Why DD might not want Snape for DADA job

[annemehr]

No: HPFGUIDX 95240


> Carol wrote:
> > <snipped> I have no doubt whatever that Snape is a dangerous man,
> one whom Dumbledore wants on his own side, but he isn't a criminal and
> I very much doubt that DD would have hired him, much less trusted him
> > >with difficult missions outside the school, if he had ever
> performed one of the Unforgiveable Curses. (What did he do for Voldy?
> IMO he made complicated and possibly deadly potions.)
> 
> 
> Janet Anderson responded:
> I disagree with this for two reasons.
>  
> First, we already know that Dumbledore is not averse to working with 
> Mundungus Fletcher, who is not only a thief, but not even a reformed
> thief
<snip>
> 
> > Secondly, I think that Dumbledore's trust of Snape is the most
> powerful element in his reformation -- whatever the reasons (and
> wouldn't we all like to know) behind this mutual trust, I think it
> overcomes anything which took place before Snape changed sides. 
> Dumbledore probably knows quite a lot about what Snape did while he
> was a Death Eater.  I believe Snape probably knows, and has used, all
> three Unforgiveable Curses.
<snip>
> 
> Carol replied:
> I agree that Snape's loyalty to DD and DD's trust of Snape is a
> two-way street. But there's a huge difference between stealing
> silverware and other shady dealings and using any of the Unforgiveable
> Curses, especially AK, which is used solely to commit murder.

Annemehr:
There are a lot of things Snape could have done that were criminal,
without resorting to any of the Unforgivables.  However, I personally
would be very surprised if he'd never used any of them, so I'm
agreeing with Janet here.

Carol:
 If Snape
> has used even one of them and Dumbledore "forgives" him ("It's okay,
> Sevvie. You've reformed now"), the whole term Unforgiveable is
> meaningless.) I don't think Snape would or could have been forgiven so
> easily, or even at all, if he had performed one of those Curses.

Annemehr:
I know we've been having a big discussion about what exactly makes
them unforgivable and why, but since we don't really know yet, I don't
think Snape using Unforgivables and Dumbledore trusting Snape after
his change of sides are mutually exclusive. 

Carol:
> Also, the penalty for (successfully) performing even one of the
> Unforgiveable Curses is a life sentence to Azkaban. (AFAIK, the only
> exception is Karkaroff, who was released after a year or so in Azkaban
> for ratting on Rookwood.) IMO, Crouch Sr. would not have accepted
> Dumbledore's testimony in Snape's favor as sufficient grounds for
> releasing Snape if Snape had performed one or more of the Curses,
> especially AK. He sent his own son to prison for Crucioing the
> Longbottoms. Why would he have been more generous to Snape?

Annemehr:
Well, people don't always get the proper penalty, do they?  But Crouch
never had to release Snape, because Snape was never *in* Azkaban. 
Snape went straight from Voldemort to Dumbledore some time before LV's
first encounter with Harry, and anyway, if Snape had ever been in
Azkaban, Sirius would have known about it.  Karkaroff only told Crouch
Sr. that Snape was a DE, and Crouch Sr. never asked Karkaroff exactly
what criminal acts Snape may have performed.  Then Dumbledore vouched
that Snape had returned to "our side," and that was accepted.  IMO, we
have no way of knowing at all how much or little Snape may have done
for Voldemort.

Annemehr
who secretly hopes to find out the horrific things Snape did