[HPforGrownups] Re: In defense of DD WAS musings on Dumbledore - Even Longer/Sirius and DD

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 158718

Julie:
> 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.

Magpie:
But nobody's asking him to know that Sirius was innocent.  They're pointing 
out that he assumes he's guilty based on circumstantial evidence and never 
tries to find out what happened.  Sirius is guilty until proven innocent, 
with nobody trying to prove him innocent.  Dumbledore, like it or not, 
actually *has* been set up with having, if definitely not God-like, 
particular insight when it comes to knowing people--what was his post-mortem 
of Sirius like back then, given the one he easily gave in OotP?

There's plenty of things Dumbledore doesn't know, and he makes mistakes with 
people, but he often actually is known for getting the "essence" of people 
in some instinctual way.  His wisdom and goodness is very often linked to 
seeing innocence.  If Harry was the way James was, and last we heard Ron was 
the Secret Keeper, wouldn't we all expect Dumbledore to find out what 
happened and not condemn Ron without talking to him?

Besides which, he's not even being asked to know Sirius' essential nature 
the way he better senses Snape's, Draco's, Tom's and Hagrid's.  There's just 
wondering why he doesn't demand a full investigation for one of his own 
Order members--and he's got over a decade to do it.  His not looking into it 
means that the real traitor went free and later brought Voldemort back to 
life.  It's necessary for the plot, but this is one case where Dumbledore's 
part of the problem.

-m