Arthur Weasley & Imperius Curse (was Re: TBAY: Missing Theory)

[Veronica]

No: HPFGUIDX 45236

Richelle:

>>First, I agree with the above
mentioned post, based on Moody/Crouch's actions in the DADA class 
(calling on Neville for Cruciatus curse answer, drawing attention to 
Harry after AK, etc.) it is highly likely that Arthur was somewhere 
along the way a victim of the Imperius curse. Futhermore, Harry's 
parents were killed by AK, one of the unforgiveables; Neville's 
parents were driven insane by the Cruciatus curse, another of the 
unforgiveables; therefore it would make sense that someone's parents 
were in some way tortured by the third and final unforgiveable, the 
Imperius. <snip> And the only one mentioned in relation to this was
Arthur Weasley (and Ron, for being called on to give the answer).

But how? My personal opinion ties this in with the Weasley family's
absolute horror at the name "Voldemort" and Arthur's recollections of 
the dark mark. Could a DE (or Voldemort himself, for that matter) 
have put Arthur Weasley under an Imperius curse, had him kill one or 
more of his own children, leave the dark mark, and return to the DE's 
so they could laugh about it? There's definitely a missing Weasley or 
two in there (what family who loves having children so much goes 
what, six years without at least one?)>>


Veronica:

Yes, I love the symmetry (as Elkins described it) of that scene. It 
says so much about Moody!Crouch that he brings attention to Neville 
in regards to Cruciatus (which for some reason is always Crustaceous 
in my head), and Harry in regards to AK. It just adds a nice parallel 
that if Arthur had been enslaved at some point by the Imperius that 
he call on Ron.

In fact, I think Moody is the key to this whole theory. Why was it 
Arthur who had to help out Moody the morning the kids left for 
Hogwarts? Yes, it could just be that they are old friends, but my gut 
tells me there is something more here. Perhaps, as I think Elkins 
suggested (forgive me if it was someone else), it was Moody that 
investigated his case. I personally don't see Moody doing much 
investigating; I think perhaps he "caught" Arthur, or the person 
doing the spell, and broke the spell. Still, I think Moody was 
involved in clearing his name, thus the deep respect on Arthur's part.

It also makes sense that some families might be more vulnerable to 
the Imperius curse. After all children of alcoholics are more likely 
to be alcoholics. Perhaps there is a gene that some have that make 
them less able to fight off that curse. That would explain why Ron 
has a more difficult time with that curse in DADA class.

Another idea, perhaps part of the reason Arthur never advanced far in 
the MOM, apart from his love of all things Muggle, is that he is 
still partly ashamed of what he might have done--even though he 
wasn't conscious of his actions.

I also agree that this would explain the family's "absolute horror" 
at LV's name, thought I have not been able to determine if their 
terror is any more acute than that of others in the WW. Just not 
enough evidence so far. As for the infamous "Missing Weasley Child", 
I personally own no FEATHERBOAS, and flinch from the idea that Arthur 
killed his own child, Imperius Curse or no. BUT, perhaps, after 
Arthur freed himself of said curse, angry Death Eaters sought 
vengence by killing the "Missing Weasley Child." Thus Arthur could 
have come home to be greeted by the Dark Mark hovering above the 
Burrow.

Like I said, a lovely theory in its subtlety, and it plays well with 
a number of other theories, as well. I hope it soon earns its own 
ship!

Veronica