Snape's Attack on Flitwick

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 139572

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" <Aisbelmon at h...> wrote:
>   mhbobbin:
> > Although I lean to believing that Snape killed Dumbledore on 
> > Dumbledore's orders, and that Snape isn't really working for 
> > Voldemort, I am most troubled by my inability to reconcile Snape's 
> > attack on Flitwick with this theory.
> 
> Valky:
> I too find it difficult to reconcile, I generally have ignored it up
> till now, but I guess we should bite it and have a look sometime 
> hey? :D
> 

bboyminn:

I see the thread has run on quite long, but no one seems to have
addressed this basic question head-on. 

I think Snape took Flitwick out of the game, by whatever means,
because once he discovered there were Death Eaters in the castle, he
knew he was in a very awkward situation. If he intended to fight the
DE's without seeming to do so, he had to act alone. He couldn't have
Flitwick tagging along behind him. This was a situation that require
great stealth as well as great finesse. 

He had to either covertly fight the DE's, or he had to get them under
control and get them out of the castle without compromising his
position with either Voldemort or Dumbledore. So, again, he couldn't
have Flitwich tagging along behind him.

I really think it is as simple as that. Certainly, at that moment, his
concern was for maintaining his cover, getting Draco out of trouble,
and getting the DE's out of the castle. At that time, I don't think he
knew what was in store for him when he met Dumbledore at the top of
the tower. That was a spontaneous event.

It's already clear to everyone that I don't think Snape and Dumbledore
conspired in advance toward Dumbledore's death. Instead, I think, in a
manner of speaking, they conspired on the spot, and Dumbledore make
Snape aware that all was lost, and Snape took the opportunity to turn
a bad situation to his advantage.

Don't get the idea that I am completely excusing Snape. Even under the
best possible outcome and the best possible circumstances, Snape
killed Dumbledore, and he will have to pay some price for that.
Although, I don't forsee that price being 'murder'. I see it more as
manslaughter, though it may not be legally right, my point is that
Snape will pay for his crime because there is no way to erase it. But
I also think, that Snape will explain it away to the point where he
won't be charge with the cold-blooded murder that it appears to be.

I think that was the foundation behind Snape chastising Harry for
calling him a Coward. Snape did a very brave thing, at least in his
eyes, in killing Dumbledore. He did what must be done to bring about
Voldemort's ultimate defeat at some point in the indeterminate future.
But to accomplish that future task, he has to do a terrible thing for
which he can never escape punishment. His courage wasn't in killing
Dumbledore. It was in being willing to commit a terrible crime, and in
doing so, accept the punishment, knowing that his personal sacrifice
would bring about an ultimate greater good. In a sense, Snape, and by
his eventual punishment, is a casualty of war.

Again, I'm not really defending Snape or saying he should be forgiven,
but if we take the position that Dumbledore was already dying, and
Snape simply worked that death to his advantage, then while we can
never forgive him stealing one second of Dumbledore's life, we can at
least understand the sacrifice they both made.

Just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn