Harry's arrogance /Evil Snape.

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 154365

> Alla:
> 
> YES, he did, but he did something very similar with Tom Riddle as he 
> did with Snape, no?
> 
> He did not SHARE his suspicions with anybody, he supposedly kpet an 
> eye on Tom himself, but obviously did not act on his suspicions, no?
> 
> Isn't that a very similar mistake? If one believes that DD made a 
> mistake of course.
> 

Pippin:
Um, no. Dumbledore had no evidence other than hearsay that Tom was 
guilty of anything besides petty pilfering. That is hardly a matter for
the wizengamot. 

But Crouch's tribunal cleared Snape. Presumably the ministry could
have overruled Dumbledore and sent Snape to Azkaban if they weren't
satisfied. It also apparently gave Snape the right to keep his past
a secret. If so, I see no justice in Dumbledore overturning it to pacify
Harry's doubts about Dumbledore's wisdom. If personal interests are 
allowed to outweight the decisions of the courts, we might as well not 
have them.

It isn't even as if Harry is consumed with a desire to learn what
happened to Lily and James -- at least not until he found out that Snape 
was involved. I'm afraid Harry is more concerned with feeding his
vicious anger against Snape than with learning about his parents.

> Alla:
> 
> Um, why does he become deluded if he trusts the wrong person?

Pippin:

What makes him deluded is not being wrong, but being wrong in the
face of Harry's insistence. If he gets fooled by someone both he and
Harry trusted, that's a lot different than having poorer judgement
than a sixteen year old boy with a history of jumping to conclusions
about people. 

Also, if  Snape has to die to prove that he's really redeemed, then
the whole second chance thing is delusional, because it sure would
look like the only good DE is a dead DE.

Pippin