Draco and Dumbledore WAS: Re: Dumbledore Does Lie - Sort Of

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 159867

> Magpie:
> Well, we never hear that anyone tries to track down who might or might not 
> have been near the mead or the necklace, which is handily explained by the 
> fact that Dumbledore and Snape both are said to know who did it and be 
> trying to protect him.  Trelawney doesn't know who pushed her out; Harry 
> assumes it's Draco based on the fact the whooping sounded more male than 
> female--if Draco was in the room later he might have just arrived.

Pippin:

Dumbledore said he would take all appropriate measures to investigate
anyone who might have had a hand in Katie's accident. I know it's rather
a novel suggestion, especially coming from me, but we could try taking
him  at his word. <g>

We know that Katie was questioned, because she said she didn't remember
anything. We know that McGonagall was sure Draco couldn't have gotten
the necklace into the castle. The Malfoy home was searched and Snape
was told to make investigations in Slytherin. Somebody was sure as
heck looking for evidence.


> >
> 
> Pippin:
> And if there weren't
> > such a right in the WW, then Umbridge could have had Harry imprisoned
> > on suspicion without even bothering to set up the dementor attack, and
> > Snape could have had Harry deprived of Quidditch in CoS for refusing to
> > explain why he was in that corridor.
> 
> Magpie:
> Yes, the WW has rights and not when the plot allows, but you haven't 
> convinced me that this right is in any way driving Dumbledore's actions in 
> the story, so that had Harry simply told Dumbledore that Trelawney was 
> ejected from the room by some unknown person, Dumbledore would have 
> immediately arrested Malfoy.


Pippin:
JKR could have chosen any issue to split Harry off from the Ministry and
emphasize his loyalty to Dumbledore. She chose civil rights. They drive
Dumbledore's actions and Harry's decision to be Dumbledore's man. 
As far as I can see, Dumbledore is very interested in evidence. What
he's not interested in is accusations made without it, and he's not
interested in having Harry ignore his assigned tasks to indulge his
obsession with Malfoy. Snape is in a far better position to keep
tabs on Malfoy and Draco isn't likely to try crucio-ing him for it.

I actually agree with you that Dumbledore's main objective is to
show Draco that he's not a killer. What I disagree with is that there
was such a great risk of Draco murdering someone that Dumbledore
would have been justified in depriving Draco of his civil rights. 
He knew that Draco would not kill if he had a choice, since he
didn't kill Harry when he had the chance. 

If Dumbledore showed by his actions that it's okay to imprison
without due process then he'd be protecting people from the
remote danger of  Draco at the cost of bringing the  Crouch-ists 
back to power, and quite frankly they scare me a lot more than 
Draco would  even if he had managed to kill somebody. How 
many innocent people were killed by Crouch's aurors? Lots, 
I take it.

I realize I am extrapolating a bit from the books, but so is Alla,
IMO. Dumbledore said he did try to stop Draco. Alla, if I understand
her correctly, doesn't really believe that and thinks he was bluffing
because if he was trying to stop Draco he should have put him 
into protective custody. I was explaining the reason I don't think
Dumbledore could do that -- it's one of the powers that he is
too noble to use.

Pippin