Voldie's Wand and other details

[lealess]

No: HPFGUIDX 140408

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saraquel_omphale"
<saraquel_omphale at y...> wrote:
> It's a question of what is 
> charmed, the house or the Potters? I'm inclined to think that it
was 
> the house.  Pettigrew charmed the house, using the Fidelius, hence, 
> as the caster, he still had access to its whereabouts.  Once the 
> house is destroyed, the charm is broken and just like magic, anyone 
> who ever knew where GH was can remember/find it again.  I have no 
> doubt that DD was the one who suggested in the first place, that
the 
> Potter's hide at GH.
> 

I agree that the house is protected by the Fidelius charm, but to some
extent, the house's inhabitants may also be protected by being in the
charmed location, not just by being indoors *anywhere*.  The Order
provided a guard for Harry on his trip to 12 Grimmauld Place but once
there, they ignored him.  We had Severus Snape and Remus Lupin, two
double-agents, going in and out of the house without interruption.  If
Snape or Lupin was Voldemort's-Man, what was to prevent the
double-agent from blowing up the whole charmed house, or poisoning its
inhabitants, or killing a person isolated in his bedroom then
disappearing into the night?  What's the use of having a charm on a
place if a person, aware of the location but unable to speak its name
or lead others to it without the Secret Keeper's permission, can still
infiltrate and wreak internal havoc?  Mundungus Fletcher was able to
steal items from 12 Grimmauld Place while it was under Fidelius, so
wrongdoing of some kind can occur, but perhaps not physical harm to
its inhabitants.  The almost-duel between Black and Snape -- I wonder
if it could have ever come to actual harm.

Lupin may have had the same access to Godric's Hollow as Order members
had to 12 Grimmauld Place.  If Lupin was Ever-So-Evil, what was
preventing him from finishing off the Potters in their own home? 
Pettigrew might have been fingered for the crime, not Lupin.

It seems only when the Secret Keeper renounces the *intent* of the
charm, protection, that the charm becomes void and evil-doers can
inflict harm.

Does this make sense?

lealess