I find it hard to believe that any jury would convict someone of even 2nd degree murder in the Cassius situation...

Let’s go through the events here - the ‘victim’ (Cassius) had just spent the last few minutes cutting the ‘murderer’s’ chest open & was just about to kill him when he was interrupted by a 3rd party (Butters). The victim then breaks the 3rd party’s nose & tries to kill him with the same knife. The murderer’s dog is able to intervene & kill the ‘victim’ while protecting its master.

There is no way to prove that Cassius wouldn’t have been able to get back to up & finish what he’d started - perhaps he would’ve been able to get the drop on Mouse (unlikely) or perhaps he would re-attempt this at a later date, given that’s exactly what Cassius was doing here (after the events of DM).

We only know that Harry gave the order to Mouse to kill Cassius because he expressly tells us so, why would he do this in a hypothetical court of law where he is being ‘accused’ of murder? Before Mouse managed to get his mouth around Cassius’ throat, Cassius was winning the fights against both Harry & Butters... Cassius was in better shape than either of them at that point & was planning on killing both if not for Mouse, who as a dog would be legally & morally venerated for protecting its owner, even if such an attack was fatal to the ‘victim’...

All of Harry’s ‘murders’ would probably count as justifiable homicides (especially if he could get a Sidhe lawyer) - including that of Corpsetaker in DB. Like Harry tells Sarissa in CD, the only 2 people he’s killed in cold blood were Susan & Lloyd Slate. Given that Susan’s body likely vanished after the Ramps were exterminated as a species, I doubt any mortal authority would be able to prove anything there (no body, almost impossible to prove the crime) & Lloyd Slate was murdered in the NN - well out of any mortal police’s jurisdiction & in full compliance/ being forced to do it by the ruler of that nation (Mab).

So I really don’t agree with the assessments of Harry being a ‘murderer’ according to American law. The legal definition of murder is just that, a legal definition - extenuating circumstances are always considered in such cases.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide

Fair enough although I’m unsure if JB was aware of this switch as well. My point in this thread is that Persephone dictated the climate in Ancient Greece & given Hades’ crown of mordite, I wonder what this tells us about the defense of the Outer Gates before the Norse.

Additionally the Marcone: Hades, both being lords of different Underworlds similarity is not exactly subtle, I wonder if JB is foreshadowing something. Marcone is sleeping with Demeter, where as Hades seemed to have a more antagonistic relationship with the Greek goddess who is Persephone’s mother.

@KurtinStGeorge
Sure, maybe Lea passively condones Justin’s behavior if she knows about it but it’s pretty clear that Justin was running his own game - whether it was against Outsiders is another issue entirely. Perhaps it was & that’s why Lea trusted him enough to raise Harry?

Perhaps Lea felt like 16 year old Harry could take on Justin because he had just vanquished an Outsider - WoJ is that she basically just gave him confidence? Unlikely, but I think Lea was herself curious about how Harry was able to achieve this which is why she specifically asked about this - perhaps she wanted to see the Starborn in action?

I do like the idea that Lea interfered in the duel to allow Harry to win - explaining the lack of a death curse from Justin (surprised him maybe?) - and that’s why she’s not too curious about that fight. It would also make sense in a Sidhe way that she then sends Elaine to Summer to balance out the fact that Winter has its own designs for the Starborn Harry.

@KurtinStGeorge & morriswalters
My only issue with this scenario is why Lea would view Justin as the right person to teach Harry? He was never known as a teacher - no other former apprentices are mentioned (aside from Elaine). Additionally there is strong evidence that he was walking on the left-hand path - witnessed by his keeping Bob & likely summoning HWWB to track Harry after his thralling attempt fails. Sure, Lea could’ve been wrong, but I believe Harry says in GS that Lea had always kept an eye over him even when he was younger, so wouldn’t she be keeping a very close eye on what all Justin is upto?

I think it much more likely that Justin & Simon (so Cowl) got some knowledge (perhaps because he & Maggie were ‘friendly’ or through a demon like Chauncey) that there were 2 Starborns in mundane orphanages around the country ripe for the plucking. His goal seems to have been to round them up, train them, emotionally manipulate them & then enthrall them into his personal service.

I’m also a little unsure of why Lea thinks Harry can go back & defeat Justin as a 16 year old.

I would say that it is definitely likely that Malcolm was murdered - this is why he is able to interact with Harry in his dreams occasionally. In DB, Malcolm specifically says that he is able to speak to Harry because “others have crossed the line”.

To me this says that Malcolm was likely killed by someone evil (like Denarian) - the smile on his face is reminiscent of Shiro. And he likely knows Uriel & maybe even works for him.

@Bad Alias
They can only monitor, not interfere so long as everyone is playing by the rules. There is free will after all for mortals (as we see when Uriel refuses to help Harry get Maggie Jr back or fix his broken back in Changes).

We know that Uriel can only interfere when someone from the other side has broken a rule - perhaps Anduriel did so in killing Maggie which allowed Uriel to act. Perhaps Lea/ Mab are able to act because Harry is Lea’s godson & she has a sworn duty to protect him.

Sending Harry to an orphanage is likely Lea or Mab’s doing since it strikes me as a little heartless from Uriel.

Saying that Harry is responsible for the death of Kirby is a bit like saying he is also responsible for HWWB killing the gas station attendant when Harry was 16....

I agree with @nadia, Mira & Bad Alias - Harry’s lack of sharing knowledge has not yet been the sole reason anyone dies in the series so far. In each of the deaths, there is definitely more culpability from the victims (less so in Kirby’s case granted) or the perpetrators. If anything, Harry’s withholding info is a smaller piece of the mosiac that explains the deaths of the 3 people being discussed, but it is in no way the sole or most important piece. 

That Harry feels it is does not make it so - as has been pointed out by Michael, Harry (like the WC) is sometimes arrogant to the point of idiocy. Just because Harry could have theoretically prevented something (with 20/20 hindsight), he feels like he should have done so & blames himself for not doing it. This is not rational....