Using the Piensive by eye Witnesses

[sbursztynski]

No: HPFGUIDX 91468

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sawsan_issa" 
<sawsan_issa at e...> wrote:
> So why couldn't Dumbledore use the
> piensive of all of the eye witnesses before Fudge to prove 
Sirius's
> innocence and Pettigrew's treason? In fact, why couldn't DD 
use it on
> Harry in GoF to prove as an eye witness account that Moldy 
Voldy was back?
> 
> As for the idea that the piensive is subjective or objective, 
please
> read the article from mugglenet about the piensive.
> 
> http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt17.shtml 
> 
> This has been bothering me for some time.
> Sawsan


Sue B:

Fudge is an idiot who wouldn't believe LV was back if  You Know 
Who tap danced on his desk. I have never quite been able to 
believe in the Pensieve, anyway - and I think it's really just a plot 
device to explain things that happened in the past without lots of 
heavy exposition. There are just too many holes in it. You'd think 
that the thing would show you what was happening through the 
eyes of the witness, but it doesn't - and while it does say in OOP 
that Harry couldn't have followed James and Sirius outside 
unless Snape does, he sees and hears lots of things that Young 
Snape couldn't have. 

Sorry if this is slightly off-topic!