Guardianship, agreements, and public protection

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 158434

BAW:
Sirius was, at that time, a wanted criminal. He was believed to
have betrayed James & Lily to Voldemort and to have killed Peter
Pettigrew. WE know from hindsight that he was framed, but nobody
knew that at the time. I think that, notwithstanding the Potter's
Will, nobody would have considered Sirius as a proper guardian.

a_svirn:
No, he wasn't at the time a wanted criminal. He was proclaimed a 
criminal only after his showdown with Pettigrew, and "wanted" 
criminal twelve long years later, after he broke from Azkaban. 

BAW:
> If his parents had put him down for Hogwarts before they died,
> his guardians should honor that wish.

a_svirn:
As Carol pointed out upthread it was magical quill that put Harry's 
name down for Hogwarts. And even if it didn't, how should the 
Dursleys know about their wishes? It's not like they were privileged 
to read their Will. 

And in any case I don't see how come the Dursleys, who genuinely 
despise the Potters and the WW, must honour their wishes while for 
Dumbledore, who was their mentor and comrade-in-arms, it's perfectly 
OK to disregard them? Talk about double standards. 

BAW:
We, of course, don't know what was in the letter, but if one of
the conditions was that he was to be sent to Hogwarts at the proper
time--which is not unlikely--well, we know how the Wizardling World
feels about vows and contracts.

a_svirn:
But the Dursleys do not belong to the WW. And whatever they owe 
Harry, they owe Dumbledore nothing. 


> a_svirn:
> And how does all this apply to Harry's situation? Did
> Dumbledore wait for the Potters will to be probated?
> Is Hagrid a magical equivalent of a police officer?
>

bboyminn:

You seem determined to be contrary.

a_svirn:
You seem to like making personal remarks like that. 

bboyminn:
You ask if Dumbledore waited for the Potter's Will to be
probated? Do you really think that would be resolved is
five or ten minutes after the crime? Of course, not.
Harry needed care immediately.

a_svirn:
So? Taking care of Harry until things are sorted out and giving him 
right away to the Dursleys is two different kettles of fish. 

bboyminn:
Dumbledore took on the
role of that care and he did so with the implied
permission of Sirius.

a_svirn:
Not true. He simply told Hagrid to bring Harry. 

bboyminn:
Further, no one was going to
immediately turn Harry over to Sirius when Sirius was a
suspect in the killing of the Potters.

a_svirn:
Except that he wasn't. Dumbledore was the only one who might have 
any suspicions. 

bboyminn:
On a tangental note, as discussed in other parts of this
and other threads, people wonder how Sirius could have
been thrown in prison without an investigation. The answer
is simple, he didn't defend himself, he didn't protest is
arrest or his being sent to prison. He was so stunned with
shock and racked with guilt that he didn't claim he was
innocent. He didn't explain what happened. He may have
even made statements that implied his guilt.

a_svirn:
So it's his own fault that he wasn't given a fair trial?