[HPforGrownups] Draco and Dumbledore WAS: Re: Dumbledore Does Lie - Sort Of

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 159886

 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>

Magpie:
I am taking him at his word.:-)  At the end of the book he says he knows 
what Draco's been doing all year and had been trying to stop him--through 
Professor Snape. He does investigate--but not to find evidence to take Draco 
in, imo.

Pippin:
> 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.

Magpie:
I believe the Malfoy home was searched by Arthur because Harry told him 
Malfoy was up to something early in the year, wasn't it?  We know Dumbledore 
was on the case of Malfoy in general--we do not know that he was mostly 
looking for evidence of who was behind these acts and if he thinks it's 
Draco he still doesn't have evidence--when Harry suggests some clues 
Dumbledore seemed to always respond that Harry shouldn't bring him this sort 
of thing. At the end of the story he says he knows what Draco has been doing 
and had Snape on it.

> 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.

Magpie:
I honestly don't remember anything in HBP that indicated that the thrust of 
the Dumbledore/Malfoy storyline is Dumbledore not believing that Draco is 
doing anything and searching for evidence before he accused him or acted.  I 
thought Dumbledore's motivation with Malfoy was that he knew he was trying 
to kill him and was trying to protect him and ultimately get him to change 
sides, which he did.When Harry tried to tell him Malfoy was up to something 
I didn't get the feeling DD was disappointed Harry didn't consider Draco 
innocent until he had proof he was guilty. I thought he really did know more 
about it than Harry did.

Pippin:
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.

Magpie:
I honestly don't remember Dumbledore ever seeming annoyed by Harry's making 
accusations without evidence. He seemed to just be trying to get Harry to 
back off because he knew what was going on and didn't want Harry 
involved--and also wanted Harry to concentrate on the Horcrux hunt.  He 
wanted Snape to handle it not just because he was less of a loose cannon 
than Harry, but because Snape, like Dumbledore, was watching Draco to 
protect him and stop any murder attempts, not get evidence to bring him in.

I think he would have still wanted to concentrate on the Horcrux Hunt that 
final night if Harry had told him that the unknown person who whooped in the 
RoR also pushed Trelawney out of it.

Pippin:>
> 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.

Magpie:
That particular argument isn't actually mine.  I do think, though, that 
clearly there was a rather large risk of Draco's murdering someone.  Two 
people almost do get murdered, so it can't really be said to not be a risk 
at all.

Pippin:
> 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.

Magpie:
Right, but he almost killed Ron and Katie by accident, which I assume is 
what Alla means in considering him a danger.  I agree that protecting civil 
rights is very important--I'm definitely on the side of not imprisoning etc 
without evidence. I just don't see any indication that that's what's holding 
Dumbledore back in the book.  One of the main things that struck me as kind 
of hilariously missing in HBP was any major investigation.  The two 
almost-murders don't seem to be much interest to anybody. The only reference 
to an investigation we hear of besides Harry is Hagrid's claim that 
Dumbledore surely must be investigating and just not know who done it 
yet--which I think is ultimately proved to be inaccurate.  Since there's no 
official investigation, it seems like Dumbledore's already working around 
official law to me.

Pippin:>
> 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.

Magpie:
Oh--well there I do agree.  I think Dumbledore was trying to stop Draco 
through Snape--I agree he had good reason for not wanting to just lock him 
up, and those reasons do go back to his views on people choosing, and 
believing in personal freedom.  A form of that comes up on the Tower, I 
think, when Dumbledore says that Voldemort would assume that Dumbledore 
would actually kill Draco to protect himself or others, or to remove him as 
a threat.  It's the same idea, I think--Voldemort treats people like objects 
and Dumbledore wants to treat them like individual people. Voldemort remove 
enemies or force them into his service, Dumbledore tries to genuinely turn 
them.  I do see a danger in Dumbledore acting by just saying, "Oh, we all 
know this kid's a DE so I'm just going to lock him up."  I just agree with 
Alla that in not doing that Dumbledore knew that he was taking a serious 
risk, especially once Katie was hurt.  He tried to minimize the risk by 
getting Snape to watch Draco, but I think the fear on Snape's face at the 
Xmas party was a sign that that wasn't going to cover it.

-m