Skip to main content

Why isn't memory admissible as evidence in the Harry Potter universe?


It seems to me that Harry could have saved himself a lot of grief if he had allowed people to see his memories (either through extraction or Occlumency). For instance:



  • He could have proved Lucius Malfoy placed the diary in Ginny's basket.

  • He could have proved Sirius's innocent (with the memory of Wormtail's confession).

  • Most importantly, he could have proven Voldemort was back.


Maybe it would have made for a less exciting story, but it sure would have made his life easier.




Answer



I'm going to say that canon is inconsistent when it comes to memories. There are instances of memories being used as evidence in the Harry Potter series.


In Chamber of Secrets, the diary Horcrux is actually a preserved memory of sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle; Dumbledore uses the remains of the diary Horcrux to establish that Voldemort is active again and attempting a comeback.



"Dumbledore's been driven out of this castle by the mere memory of me," [Tom Riddle] hissed. (emphasis J.K. Rowling, Chamber of Secrets -- Chapter 17)



and then:



"A clever plan," said Dumbledore in a level voice, still staring Mr. Malfoy straight in the eye. "Because if Harry here--" Mr. Malfoy shot Harry a swift, short look "--and his friend Ron hadn't discovered this book, why -- Ginny Weasley might have taken all the blame. No one would ever have been able to prove she hadn't acted of her own free will" . . . "Very fortunate the diary was discovered and Riddle's memories wiped from it. Who knows what the consequences might have been otherwise. . . ." (Chamber of Secrets -- Chapter 18)




Dumbledore was prepared to use the diary with its memories preserved as evidence toward Ginny Weasley's innocence. However, Harry destroyed the diary with the basilisk fang, effectively wiping all memories from its pages.


Throughout Half-Blood Prince, Dumbledore uses memories in the Pensieve as evidence to show Harry Tom Riddle's/Voldemort's actions, motivations, crimes, and plans.


In Half-Blood Prince Dumbledore recounts to Harry how Morphin Gaunt was falsely convicted of the murders of Tom Riddle Sr and Tom Riddle Sr's parents in the Riddle House. When the Ministry came to question Morphin Gaunt, he confessed to the murders on the spot, therefore not requiring either Veritaserum or Legilimency (magic that extracts memories). Dumbledore was able to procure a visit with Morphin Gaunt at Azkaban in the weeks before Morphin died; Half-Blood Prince says:



"But he had this real memory in him all the time? [Harry]


Yes, but it took a great deal of skilled Legilimency to coax it out of him," said Dumbledore, "and why should anyone delve further into Morphin's mind when he had already confessed to the crime? However, I was able to secure a visit to Morphin in the last weeks of his life, by which time I was attempting to discover as much as I could about Voldemort's past. I extracted this memory with difficulty. When I saw what it contained, I attempted to use it to secure Morfin's release from Azkaban. Before the Ministry reached their decision, however, Morphin had died." (Half-Blood Prince -- Chapter 17)



This is an example of a memory being used as evidence by the Ministry of Magic; although they had not reached a decision, they were considering it. It also implies that the Ministry of Magic uses both Legilimency and Veritaserum (another way of gaining memories, via potion) to collect evidence to be used in criminal proceedings.


In Order of the Phoenix, Snape says,




[Legilimency] is the ability to extract feelings and memories from another person's mind--" He then explains, "The mind is not a book to be opened at will and examined at leisure. Thoughts are not etched on the inside of skulls, to be perused by any invader. The mind is a complex and many-layered thing, Potter . . . or at least most minds are . . . " He smirked. "It is true that those who have mastered Legilimency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly. (Order of the Phoenix -- Chapter 24)



In Goblet of Fire, Dumbledore says,



"The Longbottoms were very popular. The attacks on them came after Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone thought they were safe. Those attacks caused a wave of fury such as I have never known. The Ministry was under great pressure to catch those who had done it. Unfortunately, the Longbottoms' evidence was -- given their condition -- none too reliable." (Goblet of Fire -- Chapter 30)



Yet, Barty Crouch Jr. was convicted of the torture of the Longbottoms and sentenced to life in Azkaban, on what appears to be testimony from the Longbottoms themselves, which would be their recounting of their torture presumably from memory.


Regarding the original question, as others have mentioned, Lucius Malfoy was not witnessed putting the diary into Ginny Weasley's cauldron, so there would be no memory of that incident by anyone other than Lucius himself. Perhaps Lucius's own memory, if it had been secured, could have been used as evidence against him at a criminal trial. And, yes, Harry could have quite possibly proved Sirius's innocence. Regarding the return of Voldemort, Cornelius Fudge was determined not to believe Harry, despite reasonable and overwhelming evidence that Voldemort was back. I believe he would have rejected a retrieved memory from Harry if one had been obtained. It wasn't until the end of book five that Fudge accepts Voldemort's return. Harry was not the only one to see Voldemort at the Ministry of Magic following the battle at the Department of Mysteries in Order of the Phoenix. Dumbledore dueled Voldemort and was aware of his return. Furthermore, Voldemort was witnessed at the Ministry in the atrium by Cornelius Fudge and an Auror named Williamson. As well, Order of the Phoenix indicates that there was a large group of people in the atrium at the time Voldemort was sighted.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir

the lord of the rings - Why is Gimli allowed to travel to Valinor?

Gimli was allowed to go to Valinor despite not being a ring bearer. Is this explained in detail or just with the one line "for his love for Galadriel"? Answer There's not much detail about this aside from what's said in Appendix A to Return of the King: We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Glóin's son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter. And Appendix B: Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf . And when that sh

Did the gatekeeper and the keymaster get intimate in Ghostbusters?

According to TVTropes ( usual warning, don't follow the link or you'll waste half your life in a twisty maze of content ): In Ghostbusters, it's strongly implied that Dana Barret, while possessed by Zuul the Gatekeeper, had sex with Louis Tully, who was possessed by Vinz Clortho the Keymaster (key, gate, get it?), in order to free Big Bad Gozer. In fact, a deleted scene from the movie has Venkman explicitly asking Dana if she and Louis "did it". I turned the quote into a spoiler since it contains really poor-taste joke, but the gist of it is that it's implied that as part of freeing Gozer , the two characters possessed by the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper had sex. Is there any canon confirmation or denial of this theory (canon meaning something from creators' interviews, DVD commentary, script, delete scenes etc...)? Answer The Richard Mueller novelisation and both versions of the script strongly suggest that they didn't have sex (or at the very l

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed.