Draco and Dumbledore LONG, beware
pippin_999
foxmoth at qnet.com
Mon Oct 23 21:26:01 UTC 2006
No: HPFGUIDX 160229
<snip examples of people who attempted to kill, see upthread>
> Alla:
> Sorry, but **no** in all of these cases there are not just
> extenuating circumstances, but as far as I remember - absence of the
> intent to kill - that is the **huge** difference to me.
<snip>
> Of course we can still uncover that in Sirius case there was intent
> to kill, but we do not know that with certainty, so your analogy does
> not work for me at all.
Pippin:
Splendid! Yes, until we have evidence of Sirius's intent we cannot
condemn him. I agree.
And how would Dumbledore be sure, at the time of the necklace,
that Draco had intent to kill? Snape's memory of Bella's hearsay?
Foreknowledge of the mead or the tower? Some evidence that we
don't know about but that Dumbledore could have found if he'd
looked harder? But if Dumbledore had openly searched for evidence,
Draco would have been killed or condemned to a miserable life
in hiding whether the evidence existed or not. Did the safety
of the other students justify that? Perhaps if Draco's intent was
indeed murderous. But how is Dumbledore to know?
Consider the difficulties Dumbledore would face with
Snape's allegation that Lupin was involved in the Prank.
If an open investigation had even started, Lupin would
have been condemned or forced into hiding whether he
intended to harm Snape or not. Did he deserve that?
Even I would have to say no, and I think
he was guilty!
Further, if Dumbledore was satisfied of Snape's intentions
in taking the vow, then he could not condemn Snape for it.
As for us, since we have no idea what Snape's intentions
were, we cannot condemn him at all, I guess. Of course
should it turn out that Snape's intentions were transparently
ignoble, I will of course bow to your greatness <g>.
Pippin
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive