Were Dumbledore & Snape involved in James & Lilly's death+ LV downfall?

[Jim Ferer]

No: HPFGUIDX 90067

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ilubom" <irina_l_ at h...> wrote:
> Greetings everyone,

Ilubom:
> I was thinking about DD's explanation to Harry about why LV decided 
> to try to kill him as a baby - ie that Trelawney's prophesy was 
> partly overheard by a Deatheater, and the story has some gaping 
> holes in it.

It was overheard; there's nothing about the eavesdropper being a 
Death Eater.
> 
> DD was there for a basic job interview of ST, he says himself that 
> he did not expect to hear anything interesting that night. So why 
> would anyone bother eavesdropping on the conversation?

If I was LV, any time there was an opportunity to overhear Dumbledore 
at any time I'd take it.  That's basic intelligence gathering.  There 
aren't too many opportunities to catch DD outside the Hogwarts 
grounds, and LV should take every one if he can.  Every low-life in 
the WW probably knows there's money, no questions asked, in reporting 
anything DD says. Recall that only DD knows he's going to a simple 
interview.

That's what war is about.  You find out every thing you can about 
your enemy, listen to every word he says if you can, in the hope that 
the nugget you seek turns up.  LV got lucky. It happens.  The folks 
at NSA pray for moments like that.

> My theory is that Dumbledore, probably with Snape's assistance made 
> sure that LV was aware of the first part of the prophesy and, in 
> effect sent LV after Harry + his parents. I know it sounds crazy, 
> but let me explain.

It's not just crazy, it's repugnant.  Any of the "Evil Dumbledore' 
theories, if true, would be the greatest betrayal of readeres by an 
author, ever.  Unforgivable.  What would it tell readers, many of 
them young?

** People are no damn good.
** Everyone will betray you in the end; nobody can be trusted.
** Love, loyalty and service are not real. Only betrayal is real.

We get this from pop culture, from countless shows where your best 
buddy from the Army is the one helping the drug dealers.  I don't 
believe for a second that JKR would do it.  That's not the same as 
saying Dumbledore can make a mistake; he has, several, the biggest 
one born of love and compassion for Harry and maybe a little 
avoidance of causing pain - a human weakness.  What Harry can count 
on is that Dumbledore will do his best for him, flawed though it may 
be.

> DD hears the prophesy from ST. He realises that, in order to have 
> any chance to be rid of LV, one of the boys who fit the description 
> of the prophesy has to be marked by LV as his equal and to have 
> powers that LV does not know of. He realises of course that LV is 
> unlikely to "mark" either Harry or Neville unless he has a reason
> to do so. How can he do so? - by making sure that LV knows only the 
> first part of the prophesy!

The hole here is that DD heard the prophecy, understood its 
significance, and hatched a plan to have half of it overheard *after* 
the fact. (We'll bring out the Time Turner next).  Why is this 
explanation more believable than the one advanced?  He did have time 
thereafter to have James and Lily betrayed to their deaths, knowing 
that Lily would sacrifice herself in a way that would keep Harry 
alive but leave him marked.  I doubt the "Mission Impossible" team (I 
just outed my own age) could have brought it off.

I think JKR is reasonably logical.  She hasn't thrown us major curve 
balls.  Magic is magic, but her characters are as real and human as 
we are, they act as we do, and the principles of strategy and tactics 
apply the same.  The problem with being a puppeteer like Dumbledore 
is supposed to be is that the puppets seldom cooperate. Look at the 
much simpler conspiracies that fall apart in our own world!