Sirius, Hagrid and Dumbledore and Harry - three men and a baby

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 179245

zgirnius:
It would have made all the difference on the issue of Peter, though.
If he was known to be a Death Eater and Rat Animagus, his ability to
do damage would have been greatly curtailed. And as I keep saying,
the decision to send Harry to the Dursleys was not irrevocable. If it
was irrevocable, Sirius would not have offered to take Harry in 
PoA. Apparently, this was *still* an option for an exonerated Sirius
to consider 12 years later. a day after Harry was placed, it ought to
have been even easier for Sirius, assuming he was not suspected of
betrayal.


Alla:

Well, of course it was an option to consider for Sirius in PoA. 
Apparently that is what he wanted to do and what he would have tried 
to do. Whether it would have been POSSIBLE for him to do so, now that 
is the question IMO, had Dumbledore decided that no, Harry does not 
need to have Sirius' as constant presence in his life.

And now I have another bizarre speculation to offer. Sirius offered 
to do so, when he was not still exonerated, was he not.

During that famous conversation with Sirius, does anybody have any 
doubt that Dumbledore used legilimency on him, since he used that on 
Harry quite routinely? It is not that I mind in this situation, quite 
the contrary, I thought it was long overdue. But what if Dumbledore 
saw what Sirius wanted to do with Harry, and while maybe his 
conscience would not let him to feed Sirius to dementors, he would 
decided to send Sirius far away  and keep very quiet with Fudge about 
the fact that man is innocent.


a_svirn:
I don't see what it has to do with any criteria for judging
characters. All Dana said (as far as I understand)is that Sirius
*had* already lost his guardianship by the time he went after
Pettigrew. Because Dumbledore *had* already decided to deny him the
said guardianship, and Dumbledore's word was final for the members of
the Order (for some reason not at all clear for me). So the cause and
effect chain in this case is quite the opposite to the one you
proposed. Sirius did not lost his guardianship through his
recklessness, on the contrary, he decided on this reckless course
because he had already lost his friends and the guardianship of his
godson and had virtually nothing else left to loose.:

Alla:

Right, that is how I understood Dana as well and this is how it reads 
to me too. I mean, Dumbledore already TOLD Hagrid not to give Harry 
to Sirius. I think if Dumbledore had the slightest inclination to 
find out the truth, he would have gone to GH himself, it is as simple 
as that to me.

As I said, I would love for Sirius to go to Dumbledore, but I do not 
see how that would have made the slightest difference, IMO of course.

Dumbledore's actions read to me as very set upon taking Harry from 
Sirius.  And indeed he went after Peter afterwards not before.

Surely, I would much prefer Sirius to scream on the top of his lungs 
to WW that he is innocent and continue to fight for Harry that way, 
but I indeed see no indication that he lost Harry because he went 
after Peter.

I see that he lost Harry BEFORE he went after Peter, IMO of course. 
Again, do I think Sirius bears his part of the blame for not figuring 
out who Peter was? Absolutely, but I blame Dumbledore a lot as well. 
One conversation it took for him to know that Sirius innocent. ONE 
conversation.

LOL, I still remember how shocked I was some time ago during our post 
HBP debates when a_svirn reminded me that Sirius was indeed appointed 
guardian. ( At some point in time I completely for got about it, and 
happily argued that Dumbledore placed Harry with Dursleys, because 
there was nobody else to place him with legally, HAHA)/

I do not want to subscribe to myself the prediction powers I never 
had. I WAS not seeing the extent of Dumbledore's manipulativeness, no 
way. Although the fact that he did not reach the level that some 
theories were giving him, helped , but still


But ever since I was reminded of that remark, I viewed Dumbledore's 
actions towards Harry and Sirius that night in quite dark light.

What saves Dumbledore for me is his love for Harry and his remorse, 
but there is no way I now can buy that when he placed that child with 
Dursleys he was thinking of anything else but his plan and saving 
this child for anything else, but to become his tool.


Carol:
I do agree that Black could not have won against Dumbledore in any
case, which makes the whole argument rather pointless, but I would
hope that he would be persuaded by the child's best interests rather
than his own.

Alla:

Well, yes, rather pointless, I agree. I also think that Sirius' 
definition of Harry's best interests would not have included to be 
raised by Dursleys just to be killed by Voldemort later on.
I would think that he would have indeed acted by child's best 
interests and did what his parents wanted to.
But that is rather pointless, since we agree that Dumbledore would 
have won no matter what.

Dana:
<SNIP>
I never said that DD should just hand over Harry and do nothing; what
I have been saying over and over again is that DD should have talked
to Sirius before placing a final judgment about his supposed guilt.
<HUGE SNIP>

Alla:

Yes, me too, me too. GO to GH yourself Dumbledore, you idiot, you 
live nearby, no?
If you are interested in truth, that is.
Even if he sent Hagrid to **investigate** I would be happier, but he 
already put the opinions of who is guilty and who is not. Sigh.