Some Dumbledore ranting/ some Sirius WAS: Re: Harry as godfather

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 179215

> > Alla:

> > Then if credible witness would have testified that it was child's 
> > parents wish to have Sirius as guardian, yes, it would have been 
> > legally significant all right. It would have been nice exception 
> from 
> > hearsay rules, etc.
> > 
> 
> a_svirn:
> Exactly. If it is an ancient wizading ceremony, like, say, handfast 
> marriages in real life they it is legal and binding, and no way 
out. 
> Assuming that you could produce witnesses, of course. And Harry was 
> names a godfather, not a guardian.  
> 
> Besides which, Black said clearly that he was "appointed", not 
named. 
> Appointed has somewhat more official ring to it.
> 
>  "Well... your parents appointed me your guardian," said Black 
> stiffly. "If anything happened to them..."
> 
> I'd say that the Potters didn't have the luxury of being carefree 
> where their son's welfare was concerned. After all, they did know 
the 
> risks. So it's safe to assume that they took necessary legal 
> precautions. (The alternative is that they were irresponsible 
fools, 
> but that's somehow doesn't look plausible.)

Magpie:
But there is something hilarious about it *not* being binding.

Lily and James, a couple who knows they're in danger, choose the one 
person in the world, their good friend, to look after their only son 
should anything happen to them, because that's who they trust would 
love him and raise him well.

And that means nothing-the school headmaster can override that no 
problem.

But 14 years later when a random guy writes Harry's name on a paper 
and enters him into a contest he's supposed to be legally barred from 
entering against his will...

That's a magical contract that can't be broken.  Dumbledore's hands 
are tied. Get in the ring, Harry, the dragon's waiting. 

-m