= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
cultureulterior comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 10 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (641)
I'm assuming that the evidentiary standards are higher for conflicts between noble houses. I could also imagine a trial by combat alternative.
As much as I'd love it, there's no chance of a trial by combat. "If we did it your way, Kingslayer, you'd win. We're not doing it your way."
I'm getting the sense there isn't an evidentiary standard at all, not in any case. Each side argues their case and presents whatever evidence they like, and then the Wizengamot votes whatever the hell they feel like, nonwithstanding evidence to the contrary. Remember what Draco told Potter back at the train station: the Malfoys can get out of any accusations before the Wizengamot, like a non-noble accusing Draco of rape, simply because they've got the votes. Or the case with clearing Hagrid of blame: Quirrel said it would go ahead "because Lucius would have no reason to oppose it" (my words).
What, Lord (Harry) Potter against Lord Lucius Malfoy? What a fine trial by combat that would be.
No, they'd be allowed champions, and Dumbledore would win.
If it were that easy, Lucius couldn't contest Dumbledore politically. I suppose the Wizengamot would have to rule to adjudicate by combat, and they won't in an apparently clearcut murder attempt case.
Well, for underage wizards, they get a champion, obviously. Dumbledore or Quirrel, I'd assume.