[HPforGrownups] Harry's Wand Conjures the Dark Mark - Significance?

[Patty]

No: HPFGUIDX 51029


On the issue of the playback of Harry's wand:


Ed (moi) said:

One possibility:  If, as has been theorized around here lately, Harry is
made to defend himself against accusations of his dark tendencies, the fact 
that his wand conjured the Dark Mark might be used as evidence against him.
>


>To which Patty asked:
>
>Would it even be necessary to have the spells replayed from Harry's wand 
>since Barty Jr. had confessed, in front of four witnesses, that it was he 
>(Barty Jr.) who conjoured the Dark Mark?
>
>Patty
>
>

To which Ed merely replies:   it wouldn't be necessary in a WW where 
everybody believes everybody else.  But, if the future holds the Dumbledore 
"side" as opposed to the "Fudge" side, the witnesses might be split and only 
have their words to back them up.  The courtroom would be full of 
"Objection!  Hearsay!"

The wand replay would be considered more objective evidence.


Ed

To which Patty replies: It would be evidence of whose wand conjoured the Dark Mark, but not of the wizard behind the wand.


Patty


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]