The "Missing 24-hours" - another theory

[grey_wolf_c]

No: HPFGUIDX 42505

Richelle Votaw wrote:
> I've kept lots of babies, and I'd much rather keep a small infant
> that didn't know me than a 15 month old who didn't know me.  A 15
> month old (particularly a distressed 15 month old) is not easily
> comforted.  I would think that in Harry's situation (parents dead, 
> mum murdered in front of him, big bad guy in robe pointing wand at 
> him, bright light, house falling down, all in a matter of minutes) it
> would take an experienced caregiver to calm him.  With a 15 month old
> it's not simply a matter of crying himself to sleep.  A traumatized
> 15 month old could easily make himself physically ill in such a
> situation (and in situations far less traumatic for that matter).
> Someone with ample experience in caring for babies would be able to
> calm him much better than, say, a half-giant.  Also, come to think of 
> it, Mrs. Weasley did have several small children at home. Baby
> Ginny, Ron, who must've been about 19 months, a couple of 3 year olds
> and so on. There would definitely have been someone to get Harry's
> mind off his problems there. 

Yes, the Molly-took-care-of-Harry-for-a-day (THE FIRST MEMORY FRIEND) 
theory seems to be gaining strenght, doesn't it? It covers Hagrid's 
possible incompetence with children (which I'm not sure I believe, but 
I definetely agree that Molly is a better choice), and his comments 
after the bike ride.

> However, would the other kids remember
> him? Simple memory charm would work, I guess, but still, let me see. 
> The twins probably not at 3 they're a bit too young.  Percy would've
> been 5, so it's possible. But he doesn't spend a lot of time with our
> Harry anyway to tell him about it. He hasn't been around Bill and
> Charlie much either.  Well, now I'm rambling, so I'll shut up.
> 
> Richelle

Since I think it's agreed that Charlie is at least 6 yers older than 
Percy, it would indicate that the bigger boys were both at Hogwarts 
(Being school time and all), and everyone else were probably too young 
too remember. Percy *could* remember -although I don't remember much 
before I'm 6-8 years old- but it's possible that Molly took the twins 
and Percy to friend/family so they were not underfoot. Another 
possibility is that they remember Hagrid's visit, but by centering in 
him, they fail to remember that he was bringing a baby to their mother. 
A baby in the Weasley's lie is commonplace, while a semigiant is not. 
The second could have shadowed the ifrst in their undeveloped memories.

JOdel wrote:
> If Hagrid did NOT return to Hogwarts how did McGonagall get the 
> information of where Dumbledore was going to be that night out of
> him?

He could've used the fireplace at the Weasleys. After all, he crashed 
there for a day too, if he took Harry to be cared by the expert mother 
Molly is. He could've contacted McGonagall to explain his sudden 
vanishing, and to tell her she could find Dumbledore for more 
explanations at Privet Drive. Or he could've just sent an owl. He 
doesn't really tell her that much, just were to find Dumbledore. The 
other information she could've picked it up from the rumours that I 
assume were iniciated by the MoM officials that were to the scene of 
the crime (i.e. the ruined house at Godric's Hollow).

> At some time during the day Sirius Black shows up at Hogwarts. He was 
> too late at Godric's Hollow to witness the attack or to meet up with 
> Hagrid, but he hung around in his animagus form (which not even 
> Dumbledore knew about) to listen to what the Ministry investigators 
> had to say about events. At some point during the investigation 
> Dumbledore showed up with Ministry officials. That's how Sirius got 
> the news that Harry had survived and that Hagrid had taken him back 
> to Hogwarts. Dumbledore probably also mentioned his intention of 
> sending Harry to his mother's relatives.

Why the need to complicate things thus? Sirius tells Harry (and I doubt 
Sirius lied during that or any other conversation with Harry) that he 
arrived to *Godric's Hollow*, to the ruined house, in time to find 
Hagrid with the child. He tried to get the child, and when he didn't, 
he lent Hagrid his bike -I assume so Hagrid was safer while with the 
child, since he would have had to *walk* to Dumbledore if not- and, 
with no responsabilities as godfather hanging over him, Sirius went to 
hunt a rat.

> Sirius was the child's godfather, and he may have met Petunia Dursley 
> at some point during his and Lily's time at Hogwarts and wouldn't 
> have thought much of that idea. He raced off (on his motorcycle) to 
> Hagrid and made a valiant attempt to get Hagrid to turn Harry over to 
> him, instead. Hagrid is very, VERY good at stonewalling. Once Sirius 
> realized that he was not going to be able to "save" Harry from the 
> Dursleys, he decided that at least he would avenge James and Lily's 
> deaths. He "lent" Hagrid the motorcycle, hurried to Hogsmeade and
> disapperated.

I insist that I don't see the necessity of having Hagrid or Sirius go 
all the way to Hogwarts during that night, especially when canon 
indicates that they last met at Godric's Hollow since Hagrid left on 
the bike (I like to think that he left for the Weasleys, but that's 
open to interpretation), and Sirius went to hunt Peter down.

That said, I *have* liked a lot your explanation on why Sirius lent 
Hagrid his priced bike, which fits nicely in any theory.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf