In defense of DD WAS musings on Dumbledore - Even Longer/Sirius and DD

[julie]

No: HPFGUIDX 158706


>
> > Julie:
>  Especially this idea that it was Dumbledore's responsibility 
> > to keep Sirius out of Azkaban in the first place. WHY is this 
> > Dumbledore's responsibility?? <snip> Dumbledore isn't judge, jury 
> or executioner in this matter, he's 
> > nothing more than one witness who told the only truth he knew, 
> that 
> > James had told him Sirius was the secret-keeper. But the fact 
that 
> he 
> > didn't go beyond that, didn't step out of his own position as 
> > Headmaster at Hogwarts and take over the WW court system and take 
> on 
> > the case of one student out of thousands he's watched pass 
through 
> > Hogwarts who was to all appearances very guilty of the crime, 
> makes 
> > *Dumbledore* the guilty one.
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I would feel much better if Dumbledore just did not get involved 
> **at all**, you know. But he made himself involved IMO so Yes, it 
is 
> his responsibility as far as I am concerned to investigate further.
> 
> He did not just step back and watched the events unfold, he took it 
> upon himself to send Hagrid to get Harry, moreover he took it upon 
> himself ( unless you would argue that Fudge somehow forced him to 
> come forward) to step up with the **evidence** that Sirius was a 
> Secret Keeper, and just as Sherry said I am not sure I remember 
> stellar cannon support that James told him about Sirius being 
secret 
> keeper ( even if he did, I think DD had to investigate further, but 
> I am not sure that he did).
> 
> Dumbledore took it upon himself to help condemn Sirius as far as I 
> am concerned and before he did that, he IMO should have been 
> absolutely sure that the evidence he had was a strong one.

Julie:
What's stronger evidence than Dumbledore knowing Sirius was the
secret-keeper? *ONLY* the secret-keeper can reveal the location
of James and Lily. My real argument is again WHY should Dumbledore
even suspect that something other than what seems to be the case
from all evidence? He should suspect that James suddenly changed the
secret-keeper in mid-stream? *And* he should suspect that James
picked someone else close to him who *would* betray him, i.e., 
he should suspect Peter or Lupin are more likely betrayers than
Sirius? Why, if no one else suspected that, least of all Sirius,
James, and Lily who felt secure naming Peter the secret-keeper.

It just seems to me we're expecting Dumbledore to have some sort
of God-like precognition. Dumbledore gave the evidence he had on
Sirius, and didn't investigate further because not only was the
evidence quite damning, I suspect Dumbledore also *believed* that
Sirius had done the act. Again, people who knew Sirius much better
than Dumbledore--like McGonagall and Lupin--accepted it. So WHY
should Dumbledore intuit something those people didn't? Why should
he be any different, and question what seemed to be a closed case?

As for the mention of Dumbledore keeping Snape out of Azkaban, it
is likely Dumbledore knew much more about Snape's activities than
he did about Sirius's. Snape approached Dumbledore after all. It's
all just a suspicion, but I'm certain Dumbledore *knew* Snape much 
better even as a child/teenager/young adult than he knew Sirius.
I have a feeling we'll learn more about that in Book 7 ;-) But
the bottom line is that the Sirius and Snape situations don't
appear to be analagous, even with what small amount of information
we now have. 

Alla:
> Ooops, it was not. I do not hold Dumbledore primarily responsible 
> for Sirius' imprisonment, of course not, but do I think he bears 
> some responsibility? Um, yes.
> 
> If Sirius was just nobody imprisoned by the Ministry, Dumbledore 
> sure did not behave like it from the side of condemning him IMO.

Julie:
Dumbledore gave evidence. He could have lied about what he knew
I suppose, but again, he had no reason to suspect the evidence was
anything but genuinely damning. It was the evidence that condemned
Sirius, not Dumbledore. 

BTW, it was McGonagall who said James told Dumbledore that Sirius
was his secret-keeper. I can't think of any reason for McGonagall
to lie, or for Dumbledore to lie--either to McGonagall or at the
trial--so I'm taking it as fact that Dumbledore knew Sirius was
the secret-keeper. I suppose one doesn't have to take it as fact,
and can assume Dumbledore lied just to get Sirius put away, but
then we're straying into nothing more than ESE!Dumbledore and I
don't see it at all. Some seem to see it though ;-)
 
> > Magpie:
> <SNIP>
>  I don't think people--at 
> > least I don't--consider Dumbledore to be the person who put 
Sirius 
> in jail 
> > any more than he's the one abusing Harry rather than Vernon.  But 
> I think 
> > it's valid to look at this kind of inaction as a part of his 
> character. 
> > Sirius was a member of Dumbledore's Order, Harry's godfather, an 
> important 
> > part of the family in the Prophecy, yet when he's in trouble he 
> becomes, by
> > your own description, nobody.  Just some random student he 
doesn't 
> know or 
> > have any responsibility to--so again, it's not really his mistake.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Yes, precisely. Dumbledore is not Barty Crouch, Dumbledore did not 
> put Sirius in prison, but Dumbledore did not do what in my book he 
> should have done and that means to me that he should bear his part 
> of responsibility, which is smaller than Barty of course.

Julie:
Again, I don't really agree. Someone James and Lily trusted 
completely betrayed them. There's never been a question that 
Voldemort could have gotten AROUND the secret-keeper thing to
get to James and Lily. It's also never been a choice of just
*anyone*, but of one very select few highly trusted persons who
betrayed the side of Good. All evidence pointed to that highly
trusted person being Sirius. McGonagall and Lupin and everyone
else in the Order who knew Sirius apparently accepted that
said evidence as fact. We know of no one who argued against it,
or who had any actual belief in Sirius's innocence coupled with
a suspicion that one of the other very few select people could
have taken his place. It's a completely unlikely scenario really.
So why would Dumbledore have any suspicion the situation was
anything but what it seemed to be? Unless he possessed God-like
ominscience of course, which he doesn't.

Julie