How come there were no witnesses to the monster when the chamber of secrets was first opened?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}






up vote
9
down vote

favorite













CoS Ch.13
In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one.




If there were witnesses to the attacks, then how come Hagrid was expelled? Even with Petrification, the students must have known that it was a basilisk that attacked them. It's hard to believe that a huge snake was able to attack several students and everyone ended up blaming a huge spider.










share|improve this question




















  • 4




    If they were petrified, it's not clear if they would remember it. Maybe they were revived at the end of the year again, as they were in the second book.
    – Wooden13
    Nov 17 at 18:52






  • 1




    Why must Petrified students have known what attacked them? Myrtle only saw a pair of eyes, then she was dead; the others must, like the Petrified students in 1992, have seen even less, perhaps just a reflection of a pair of eyes, and then been Petrified.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Nov 18 at 3:58










  • Isn't the cause of petrification-by-basilisk explicitly stated to be not seeing the basilisk's eyes clearly? Like, via reflection or something? My HP recollection is a bit rusty...
    – miltonaut
    Nov 18 at 14:06

















up vote
9
down vote

favorite













CoS Ch.13
In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one.




If there were witnesses to the attacks, then how come Hagrid was expelled? Even with Petrification, the students must have known that it was a basilisk that attacked them. It's hard to believe that a huge snake was able to attack several students and everyone ended up blaming a huge spider.










share|improve this question




















  • 4




    If they were petrified, it's not clear if they would remember it. Maybe they were revived at the end of the year again, as they were in the second book.
    – Wooden13
    Nov 17 at 18:52






  • 1




    Why must Petrified students have known what attacked them? Myrtle only saw a pair of eyes, then she was dead; the others must, like the Petrified students in 1992, have seen even less, perhaps just a reflection of a pair of eyes, and then been Petrified.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Nov 18 at 3:58










  • Isn't the cause of petrification-by-basilisk explicitly stated to be not seeing the basilisk's eyes clearly? Like, via reflection or something? My HP recollection is a bit rusty...
    – miltonaut
    Nov 18 at 14:06













up vote
9
down vote

favorite









up vote
9
down vote

favorite












CoS Ch.13
In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one.




If there were witnesses to the attacks, then how come Hagrid was expelled? Even with Petrification, the students must have known that it was a basilisk that attacked them. It's hard to believe that a huge snake was able to attack several students and everyone ended up blaming a huge spider.










share|improve this question
















CoS Ch.13
In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one.




If there were witnesses to the attacks, then how come Hagrid was expelled? Even with Petrification, the students must have known that it was a basilisk that attacked them. It's hard to believe that a huge snake was able to attack several students and everyone ended up blaming a huge spider.







harry-potter voldemort basilisk






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 17 at 18:26









Bellatrix

65.5k11297332




65.5k11297332










asked Nov 17 at 17:52









Neo Darwin

893




893








  • 4




    If they were petrified, it's not clear if they would remember it. Maybe they were revived at the end of the year again, as they were in the second book.
    – Wooden13
    Nov 17 at 18:52






  • 1




    Why must Petrified students have known what attacked them? Myrtle only saw a pair of eyes, then she was dead; the others must, like the Petrified students in 1992, have seen even less, perhaps just a reflection of a pair of eyes, and then been Petrified.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Nov 18 at 3:58










  • Isn't the cause of petrification-by-basilisk explicitly stated to be not seeing the basilisk's eyes clearly? Like, via reflection or something? My HP recollection is a bit rusty...
    – miltonaut
    Nov 18 at 14:06














  • 4




    If they were petrified, it's not clear if they would remember it. Maybe they were revived at the end of the year again, as they were in the second book.
    – Wooden13
    Nov 17 at 18:52






  • 1




    Why must Petrified students have known what attacked them? Myrtle only saw a pair of eyes, then she was dead; the others must, like the Petrified students in 1992, have seen even less, perhaps just a reflection of a pair of eyes, and then been Petrified.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Nov 18 at 3:58










  • Isn't the cause of petrification-by-basilisk explicitly stated to be not seeing the basilisk's eyes clearly? Like, via reflection or something? My HP recollection is a bit rusty...
    – miltonaut
    Nov 18 at 14:06








4




4




If they were petrified, it's not clear if they would remember it. Maybe they were revived at the end of the year again, as they were in the second book.
– Wooden13
Nov 17 at 18:52




If they were petrified, it's not clear if they would remember it. Maybe they were revived at the end of the year again, as they were in the second book.
– Wooden13
Nov 17 at 18:52




1




1




Why must Petrified students have known what attacked them? Myrtle only saw a pair of eyes, then she was dead; the others must, like the Petrified students in 1992, have seen even less, perhaps just a reflection of a pair of eyes, and then been Petrified.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 18 at 3:58




Why must Petrified students have known what attacked them? Myrtle only saw a pair of eyes, then she was dead; the others must, like the Petrified students in 1992, have seen even less, perhaps just a reflection of a pair of eyes, and then been Petrified.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 18 at 3:58












Isn't the cause of petrification-by-basilisk explicitly stated to be not seeing the basilisk's eyes clearly? Like, via reflection or something? My HP recollection is a bit rusty...
– miltonaut
Nov 18 at 14:06




Isn't the cause of petrification-by-basilisk explicitly stated to be not seeing the basilisk's eyes clearly? Like, via reflection or something? My HP recollection is a bit rusty...
– miltonaut
Nov 18 at 14:06










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
14
down vote













They may not have seen the creature that attacked them clearly.



The students who were attacked might not necessarily have a clear description of the creature that did it. Although Myrtle was attacked by the basilisk, she only remembered its yellow eyes - she didn’t remember what the creature that killed her looked like.




“So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



‘How?’ said Harry.



‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes.”
- Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 16 (The Chamber of Secrets)




Since she couldn’t identify why she died, it’s likely the other students couldn’t identify what attacked them, either, so wouldn’t be much help in determining what the real culprit was.






share|improve this answer




























    up vote
    6
    down vote













    Short answer: there weren't any witnesses to the giant snake, but there were witnesses to the giant spider.



    The important question to answer first is: who were these witnesses? The only two people we can be certain of are Tom Riddle, and Moaning Myrtle, but that gives us evidence enough:



    We know that Tom Riddle got Hagrid expelled for keeping Aragog around (and scapegoated him as Slytherin's heir), and that Myrtle saw:




    A pair of great big yellow eyes, watching me, over there.




    Spiders have eight eyes, but two of their eyes are bigger than the others.



    spider



    How is it possible to mistake a spider for a snake?



    Myrtle had been crying, and wore thick glasses. She had also just been murdered by the gaze of a magical beast that was capable of petrifying multiple students 5 decades later.



    The word of Myrtle alone would have been enough, but given that Riddle was a beloved student at Hogwarts, whose teachers were all said to be enamoured by, it's not surprising that it was easy to pin the blame on Hagrid. Additionally, it is said in The Chamber Of Secrets that the attacks stopped after Hagrid's expulsion, likely because Riddle was lying low.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Myrtle's quote may be what I remember from the movie adaption rather than the books.
      – Mikasa Pinata
      Nov 17 at 18:40






    • 2




      The question provides the quote that implies that there were other witnesses: "the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one" [said by Tom Riddle to Harry]
      – Shana Tar
      Nov 17 at 18:59


















    up vote
    4
    down vote













    We have only one evidence from an attacker in the books and that is from Myrtle:




    So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



    ‘How?’ said Harry.



    ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes. My whole body sort of seized up, and then I was floating away ...’




    Apparently she died so fast and abruptly that she wasn't able to analyze the circumstances. Probably is was the same case with others (we don't know how many there were, maybe just a couple) - their attention was naturally drawn to the big yellow eyes first so they couldn't catch the details.
    Could it be that an attacked person saw the snake from a sideback view first and only then met it's eyes? It could, but it just didn't happened. By chance they all met the Basilisk suddenly and straight eye-to-eye.






    share|improve this answer




























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      Consider when the attacks were.



      Firstly, during the Halloween feast. Later, late at night. After that, during class. After that, before a quidditch game.



      All of the attacks were timed when there wouldn't be people wandering around to spot things.



      The attacks were orchestrated by a skilled, powerful wizard who didn't want people to know the details of the attack. As Myrtle notes, the basilisk can be very sneaky, and they were aided by a powerful wizard.



      This was true in the past as well, during the first attacks.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.


















      • The question does not seem to be based on their being other witnesses; rather it seems to be assuming that the multiple students who were attacked would be the witnesses. In that case it wouldn't matter if they were attacked when no one else was around.
        – Alex
        Nov 17 at 23:30










      • The more people around the more chance of seeing something, and when people would be busy and distracted and not very attentive. If they were attacked when people were around there'd be more chance of them seeing something, and at those times of day they'd more attentive.
        – Nepene Nep
        Nov 18 at 16:55










      • True, but it seems that the question is primarily how there could not have been witnesses if the victims themselves would have to have witnessed the basilisk.
        – Alex
        Nov 18 at 17:41


















      up vote
      1
      down vote













      It is possible that Tom Riddle modified the memories of the other victims. Unlike the second time around when he was not on hand (being a mere memory from 50 years earlier), the first time the Chamber of Secrets was opened Riddle was in school. He would certainly have had the motivation to modify their memories, because if they could describe the attacks once they were revived, the trail would likely lead back to him. Modifying their memories would make it impossible for any of them to tell what really happened, and thus make it easier to frame Hagrid. In fact, if we're going with this theory, he could have even implanted false memories that would help implicate Hagrid, which would explain how Hagrid was convicted so easily (though in Riddle's conversation with Harry he implied that it was only his word against Hagrid's, i.e. there was no other corroborative testimony.)



      We know that he had the requisite level of magical skill at that point to perform such memory modifications, because we know from Dumbledore in Half-Blood Prince that that the previous summer he was already capable of implanting entirely false memories in Morfin Gaunt:




      In the summer of his sixteenth year, he left the orphanage to which he returned annually and set off to find his Gaunt relatives. And now, Harry, if you will stand ..."







      Then he returned to the Gaunt hovel, performed the complex bit of magic that would implant a false memory in his uncle's mind,







      share|improve this answer





















        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "186"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });














         

        draft saved


        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f198780%2fhow-come-there-were-no-witnesses-to-the-monster-when-the-chamber-of-secrets-was%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        14
        down vote













        They may not have seen the creature that attacked them clearly.



        The students who were attacked might not necessarily have a clear description of the creature that did it. Although Myrtle was attacked by the basilisk, she only remembered its yellow eyes - she didn’t remember what the creature that killed her looked like.




        “So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



        ‘How?’ said Harry.



        ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes.”
        - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 16 (The Chamber of Secrets)




        Since she couldn’t identify why she died, it’s likely the other students couldn’t identify what attacked them, either, so wouldn’t be much help in determining what the real culprit was.






        share|improve this answer

























          up vote
          14
          down vote













          They may not have seen the creature that attacked them clearly.



          The students who were attacked might not necessarily have a clear description of the creature that did it. Although Myrtle was attacked by the basilisk, she only remembered its yellow eyes - she didn’t remember what the creature that killed her looked like.




          “So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



          ‘How?’ said Harry.



          ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes.”
          - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 16 (The Chamber of Secrets)




          Since she couldn’t identify why she died, it’s likely the other students couldn’t identify what attacked them, either, so wouldn’t be much help in determining what the real culprit was.






          share|improve this answer























            up vote
            14
            down vote










            up vote
            14
            down vote









            They may not have seen the creature that attacked them clearly.



            The students who were attacked might not necessarily have a clear description of the creature that did it. Although Myrtle was attacked by the basilisk, she only remembered its yellow eyes - she didn’t remember what the creature that killed her looked like.




            “So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



            ‘How?’ said Harry.



            ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes.”
            - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 16 (The Chamber of Secrets)




            Since she couldn’t identify why she died, it’s likely the other students couldn’t identify what attacked them, either, so wouldn’t be much help in determining what the real culprit was.






            share|improve this answer












            They may not have seen the creature that attacked them clearly.



            The students who were attacked might not necessarily have a clear description of the creature that did it. Although Myrtle was attacked by the basilisk, she only remembered its yellow eyes - she didn’t remember what the creature that killed her looked like.




            “So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



            ‘How?’ said Harry.



            ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes.”
            - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 16 (The Chamber of Secrets)




            Since she couldn’t identify why she died, it’s likely the other students couldn’t identify what attacked them, either, so wouldn’t be much help in determining what the real culprit was.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Nov 17 at 18:27









            Bellatrix

            65.5k11297332




            65.5k11297332
























                up vote
                6
                down vote













                Short answer: there weren't any witnesses to the giant snake, but there were witnesses to the giant spider.



                The important question to answer first is: who were these witnesses? The only two people we can be certain of are Tom Riddle, and Moaning Myrtle, but that gives us evidence enough:



                We know that Tom Riddle got Hagrid expelled for keeping Aragog around (and scapegoated him as Slytherin's heir), and that Myrtle saw:




                A pair of great big yellow eyes, watching me, over there.




                Spiders have eight eyes, but two of their eyes are bigger than the others.



                spider



                How is it possible to mistake a spider for a snake?



                Myrtle had been crying, and wore thick glasses. She had also just been murdered by the gaze of a magical beast that was capable of petrifying multiple students 5 decades later.



                The word of Myrtle alone would have been enough, but given that Riddle was a beloved student at Hogwarts, whose teachers were all said to be enamoured by, it's not surprising that it was easy to pin the blame on Hagrid. Additionally, it is said in The Chamber Of Secrets that the attacks stopped after Hagrid's expulsion, likely because Riddle was lying low.






                share|improve this answer





















                • Myrtle's quote may be what I remember from the movie adaption rather than the books.
                  – Mikasa Pinata
                  Nov 17 at 18:40






                • 2




                  The question provides the quote that implies that there were other witnesses: "the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one" [said by Tom Riddle to Harry]
                  – Shana Tar
                  Nov 17 at 18:59















                up vote
                6
                down vote













                Short answer: there weren't any witnesses to the giant snake, but there were witnesses to the giant spider.



                The important question to answer first is: who were these witnesses? The only two people we can be certain of are Tom Riddle, and Moaning Myrtle, but that gives us evidence enough:



                We know that Tom Riddle got Hagrid expelled for keeping Aragog around (and scapegoated him as Slytherin's heir), and that Myrtle saw:




                A pair of great big yellow eyes, watching me, over there.




                Spiders have eight eyes, but two of their eyes are bigger than the others.



                spider



                How is it possible to mistake a spider for a snake?



                Myrtle had been crying, and wore thick glasses. She had also just been murdered by the gaze of a magical beast that was capable of petrifying multiple students 5 decades later.



                The word of Myrtle alone would have been enough, but given that Riddle was a beloved student at Hogwarts, whose teachers were all said to be enamoured by, it's not surprising that it was easy to pin the blame on Hagrid. Additionally, it is said in The Chamber Of Secrets that the attacks stopped after Hagrid's expulsion, likely because Riddle was lying low.






                share|improve this answer





















                • Myrtle's quote may be what I remember from the movie adaption rather than the books.
                  – Mikasa Pinata
                  Nov 17 at 18:40






                • 2




                  The question provides the quote that implies that there were other witnesses: "the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one" [said by Tom Riddle to Harry]
                  – Shana Tar
                  Nov 17 at 18:59













                up vote
                6
                down vote










                up vote
                6
                down vote









                Short answer: there weren't any witnesses to the giant snake, but there were witnesses to the giant spider.



                The important question to answer first is: who were these witnesses? The only two people we can be certain of are Tom Riddle, and Moaning Myrtle, but that gives us evidence enough:



                We know that Tom Riddle got Hagrid expelled for keeping Aragog around (and scapegoated him as Slytherin's heir), and that Myrtle saw:




                A pair of great big yellow eyes, watching me, over there.




                Spiders have eight eyes, but two of their eyes are bigger than the others.



                spider



                How is it possible to mistake a spider for a snake?



                Myrtle had been crying, and wore thick glasses. She had also just been murdered by the gaze of a magical beast that was capable of petrifying multiple students 5 decades later.



                The word of Myrtle alone would have been enough, but given that Riddle was a beloved student at Hogwarts, whose teachers were all said to be enamoured by, it's not surprising that it was easy to pin the blame on Hagrid. Additionally, it is said in The Chamber Of Secrets that the attacks stopped after Hagrid's expulsion, likely because Riddle was lying low.






                share|improve this answer












                Short answer: there weren't any witnesses to the giant snake, but there were witnesses to the giant spider.



                The important question to answer first is: who were these witnesses? The only two people we can be certain of are Tom Riddle, and Moaning Myrtle, but that gives us evidence enough:



                We know that Tom Riddle got Hagrid expelled for keeping Aragog around (and scapegoated him as Slytherin's heir), and that Myrtle saw:




                A pair of great big yellow eyes, watching me, over there.




                Spiders have eight eyes, but two of their eyes are bigger than the others.



                spider



                How is it possible to mistake a spider for a snake?



                Myrtle had been crying, and wore thick glasses. She had also just been murdered by the gaze of a magical beast that was capable of petrifying multiple students 5 decades later.



                The word of Myrtle alone would have been enough, but given that Riddle was a beloved student at Hogwarts, whose teachers were all said to be enamoured by, it's not surprising that it was easy to pin the blame on Hagrid. Additionally, it is said in The Chamber Of Secrets that the attacks stopped after Hagrid's expulsion, likely because Riddle was lying low.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Nov 17 at 18:38









                Mikasa Pinata

                5,06022276




                5,06022276












                • Myrtle's quote may be what I remember from the movie adaption rather than the books.
                  – Mikasa Pinata
                  Nov 17 at 18:40






                • 2




                  The question provides the quote that implies that there were other witnesses: "the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one" [said by Tom Riddle to Harry]
                  – Shana Tar
                  Nov 17 at 18:59


















                • Myrtle's quote may be what I remember from the movie adaption rather than the books.
                  – Mikasa Pinata
                  Nov 17 at 18:40






                • 2




                  The question provides the quote that implies that there were other witnesses: "the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one" [said by Tom Riddle to Harry]
                  – Shana Tar
                  Nov 17 at 18:59
















                Myrtle's quote may be what I remember from the movie adaption rather than the books.
                – Mikasa Pinata
                Nov 17 at 18:40




                Myrtle's quote may be what I remember from the movie adaption rather than the books.
                – Mikasa Pinata
                Nov 17 at 18:40




                2




                2




                The question provides the quote that implies that there were other witnesses: "the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one" [said by Tom Riddle to Harry]
                – Shana Tar
                Nov 17 at 18:59




                The question provides the quote that implies that there were other witnesses: "the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one" [said by Tom Riddle to Harry]
                – Shana Tar
                Nov 17 at 18:59










                up vote
                4
                down vote













                We have only one evidence from an attacker in the books and that is from Myrtle:




                So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



                ‘How?’ said Harry.



                ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes. My whole body sort of seized up, and then I was floating away ...’




                Apparently she died so fast and abruptly that she wasn't able to analyze the circumstances. Probably is was the same case with others (we don't know how many there were, maybe just a couple) - their attention was naturally drawn to the big yellow eyes first so they couldn't catch the details.
                Could it be that an attacked person saw the snake from a sideback view first and only then met it's eyes? It could, but it just didn't happened. By chance they all met the Basilisk suddenly and straight eye-to-eye.






                share|improve this answer

























                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote













                  We have only one evidence from an attacker in the books and that is from Myrtle:




                  So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



                  ‘How?’ said Harry.



                  ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes. My whole body sort of seized up, and then I was floating away ...’




                  Apparently she died so fast and abruptly that she wasn't able to analyze the circumstances. Probably is was the same case with others (we don't know how many there were, maybe just a couple) - their attention was naturally drawn to the big yellow eyes first so they couldn't catch the details.
                  Could it be that an attacked person saw the snake from a sideback view first and only then met it's eyes? It could, but it just didn't happened. By chance they all met the Basilisk suddenly and straight eye-to-eye.






                  share|improve this answer























                    up vote
                    4
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    4
                    down vote









                    We have only one evidence from an attacker in the books and that is from Myrtle:




                    So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



                    ‘How?’ said Harry.



                    ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes. My whole body sort of seized up, and then I was floating away ...’




                    Apparently she died so fast and abruptly that she wasn't able to analyze the circumstances. Probably is was the same case with others (we don't know how many there were, maybe just a couple) - their attention was naturally drawn to the big yellow eyes first so they couldn't catch the details.
                    Could it be that an attacked person saw the snake from a sideback view first and only then met it's eyes? It could, but it just didn't happened. By chance they all met the Basilisk suddenly and straight eye-to-eye.






                    share|improve this answer












                    We have only one evidence from an attacker in the books and that is from Myrtle:




                    So I unlocked the door, to tell him to go and use his own toilet, and then –’ Myrtle swelled importantly, her face shining, ‘I died.’



                    ‘How?’ said Harry.



                    ‘No idea,’ said Myrtle in hushed tones. ‘I just remember seeing a pair of great big yellow eyes. My whole body sort of seized up, and then I was floating away ...’




                    Apparently she died so fast and abruptly that she wasn't able to analyze the circumstances. Probably is was the same case with others (we don't know how many there were, maybe just a couple) - their attention was naturally drawn to the big yellow eyes first so they couldn't catch the details.
                    Could it be that an attacked person saw the snake from a sideback view first and only then met it's eyes? It could, but it just didn't happened. By chance they all met the Basilisk suddenly and straight eye-to-eye.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered Nov 17 at 18:28









                    Shana Tar

                    2,98021941




                    2,98021941






















                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        Consider when the attacks were.



                        Firstly, during the Halloween feast. Later, late at night. After that, during class. After that, before a quidditch game.



                        All of the attacks were timed when there wouldn't be people wandering around to spot things.



                        The attacks were orchestrated by a skilled, powerful wizard who didn't want people to know the details of the attack. As Myrtle notes, the basilisk can be very sneaky, and they were aided by a powerful wizard.



                        This was true in the past as well, during the first attacks.






                        share|improve this answer








                        New contributor




                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.


















                        • The question does not seem to be based on their being other witnesses; rather it seems to be assuming that the multiple students who were attacked would be the witnesses. In that case it wouldn't matter if they were attacked when no one else was around.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 17 at 23:30










                        • The more people around the more chance of seeing something, and when people would be busy and distracted and not very attentive. If they were attacked when people were around there'd be more chance of them seeing something, and at those times of day they'd more attentive.
                          – Nepene Nep
                          Nov 18 at 16:55










                        • True, but it seems that the question is primarily how there could not have been witnesses if the victims themselves would have to have witnessed the basilisk.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 18 at 17:41















                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        Consider when the attacks were.



                        Firstly, during the Halloween feast. Later, late at night. After that, during class. After that, before a quidditch game.



                        All of the attacks were timed when there wouldn't be people wandering around to spot things.



                        The attacks were orchestrated by a skilled, powerful wizard who didn't want people to know the details of the attack. As Myrtle notes, the basilisk can be very sneaky, and they were aided by a powerful wizard.



                        This was true in the past as well, during the first attacks.






                        share|improve this answer








                        New contributor




                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.


















                        • The question does not seem to be based on their being other witnesses; rather it seems to be assuming that the multiple students who were attacked would be the witnesses. In that case it wouldn't matter if they were attacked when no one else was around.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 17 at 23:30










                        • The more people around the more chance of seeing something, and when people would be busy and distracted and not very attentive. If they were attacked when people were around there'd be more chance of them seeing something, and at those times of day they'd more attentive.
                          – Nepene Nep
                          Nov 18 at 16:55










                        • True, but it seems that the question is primarily how there could not have been witnesses if the victims themselves would have to have witnessed the basilisk.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 18 at 17:41













                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote










                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote









                        Consider when the attacks were.



                        Firstly, during the Halloween feast. Later, late at night. After that, during class. After that, before a quidditch game.



                        All of the attacks were timed when there wouldn't be people wandering around to spot things.



                        The attacks were orchestrated by a skilled, powerful wizard who didn't want people to know the details of the attack. As Myrtle notes, the basilisk can be very sneaky, and they were aided by a powerful wizard.



                        This was true in the past as well, during the first attacks.






                        share|improve this answer








                        New contributor




                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                        Consider when the attacks were.



                        Firstly, during the Halloween feast. Later, late at night. After that, during class. After that, before a quidditch game.



                        All of the attacks were timed when there wouldn't be people wandering around to spot things.



                        The attacks were orchestrated by a skilled, powerful wizard who didn't want people to know the details of the attack. As Myrtle notes, the basilisk can be very sneaky, and they were aided by a powerful wizard.



                        This was true in the past as well, during the first attacks.







                        share|improve this answer








                        New contributor




                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                        share|improve this answer



                        share|improve this answer






                        New contributor




                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                        answered Nov 17 at 20:15









                        Nepene Nep

                        1112




                        1112




                        New contributor




                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.





                        New contributor





                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        Nepene Nep is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.












                        • The question does not seem to be based on their being other witnesses; rather it seems to be assuming that the multiple students who were attacked would be the witnesses. In that case it wouldn't matter if they were attacked when no one else was around.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 17 at 23:30










                        • The more people around the more chance of seeing something, and when people would be busy and distracted and not very attentive. If they were attacked when people were around there'd be more chance of them seeing something, and at those times of day they'd more attentive.
                          – Nepene Nep
                          Nov 18 at 16:55










                        • True, but it seems that the question is primarily how there could not have been witnesses if the victims themselves would have to have witnessed the basilisk.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 18 at 17:41


















                        • The question does not seem to be based on their being other witnesses; rather it seems to be assuming that the multiple students who were attacked would be the witnesses. In that case it wouldn't matter if they were attacked when no one else was around.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 17 at 23:30










                        • The more people around the more chance of seeing something, and when people would be busy and distracted and not very attentive. If they were attacked when people were around there'd be more chance of them seeing something, and at those times of day they'd more attentive.
                          – Nepene Nep
                          Nov 18 at 16:55










                        • True, but it seems that the question is primarily how there could not have been witnesses if the victims themselves would have to have witnessed the basilisk.
                          – Alex
                          Nov 18 at 17:41
















                        The question does not seem to be based on their being other witnesses; rather it seems to be assuming that the multiple students who were attacked would be the witnesses. In that case it wouldn't matter if they were attacked when no one else was around.
                        – Alex
                        Nov 17 at 23:30




                        The question does not seem to be based on their being other witnesses; rather it seems to be assuming that the multiple students who were attacked would be the witnesses. In that case it wouldn't matter if they were attacked when no one else was around.
                        – Alex
                        Nov 17 at 23:30












                        The more people around the more chance of seeing something, and when people would be busy and distracted and not very attentive. If they were attacked when people were around there'd be more chance of them seeing something, and at those times of day they'd more attentive.
                        – Nepene Nep
                        Nov 18 at 16:55




                        The more people around the more chance of seeing something, and when people would be busy and distracted and not very attentive. If they were attacked when people were around there'd be more chance of them seeing something, and at those times of day they'd more attentive.
                        – Nepene Nep
                        Nov 18 at 16:55












                        True, but it seems that the question is primarily how there could not have been witnesses if the victims themselves would have to have witnessed the basilisk.
                        – Alex
                        Nov 18 at 17:41




                        True, but it seems that the question is primarily how there could not have been witnesses if the victims themselves would have to have witnessed the basilisk.
                        – Alex
                        Nov 18 at 17:41










                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        It is possible that Tom Riddle modified the memories of the other victims. Unlike the second time around when he was not on hand (being a mere memory from 50 years earlier), the first time the Chamber of Secrets was opened Riddle was in school. He would certainly have had the motivation to modify their memories, because if they could describe the attacks once they were revived, the trail would likely lead back to him. Modifying their memories would make it impossible for any of them to tell what really happened, and thus make it easier to frame Hagrid. In fact, if we're going with this theory, he could have even implanted false memories that would help implicate Hagrid, which would explain how Hagrid was convicted so easily (though in Riddle's conversation with Harry he implied that it was only his word against Hagrid's, i.e. there was no other corroborative testimony.)



                        We know that he had the requisite level of magical skill at that point to perform such memory modifications, because we know from Dumbledore in Half-Blood Prince that that the previous summer he was already capable of implanting entirely false memories in Morfin Gaunt:




                        In the summer of his sixteenth year, he left the orphanage to which he returned annually and set off to find his Gaunt relatives. And now, Harry, if you will stand ..."







                        Then he returned to the Gaunt hovel, performed the complex bit of magic that would implant a false memory in his uncle's mind,







                        share|improve this answer

























                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote













                          It is possible that Tom Riddle modified the memories of the other victims. Unlike the second time around when he was not on hand (being a mere memory from 50 years earlier), the first time the Chamber of Secrets was opened Riddle was in school. He would certainly have had the motivation to modify their memories, because if they could describe the attacks once they were revived, the trail would likely lead back to him. Modifying their memories would make it impossible for any of them to tell what really happened, and thus make it easier to frame Hagrid. In fact, if we're going with this theory, he could have even implanted false memories that would help implicate Hagrid, which would explain how Hagrid was convicted so easily (though in Riddle's conversation with Harry he implied that it was only his word against Hagrid's, i.e. there was no other corroborative testimony.)



                          We know that he had the requisite level of magical skill at that point to perform such memory modifications, because we know from Dumbledore in Half-Blood Prince that that the previous summer he was already capable of implanting entirely false memories in Morfin Gaunt:




                          In the summer of his sixteenth year, he left the orphanage to which he returned annually and set off to find his Gaunt relatives. And now, Harry, if you will stand ..."







                          Then he returned to the Gaunt hovel, performed the complex bit of magic that would implant a false memory in his uncle's mind,







                          share|improve this answer























                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote









                            It is possible that Tom Riddle modified the memories of the other victims. Unlike the second time around when he was not on hand (being a mere memory from 50 years earlier), the first time the Chamber of Secrets was opened Riddle was in school. He would certainly have had the motivation to modify their memories, because if they could describe the attacks once they were revived, the trail would likely lead back to him. Modifying their memories would make it impossible for any of them to tell what really happened, and thus make it easier to frame Hagrid. In fact, if we're going with this theory, he could have even implanted false memories that would help implicate Hagrid, which would explain how Hagrid was convicted so easily (though in Riddle's conversation with Harry he implied that it was only his word against Hagrid's, i.e. there was no other corroborative testimony.)



                            We know that he had the requisite level of magical skill at that point to perform such memory modifications, because we know from Dumbledore in Half-Blood Prince that that the previous summer he was already capable of implanting entirely false memories in Morfin Gaunt:




                            In the summer of his sixteenth year, he left the orphanage to which he returned annually and set off to find his Gaunt relatives. And now, Harry, if you will stand ..."







                            Then he returned to the Gaunt hovel, performed the complex bit of magic that would implant a false memory in his uncle's mind,







                            share|improve this answer












                            It is possible that Tom Riddle modified the memories of the other victims. Unlike the second time around when he was not on hand (being a mere memory from 50 years earlier), the first time the Chamber of Secrets was opened Riddle was in school. He would certainly have had the motivation to modify their memories, because if they could describe the attacks once they were revived, the trail would likely lead back to him. Modifying their memories would make it impossible for any of them to tell what really happened, and thus make it easier to frame Hagrid. In fact, if we're going with this theory, he could have even implanted false memories that would help implicate Hagrid, which would explain how Hagrid was convicted so easily (though in Riddle's conversation with Harry he implied that it was only his word against Hagrid's, i.e. there was no other corroborative testimony.)



                            We know that he had the requisite level of magical skill at that point to perform such memory modifications, because we know from Dumbledore in Half-Blood Prince that that the previous summer he was already capable of implanting entirely false memories in Morfin Gaunt:




                            In the summer of his sixteenth year, he left the orphanage to which he returned annually and set off to find his Gaunt relatives. And now, Harry, if you will stand ..."







                            Then he returned to the Gaunt hovel, performed the complex bit of magic that would implant a false memory in his uncle's mind,








                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered Nov 18 at 0:24









                            Alex

                            10.6k12761




                            10.6k12761






























                                 

                                draft saved


                                draft discarded



















































                                 


                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f198780%2fhow-come-there-were-no-witnesses-to-the-monster-when-the-chamber-of-secrets-was%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                AnyDesk - Fatal Program Failure

                                How to calibrate 16:9 built-in touch-screen to a 4:3 resolution?

                                QoS: MAC-Priority for clients behind a repeater