After Umbridge gives the description of Mary Cattermole's wand, Mary nods. Umbridge then asks "Could you please tell us from which witch or wizard you took that wand?" Mary says she bought it, that it "chose" her, and continues to sob. Now, there are many things Mary could have said to this other than that rather weak argument, since it is already believed by the pure-bloods that "wands only choose witches or wizards." For example, she could have said "I walked into Ollivander's shop and purchased it, the memory is in my head right now, if anyone knows Legilimency they are free to go into my mind at this moment and see the memory." Or she could have said "Check Ollivander's records, my name will be down having purchased that wand." Or "Give me Veritaserum and then ask me if I stole the wand." All of these solutions would have provided evidence that she had not stolen the wand from a pure-blood. If Unbridge and Yaxley were so twisted that they would not allow for any of these methods of interrogation, then she could have said "I want a lawyer, and I refuse to answer any questions until I am legally represented. I have the right to an attorney." The lawyer would have come in and told them to either use the methods Mary has already suggested or set her free, because refusing to do something that would prove her innocence is unethical and unconstitutional. And yet this scene is written in such a childish format, and does not adequately represent a legal system backed by any kind of constitution. If there is no such constitution in the British wizarding world, and they refuse a proper attorney to Mary, she could then appeal to the wizarding UN and claim that her interrogators are not doing everything they can to prove her innocence. They claim she stole a wand and there are three foolproof methods (Legilimency, Ollivander's records, Veritaserum) that would prove she did not and yet they refuse to do any of that.
well the trauma she was going through.. you think when your are being interigrated and that too infront of dementors..and you know anytime you can be kissed by them.. you can think of such nice answers...
you just loose control on your mind at that time..ure almost driven mad in their presence..
i doubt she could say more... _________________
Name: Ruchika Pal
Wand :11", Holly, Unicorn
Patronous: Wolf
Nice try but i don't buy it. If she truly realized the gravity of her situation, which I am sure she did, she should have been going over her rights over and over again in her mind until she had them memorized. If she truly did not want to get thrown into Azkaban for no good reason, she should have come up with these methods of proving herself innocent days before her scheduled interrogation. Her husband should have helped her through this, as well. The fact is that this scene was written very childishly without much thought to standard legal conduct. Whether she is Muggle-born or not, they cannot deny her basic rights, because obviously they consider her a person, or else they would not be trying her like one.
how could she have known she'll be asked those particulatr questions..
i dont think umbridge advertisised that hey ure a mudblood..come here v'll give you the dementor's kiss..right..
till you dint enter the room...where all that was going on..how could you possibly know what the way of asking questions would be there;l..i doubt they expected such questions ortr presence of dementors inside... _________________
Name: Ruchika Pal
Wand :11", Holly, Unicorn
Patronous: Wolf
I'll tell you how she could have known, or perhaps had some inkling of, what the questions ould be. Remember the issue of The Daily Prophet that Lupin showed to the trio a couple chapters previously at Grimmauld Place? It clearly stated the Ministry's official position on Muggle-borns. It said that they believed Muggle-borns stole magic, stole wands. Mary Cattermole obviously knew this, and therefore should have expected the questions she was asked. And don't tell me she did not expect Dementors to be there at her interrogation, that's like saying you don't expect cops to be in the courtroom at a Muggle hearing or trial. Besides, all the Muggle-borns were being guarded by Dementors prior to their being taken into the room for questioning, so it seems logical to assume that if they're out here they're going to be in there. Feelings of despair and hopelessness should not stop you from sticking to your guns, if you really desire your own liberty.
But let's assume Mary did not read that Prophet article (highly unlikely, given her circumstances) and that she knew nothing of the Ministry's position. Why, then, could she have not hired a lawyer, to defend her if she was too distraught to do so herself? The right to an attorney is a basic right in any constitutionally-based legal system, and the fact that Muggle-borns were interrogated on a prosecutory basis with no form of defensive representation strikes me as odd, even with the Death Eaters in power. At some point would somebody not have been able to state their basic rights and demand they be fulfilled before the interrogation proceeded?
Remember that the CRIME itself is NOT being Muggle-born, since, as Lupin explains at Grimmauld Place, there would have been public rebellion had this been deemed criminal. The CRIME, as the Daily Prophet describes it, is Muggle-borns having stolen wands and magical power from wizards. Apparently this is deduced after research in the Department of Mysteries reveals that magic may only be passed within magical families. There are ways to disprove theft, particularly of an object such as a wand, and that is what Umbridge and Yaxley were accusing her of. So why are they interrogating her as if she has no rights? Nothing is proven on her yet. They have no leads on her other than the fact that she is Muggle-born, which is not the crime itself, but merely a grounds for interrogation.
Sorry habs, but I think that those are very poor arguements.
This one really took the cake for me:
Quote:
then she could have said "I want a lawyer, and I refuse to answer any questions until I am legally represented. I have the right to an attorney."
Wouldn't this be quite akin to a Jew demanding an attorney before Hitler? Honestly, if it were that simple, the a full out war woulld have never occurred. _________________
You have a very interesting theory there.
I think the scene is written very belivably, if you were sat in a court with a known death eater and a cow like umbridge, plus all those dementors, you really would'nt start being cocky about how she can be proven innocent.
You have to remember that no matter what she was going to say or do, they would have put her in askaban anyway, becausethey hated muggle borns, even if thats not what they say.
For example, she could have said "I walked into Ollivander's shop and purchased it, the memory is in my head right now, if anyone knows Legilimency they are free to go into my mind at this moment and see the memory." Or she could have said "Check Ollivander's records, my name will be down having purchased that wand."
That is the worst argument ever. The only way they could get the muggle-borns in trouble is if they could somehow prove that they stole the wand. Even if Mary said she bought the wand, that isn't allowed, because only witches and wizards are allowed to have wands, which they want to prove she isn't.
Quote:
Or "Give me Veritaserum and then ask me if I stole the wand." All of these solutions would have provided evidence that she had not stolen the wand from a pure-blood.
Veritaserum isn't fool-proof. If she gave the asnwrr that Umbridge doesn't want to hear, they'd accuse her of lying under the influence. Furthermore, they didn't want to prove she wasn't a muggle, they wanted to prove she was. So of course they're not going to use veritaserum or legilimancy, both of which aren't perfect methods, anyway.
Quote:
If Unbridge and Yaxley were so twisted that they would not allow for any of these methods of interrogation, then she could have said "I want a lawyer, and I refuse to answer any questions until I am legally represented. I have the right to an attorney." The lawyer would have come in and told them to either use the methods Mary has already suggested or set her free, because refusing to do something that would prove her innocence is unethical and unconstitutional.
Who has the right to what? This is the wizarding world, not the US. We have no idea what their rights are, exactly. And besides which, I doubt Umbridge or Yaxley cares what her right are. As far as they know, they are the final authority and their word overrules the witch's rights.
Quote:
And yet this scene is written in such a childish format, and does not adequately represent a legal system backed by any kind of constitution.
Right, that's because the DE's have taken over with Voldemort leading them. Hitler didn't give the Jews lawyers, either. The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay also aren't being given proper legal rights. This is what a country being led by a dictator or a government with faulty laws is like. JKR portrayed the corrupted legal system perfectly.
Quote:
If there is no such constitution in the British wizarding world, and they refuse a proper attorney to Mary, she could then appeal to the wizarding UN and claim that her interrogators are not doing everything they can to prove her innocence. They claim she stole a wand and there are three foolproof methods (Legilimency, Ollivander's records, Veritaserum) that would prove she did not and yet they refuse to do any of that.
And I'm sure Mary will do that right after she has the soul sucked out of her. _________________ Breathing is optional. Look, Bella, look.
You have to remember that no matter what she was going to say or do, they would have put her in askaban anyway, becausethey hated muggle borns, even if thats not what they say.
Ok, so then why is she in for questioning in the first place? If she had answered a questionnaire saying her parents were Muggles then why did authorities not just apprehend her at her home? Why are they all there at the Ministry going through an unnecessary process that no doubt costs time and tax dollars to undertake, if they are all going to be thrown in Azkaban anyway? I believe the Nazis simply came to the homes of known Jews and apprehended them when they were relocating the Jews, and they did not throw them all in jail, they killed a lot of them, put many more in concentration camps, etc. Besides, Umbridges main question was "Could you please tell us from which witch or wizard you took that wand?" Did ANY of the Muggle-borns actually give an answer to that question? No, I don't think so.
That is the worst argument ever. The only way they could get the muggle-borns in trouble is if they could somehow prove that they stole the wand. Even if Mary said she bought the wand, that isn't allowed, because only witches and wizards are allowed to have wands, which they want to prove she isn't.
It isn't allowed as of a few weeks before this scene takes place. So how can she be faulted for having "taken" a wand if, when she was 11, it was perfectly legal for a Muggle-born to buy a wand? That's like convicting someone of having sold marijuana in the 1920s, when it was legal, it's just stupid. If she had acquired the wand since the law was passed, then it would be illegal under the DE regime, but she clearly stated she bought it when she was 11.
And I'll play your little game here, maybe Mary is a bad example, maybe JK used her as an example of the worst of the worst treatment. But what about the other, perhaps braver, Muggle-borns, like Dirk Cresswell or someone? Surely he would have mustered up some witty responses to Umbridge, whose questions could easily be ripped into with some wit and brains. Surely Dirk and other Muggle-borns would have gone over their rights, whatever they may be, as well as some methods to prove their innocence, which, in the wizarding world, there are plenty of. By the way, I don't see how they could accuse her of "lying under the influence," because I was under the impression that Veritaserum stoppers one's ability to fib completely until its effects wear off. Is there something about the potion I don't know about?
Rules
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
Wouldn't this be quite akin to a Jew demanding an attorney before Hitler? Honestly, if it were that simple, the a full out war woulld have never occurred.
