Snape's the Rescuer - Really?/Justice to Snape

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 170771

> Lanval:
> Here's a society that, granted, in a state resembling martial law, 
> threw one of its citizens in prison (and a very bad sort of prison, 
> where he was expected to die) without a trial. Without a lawyer, 
> without due process. Years later that man escapes. There's s price 
> on his head, and the understanding is that this time there's going 
> to be no second chance for him to escape. He will have his soul 
> sucked from his body, and will be *worse than dead*. Not, as 
happens 
> in RL, perhaps killed in self defense while resisting arrest, or 
> anything similar.
> 
> No. It's get him, then execute him. Kill him as he is -- unarmed, 
> helpless. Even though he has not added to his list of crimes (which 
> got him a life sentence last time around), except that he managed 
to 
> embarrass the authorities by escaping.
> 
> Again, no trial, no hearing.
> 
> Does anyone here really believe JKR means for us to approve of this 
> sort of government?

zgirnius:
Of course not, but that is beside the point.

I have a problem with this argument. Of course Sirius should have had 
a trial before he received a life sentence in prison. And of course a 
new trial (or suitably named legal proceeding of which I am unaware) 
should be held to change that sentence based on his escape and later 
activities, which do include some crimes: breaking into Hogwarts 
twice, assaulting a portrait (not quite mere property damage in light 
of the WW's quirks), and assault on a Hogwarts student (he broke 
Ron's leg, let us not forget).

But if Snape honestly believes Sirius committed the original crimes 
for which he was imprisoned, what are his options? 

I mean, I live in the US and am a non-supporter of the death penalty. 
But if I knew the whereabouts of an escaped Death Row inmate I 
believed to be violent and dangerous, you can bet I would consider it 
my duty to report this fact to the authorities (and would admire 
someone more courageous than I who took more active steps to stop the 
fugitive, like catching him and turning him in). His later execution 
would be a thing of which I do not particularly approve, but if my 
other option is to leave the man free to possibly hurt more innocent 
people, what else am I supposed to do? The right way to express my 
views about the law is not to be lenient to a dangerous murderer, but 
to take actions that support reforms of the legal system to make it 
more in keeping with my views.

Alla:
> Gagging though is a different story. What **can**
> go wrong if Sirius will be talking, binded?

zgirnius:
PK, tying Sirius up makes sense if we grant Snape was concerned with 
the possibility the murderer would escape. But why are we supposing 
he made an independent choice to gag Sirius? We see him use a single 
spell on Lupin:

> PoA:
> BANG! Thin, snakelike cords burst from the end of Snape's wand and 
twisted themselves around Lupin's mouth, wrists, and ankles;

Zgirnius:
So it seems to me that Snape knows a tie-up-prisoners spell he is in 
the habit of using when he needs to, and that spell happens to have 
the effect of preventing the prisoner from speaking. If he is using 
the same spell, he would actually need to untie Sirius's mouth 
separately NOT to gag him.

Also, reading several posts on the supposed pointlessness of the 
gagging has got me thinking. Snape learned in the Shack that Sirius's 
Animagus form is something that can hope to battle a werewolf and 
win. The transformation does not require a wand. It seems muzzling 
such a beast is a reasonable precaution, very much in line with tying 
the wrists and ankles of a human prisoner.