Legilimency (was: How long has Snape been reading Harry's mind?)

[huntergreen_3]

No: HPFGUIDX 134923

Potioncat:
>>It has seemed to Harry since the very first book that Snape
is "reading" his mind. And it seems very clear that Snape is using
Legilimency in CoS when Mrs. Norris has been petrified. He certainly
knows that Harry isn't telling the truth.<<

HunterGreen:
Don't discount Snape's other instincts. I don't think he'd 
necessarily need Legilimency to know when Harry is lying. I think its 
equally possible that Snape figured Harry out through less magical 
means. The only scene that I am sure that Legilmency was being used 
by someone other than Voldemort (other than the Occulmency lessons) 
was after Harry's name came out of the goblet in GoF. (that, of 
course, was Dumbledore using it).

Potioncat:
>> There must be something to Legilimency that makes it, by itself, 
unreliable or unacceptable as proof.<<

HunterGreen:
Its just too subjective, like Veritaserum. The Legilimency charm (or 
spell, I can't remember if it was specified) that Snape used in OotP 
conjured only bits and pieces of memories, and unless they 
are 'magic' memories like the ones in Pensieves (which I doubt they 
are), they are completely unreliable.

Now, wandless legilimency is more obtuse, since we don't know when 
its been done or how its done or what exactly the legilmens sees. But 
I doubt it'd be much more reliable, since people lie to themselves 
nearly as often as they lie to other people. Occulmency, we are told, 
works by blocking the person from reading your thoughts at all, not 
by obsuring or confusing them, which, I would think, would need no 
training at all. If you were attempting to read someone's thoughts 
and they purposely began to think about a hundred things at once, and 
purposely contradicted the truth, would you be able to see past that? 
Or would that take an *extremely good* legilmens? If scrambling your 
own thoughts would work, than the best legilmency is done covertly. 

Perhaps though, the wandless Legilimency, is just pulling up 
memories, like the kind that Snape used in OotP, just the better you 
are at it, the more exact you can be. But that gets back to how 
little you can trust someone's memories.

I think Legilimency works best when used sparingly, and in specific 
situations. The scene in GoF is a perfect example. Harry had no idea 
Legilimency (I am so sick of typing that word) existed, so he had no 
reason to confuse his thoughts, and since the name just came out, it 
would, of course, be at the center of his thoughts. It was also a 
situation where Dumbledore needed to be *sure* that Harry wasn't the 
one responsible (since Harry sneaking his name into the goblet and 
someone doing it for him were two VERY different things), otherwise I 
think its more in his nature to just take Harry's word on it.

I'm not sure how Voldemort knows so easily when a DE is lying to him, 
and the answer could just be that he doesn't. Or at least he would 
know if one of his followers was trying to deceive him (with 
something other than Occulmency), by confusing their thoughts, and 
that's as good as lying. In that case, Legilimency only works because 
his followers are forced to consent to it. If he were trying to get 
information out of someone by force, Veritaserum would probably be a 
much better (and easier) idea. Otherwise, I'd imagine torture might 
be necessary to wear the person down.


- Rebecca / HunterGreen