Sirius, Sirus, and more Sirius (was: Petunia/Headmaster/LVatHogwarts/Mo...)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 158451

> Steve:
> 
> You seem determined to be contrary. We get your point,
> Sirius was appointed by Harry's parents as guardian, but
> that is not that. Nothing exists in a vacuum, 
> circumstances DO matter. Sirius was thought to be the
> Secret Keeper, the Secret was clearly betrayed, the left
> Sirius with suspicion pointing at him. <SNIP>

Alla:

Determined to be contrary to what? I understand that you are 
addressing a_svirn, but I absolutely don't see what point you are 
making with this sentence. Sorry.  

As to the nothing exists in the vacuum, well, that is true indeed 
and as I mentioned earlier there are certainly could be mitigating 
circumstances to Dumbledore's decision to disregard what Harry's 
parents wanted for their boy, if something happens to them.

And actually this is the very rare case where I would agree with 
Carol in thread about Sirius - certainly if Sirius was made the 
guardian orally, then Dumbledore may not have known about it and 
then his actions will look differently to me ( unless Carol was 
saying that Sirius was lying - then I'd like to express my 
disagreement here :))


So what I was saying? Oh, yes, the bottom line to me remains the 
same - Dumbledore better have better reasons than he **thought** 
that Sirius betrayed the Potters without any additional proof to 
that, otherwise he just looks way too manipulative to me.

I sincerely **hope** that Dumbledore knew something we don't know 
yet when he sent Hagrid to pick up Harry, I really really do.

Steve:
<SNIP>
> I'm sure you will point out that Sirius /was/ on the 
> scene to take Harry, and once again, I will point out 
> that Sirius cooperated with Hagrid taking Harry. He even
> assisted Hagrid by giving him his motorcycle. That 
> implies that Sirius is giving permission for Dumbledore
> to take control of Harry. Perhaps he only intended that
> to be temporary, and if Sirius hadn't got himself thrown
> in jail, he could have come out at a later date and tried
> to assert his right as designated guardian.

Alla:

My point is that  IMO Dumbledore was not supposed to send Hagrid 
there in the first place, you know. Whatever Sirius did on the scene 
is secondary, although sure I agree that he should have just taken 
the child and left instead of going after Peter. Easier said than 
done, of course considering the mood he was in after losing his two 
best friends, I suppose.

But why would dutiful member of the Order argue with great Albus 
Dumledore's decisions?

bboyminn:
<SNIP> 
>> Now if Dumbledore had jumped the gun in placing Harry 
> with the Dursley, and if Sirius name was cleared and he
> was not thrown in prison, then Sirius could have made a 
> claim for guardianship. But none of that happened. 

Alla:

Well, yes, of course - then the story would not have happened as we 
know it. I don't see though why we cannot analyse the actions of the 
characters in **real people** mode.


bboyminn:
> Under the CIRCUMSTANCE, which is the part that you seem 
> determined to overlook. Dumbledore did what he felt was 
> best, and he apparently did so with some degree of 
> cooperation and thereby implied permission from Sirius.

Alla:

Sirius agreed for Dumbledore to give child to Dursleys? Do you mind 
referring me to the quote? I don't mean him agreeing to release 
Harry to Dumbledore's care, but agreeing that Harry would stay with 
Dursleys.

I could have forgotten it, since I do that sometimes, so  do you 
mind refreshing my memory?
 
And **of course** Dumbledore did what he felt was best.  My 
questions is best for whom.
If as Julie said he did it for the best interests of the child, that 
is one story. You seem to be sure of that. I **want** to be sure of 
that, because despite my numerous problems with OOP Dumbledore I do 
not want to see him as manipulative bastard, but so far I am not 
sure **at all**

Steve:
<SNIP>
> In that moment, with no protest of his own innocent, with
> no offerred explanation, with likely statements implying
> his own guilt, and with evidence pointing at him, it 
> probably seemed very cut and dried to the Ministry.

Alla:

Yeah, Ministry is working that way, it is not surprising to me at 
all. I am just wondering why it seemed so cut and dry to Albus 
Dumbledore.

He is not in the habit as we know to just declare people guilty, in 
fact he gives them second and third chances.

I cannot help but wondering if someone lied to Dumbledore that 
Sirius was present with Voldemort in Godric Hollow and that what 
forced his hand to take Harry away from Sirius as soon as possible.

Maybe that was the same individual who used invisibility cloak? 
Hmmmm, curious speculation.


JMO,

Alla