Vengeance on Snape?Re: Snape--Abusive?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 116085


> Sigune wrote:
> Crouch does point it out himself as well - sorry, I forgot about
that line:
> "'Snape has been cleared by this council,' said Crouch coldly.
> 'No! shouted Karkaroff, straining at the chains which bound him to 
> the chair. 'I assure you! Severus Snape is a Death Eater!'" (GoF Ch. 
> 30 The Pensieve, p. 513 British ed.)
> That is when DD rises to re-state that he has given evidence on the 
> matter, in view of Karakaroff's vehement insistence. I had the 
> feeling, reading this, that he thought his fellow Wizengamot members 
> might need some reminding - that Snape could do with some extra 
> defending.
> 
> What keeps puzzling me - but I have little knowledge of the workings 
> of law and court - is that Snape is 'cleared'. The word suggest to
me that he is proved not guilty, whereas he clearly has been a Death 
> Eater. Does anybody know what kind of status spies have, that is,
are they 'cleared' of crimes committed because they made 'good' use of 
> their experiences in the end? Even so, I think a verdict of 'not 
> guilty' is a bit rich, but maybe that's just me.


Carol responds:
I think it means that charges were dismissed before the case went to
trial. Sort of a plea bargaining, protected witness arrangement.
(Someone please correct me if I'm interpreting it incorrectly.)

Certainly, the recent reference to Snape by some poster (I forget who)
as an "ex-con" is incorrect. He was never convicted and evidently
never even charged. That would explain, in part, why his name did not
appear in the papers like those of Malfoy, Macnair, Nott, et al., who
*were* tried and found not guilty by reason of Imperius.

Carol