Dumbledore Does Lie - Sort Of - Trelawney Attacked

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 159228

bboy_mn:
> > Now that that is cleared up, I have to point out that we
> > the reader know it was Draco, Harry-The Suspicious knows
> > it was Draco, but there is no proof it was Draco. 
> > Trelawney didn't see her attacker. Still, Dumbledore may
> > have had enough background information or information
> > unknown by others, that he could have reached the same
> > conclusion as Harry, and as suggested, used that to 
> > confront Draco; thereby preventing the attack and perhaps
> > drawing Draco into protective custody  before things went
> > as far as they did. 

Pippin:
Harry  overheard the attack and if Dumbledore had returned
with him they could have trapped  Draco in the RoR. It would
be difficult for him to maintain that someone else had been
in there and attacked Trelawney, especially if Draco were
found with the hand of glory and the darkness powder on 
him.

> Alla:
> 
> Sorry Steve for confusing you. Yes, this is how I interpreted 
> Pippin's  original point too. Sorry for mudding the waters, but what 
> I was trying to say  is that judging by Dumbledore's general 
> reaction to Draco's activities so far I see no definite proof that 
> this would have triggered different reaction from Dumbledore.

Pippin:

What I meant by "Dumbledore moved on it" was that he offered
protection to Draco. Why didn't he offer it sooner? I think we
saw why in the scene with Snape; Draco denied that he needed
help and wouldn't have agreed to it. If Dumbledore had accused
him of being involved in the attacks on Katy and Ron, Draco,
like his father in CoS, would have said, "Prove it! 

But AFAWK Dumbledore wouldn't have been able to, just as he 
couldn't prove Lucius was behind the attacks in CoS, even though 
he was  sure that Lucius was involved. 

You would think if there was supposed to be direct evidence of 
Draco's involvement in either previous attack, JKR would have 
had Dumbledore  tell us it existed. Then we could all wonder
what it was. But AFAWK, no such evidence existed. None. 

Up till the attack on Trelawney, canon does not present us with 
even one piece of firsthand evidence  that Draco is doing anything 
dangerous or illegal associated with the DE's. It's all hearsay
and circumstantial.

 On what basis should Dumbledore have put Draco in protective 
custody? Talking big like Stan Shunpike? Being known to have
monstrous sympathies, like Hagrid? Laughing while under suspicion
and not acting like an innocent man, like Sirius Black?  

To say that Dumbledore did have other evidence and didn't
use it  would make these parallels, which line up
far too conveniently to be coincidental, completely meaningless.

Pippin