This is common practice in many organizations. But if they
didn't a perfectly good DD would have left the matter in their hands
and refused to violate his personal ethics if asked.

DD did not *have* to act unethically, he *chose* to act unethically.
He did not force Mrs Cole to drink gin at wand point, true, but no
one forced *him* at wand point to forge the document or conjure 
the gin either. 

Ken