Snobby Snape?

[pippin_999]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at ...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth@> wrote:
> >
> > I think there was a bit more to it than that. The Ministry doesn't
> > seem to recognize emotional abuse as such, which means a witch
> > being emotionally abused can't use magic to defend herself or she
> > risks Azkaban for violating the statutes of secrecy for an
> > 'unprovoked' attack on a Muggle. 
> 
> To me that doesn't make sense. A Muggle has to be allowed to find out
> that his/her spouse is a wizard/witch, I mean how can it be required
> to be kept secret after they're married? So the wizarding spouse doing
> something to the Muggle spouse in private isn't revealing magic to
> someone who isn't allowed to know about it.
>

Pippin:
That Dudley already knew about magic wasn't used as a defense in
Harry's trial, so I don't think it matters. Apparently,  magic in the presence
of a Muggle is a crime whether the Muggle knows that it's magic
or not -- which makes sense if the goal is to restrict Muggle knowledge
of wizarding abilities so that Muggles will leave witches and wizards
alone and not demand help from them in solving their problems, as 
Hagrid said.

As I pointed out on TOL, when she hid her parents, Hermione did 
exactly what Salazar Slytherin was afraid Muggleborns would do: 
she violated wizarding law in the interest of Muggles. 

Pippin