So Why didn't Dumbledore Punish Sirius?

[marinafrants <rusalka@ix.netcom.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 48532

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, srsiriusblack at a... wrote:
> Me:
> I just thought of this.... what if the actuality of what happened 
was 
> not brought to Dumbledore's attention until *after* everyone had 
> graduated. Dumbledore says that he knew James during his time at 
> Hogwarts and after.. ( also I assume he knew all of the Marauders 
> during these times)
> 
> Snape, I think, since uninjured by the prank, really, may have not 
> gone straight to Dumbledore with the information... for a number 
of 
> reasons..
> A) Which is more powerful- To have something to hold over someone
> (s)'s head 
> or 
> B) To quickly use what you know to get the person(s) in trouble...

I don't think that works.  Lupin specifically says that Snape was 
forbidden by Dumbledore to tell anybody about the Prank (PoA, US 
Paperback, pg 357), and after Snape was out of school, Dumbledore 
would not have been in a position to tell him what to do. Even 
Lupin's phrasing: "He was forbidden by Dumbledore to tell anybody, 
but from that time on he knew what I was" implies that he was 
forbidden at the time it happened. Also, once Remus himself was out 
of school, the information would lose its power -- Remus would no 
longer have to worry about getting kicked out of school if everyone 
learned he's a werewolf.  I suppose Snape could've tried to get 
Remus punished for the "attack," but it would be his word against 
the Marauders, with no physical evidence, and no satisfactory answer 
to the obvious question of "So why didn't you complain at the 
time?"  Right after the prank, Snape could've at least presented any 
injuries he had as evidence.

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com