The Spying Game and the Shrieking Shack (Dumbledores evidence)

[bluesqueak]

No: HPFGUIDX 39695

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "marinafrants" <rusalka at i...> wrote:
<Snip> 
> But I'm afraid that the analysis of Dumbledore falls apart for me 
> here.
> 
> You're basically suggesting that Dumbledore knew Sirius didn't 
> betray the Potters, yet Dumbledore gave false evidence against him 
> and allowed him to go to Azkaban for life without a trial on the 
> basis of nothing more than a vague suspicion that the Secret-keeper 
> switch seemed kind of dodgy?  And, as a side effect, allowed the 
> Potters' real betrayer to be posthumously hailed as a hero?  That 
> would make Dumbledore way worse than Crouch, Sr., who at least 
> genuinely believed that Sirius was guilty.  It's out of character, 
> too: Dumbledore hates Dementors; there's no way he would hand a man 
> over to them for life for nothing more than a suspicion.
> 
> Marina
> rusalka at i...

Wow, this list is making me improve my writing skills [grin].

I thought I'd made it clear that Dumbledore undoubtedly did think 
Sirius Black was the Secret Keeper when he gave evidence against him, 
but rereading my post I find that I did leave it a little ambiguous.

So: at the time he gave evidence Dumbledore did believe that what he 
was saying was the truth; that Sirius Black was the Secret Keeper and 
thus the only person who could have betrayed the Potters [another 
pointer to 'what Dumbledore says isn't necessarily true'. It might be 
something he *thinks* is true...].

Dumbledore did not find out that Peter Pettigrew was the Secret 
Keeper until several years after Sirius Black was imprisoned. He 
can't say 'I believed Sirius was the Secret Keeper'; because it 
implies he believed it *until* he spoke to Sirius. That's too close 
to a real lie for Dumbledore, given that he has the more honest 
option of telling Harry that he "gave evidence".

The timing that leaves Dumbledore in the best light is that he didn't 
find out until Hagrid was released from Azkaban. Dumbledore would 
then only have had a matter of weeks to try and find out if the 
switch meant Black was really innocent before the Scabbers affair 
blew up and Black escaped anyway.

Remember, I'm arguing that this is a war of cross and double-cross; 
betrayal and counter-betrayal. Evidence of Black's innocence CANNOT 
be immediately taken at face value - what if those loyal Death Eaters 
in Azkaban had been lied to by Voldemort to protect Black? To leave 
Black in a situation where he could realistically return to 
Dumbledore...

Dumbledore is a good person. But he isn't stupid. And he's completely 
ruthless when he thinks it's necessary. Look at what he's put Harry 
through so far ;-)

Pip