Vengeance on Snape?Re: Snape--Abusive?

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 115698


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severelysigune" 
<severelysigune at y...> wrote:

> Sigune begs to differ:
> He shows the Mark to *Fudge*. By that time, Crouch Sr is dead. 
Crouch  Sr, by the way, KNEW about Snape's former DE 
allegiances: he had been  the prosecutor in the DE trials, and 
though we aren't shown Snapes,  we are shown Karkaroff's 
'information session' in which Crouch hears  DD mention, yet 
again, that Snape has switched sides.<

Yet again? There's something curious about that. Crouch tells 
Karkaroff that Dumbledore vouched for Snape and that Snape 
has been cleared. But when Karkaroff insists,   Dumbledore has 
to rise to report that Snape was indeed a former Death Eater, but 
that he turned spy and is now a Death Eater no more.  Wouldn't 
Crouch be the logical person to tell the tribunal this? Wouldn't 
the permanent members of the tribunal already know? Unless, 
perchance, they'd been memory charmed. Is Dumbledore's 
function at the trials to recall information  which the tribunal 
needs to know to decide a particular case, but which would be 
dangerous for them to retain afterwards?

Pippin