In defense of DD WAS musings on Dumbledore - Even Longer

[James Lyon]

No: HPFGUIDX 158707

Tonks
 >Lets say that a Godparent is a legal guardian. If that be the case,
 >I think the fact that Hagrid had the kid and the guardian's
 >motorcycle that Sirius must have somehow given his consent to Harry
 >being with his aunt. I know that this isn't canon either, but the
 >bike and Hagrid and the kid all together is. I think that is as good
 >a piece of evidence as any. Instead of blaming DD, maybe you should
 >blame Sirius.

James:
Tonks_op should be quite aware of DD's inability to consider other's  
feelings.

Sirius gave Harry to Hagrid to take to DD. At the time, Sirius didn't  
know how unbelievably manipulative and uncaring DD was and he wanted  
to get Peter. I am sure if the name Dursley had come up, Sirius would  
have fought Hagrid to get Harry back.

Remember: the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and all DD  
has are good intentions. Those intentions, however, keep leading to  
bad results. A child who tortures other kids is allowed free access  
to a whole school of them and Tom is set in his path to DarkLordhood.  
DD doesn't try to get Sirius re-tried, he lets him rot in Grimmauld  
Place, knowing that Sirius is a man of action and not contemplative  
thought. Also, DD sets himself up as a near god-like figure whose  
word is to be obeyed and acted on. Canon is clear that he is not  
concerned with other's feelings. You say, where? He is always caring.  
Wrong. Consider: He continues to call Tonks "Nymphadora" even though  
she requests several times not to be called by her first name. The  
man just has to ensure that he is the authority figure and everyone  
else is no more than a child.

James