Snape didn't kill DD with AK!! And here's the evidence

[zgirnius]

No: HPFGUIDX 138688

"lolita_ns" <lolita_ns at y...> wrote:
> And as for the thery that Snape did not use AK to kill 
Dumbledore... 
> What could possibly be gained, plotwise, by that? Kill him he did, 
and 
> what does it matter what curse he used? If he is ever proven to be 
not-
> completely-evil, it will most probably be because of some 
preconceived 
> master plan between him and Dumbledore, and not beacause of the 
fact 
> that, in killing Dumbledore, he did not use the AK curse.

zgirnius:
Oh, the most important reason some of us want the spell to be 
anything but a successful AK is not plot-related, rather, it relates 
to character development. Is Severus Snape a man who is capable of 
forming the requisite intent to perform the AK, an Unforgiveable 
Curse, successfully against Dumbledore, who is such a good man, and 
to whom Snape owes so much? Even if we learn he has been on the "good 
guys" side all along, his ability or inability to cast that AK says 
something important about the kind of man he is. And, perhaps, by 
extension, about DUmbledore's judgement in trusting Snape. Which is 
why, Snape sap that I have become after readin Book 6, do prefer to 
believe the spell was either a mystery nonverbal spell, or an AK 
which failed in the sense that, while it hit its target, it did not 
have behind it the necessary evil intent. (We've never seen one of 
these. It could certainly behave differently that a standard AK in 
ways beyond simply leaving the victim alive.)

And there could be a plot reason as well. If Snape is still on the 
good side, how is the good side to ever realize this? JKR has many 
options open to her: the grand self-sacrificing gesture by Snape 
and/or unambiguous bottled memories of Dumbledore come to mind. But 
another way could be for someone like Hermione (a logical thinker) to 
learn of the possible oddities in the death scene and be inspired to 
investigate further.