DDM!Snape & the UV/Have Snape ever killed anybody?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 149844

Carol earlier:
*Wormtail*
> > would have told LV back in VW1 that Black was an Order member. If
he didn't tell LV then that Black was an Animagus (and the form he
took) then, he certainly would have done so when he explained his
return to Voldemort at the end of PoA.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Why would he have done so? <snip> But of course we don't
> know what Wormtail told Voldemort, so my only contention of your
> speculation is to word "certainly". Could you refer me to relevant
> canon?
> 
Carol responds:
Absolutely. Sirius arrives at this conclusion himeslf:

"Because the Ministry of Magic's still after me, and Voldemort will
know all about me being an Animagus by now, Wormtail will have told
him, so my big disguise is useless. There's not much I can do for the
Order of the Phoenix ... or so Dumbledore feels." (OoP chapter 5)

Now granted, Sirius doesn't know this to be a fact, but it's a
reasonable assumption. He knows Wormtail very well, for one thing. For
another, we know that Voldemort thoroughly questioned Snape after
Snape's return (on DD's orders) at the end of GoF. He even thoroughly
questioned Bertha Jorkins, to the point of breaking her mind, and she
wasn't even a DE. Voldemort wants every shred of information
available, and he would have interrogated Wormtail to find out the
circumstances under which he returned. And since Peter, AFWK, is not
an Occlumens, he would have had a very hard time shutting out the
image of Black as an Animagus when he told the tale. In addition,
Black is a known enemy, and Voldemort would want every scrap of
information about him. IMO, there's no reason to question Sirius's
statement, which is not contradicted by anything in canon; it's JKR's
way of telling us what happened.

But since it's the word "certainly" you're objecting to, how about
"almost certainly" or "probably"?

Carol:
>   *Kreacher* told the Malfoys that Sirius Black was the one person
that Harry cared enough about to save, and the plan was to make Harry
think that LV held Black captive to lure *Harry* to the MoM. The Order
members, including Black, weren't supposed to be there. Snape told
Black *not* to go to the MoM, but Black chose to disregard him and
ordered Kreacher to wait for DD instead. Black carelessly taunted
Bellatrix as they fought near the Veil and she sent him through it.
Where does Snape fit in? What could he have told LV that he [LV]
didn't already know?
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Where does Snape fit in? Let's say he went to Voldemort's or Malfoys
EARLIER than Kreacher did and first alerted Malfoys as to bond of love
existing between Sirius and Harry, or alerted Voldemort of such bond
earlier than Kreacher. Considering that Snape confirms that he played
a part of Sirius death, I consider that to be more than speculation,
but canon supported argument.

Carol:
The problem is, you're ignoring canon here. We *know* that Kreacher
went to the Malfoys and that he told DD about the Sirius/Harry
connection. Having Snape do so as well is not only uncanonical, it's
redundant.

Snape doesn't "confirm" that he had a part in Sirius Black's death, he
only states it to convince Bellatrix that he's done something other
than "slithering out of action." Quite possibly he *did* provide
information, but it must have been information that can't otherwise be
accounted for. There's no point in his revealing what Wormtail could
have revealed a year earlier or what Kreacher confesses to. And that
information need not have actually contributed to Black's death, which
would have been prevented if he'd followed Snape's advice and stayed
home; Snape just wants Bella to think that it did (while still
claiming most of the "credit" herself).

About the only piece of information that LV would not have known
without Snape's help is Black's return to England after his escape on
Buckbeak, which Snape would have discovered when Black transformed in
front of him right before Snape returned to LV at the end of GoF. This
bit of information would have been timely and new and would have
helped to support the story that Snape had already prepared ("if you
are ready . . . .if you are prepared") by providing seemingly
important information on a member of the newly reconstituted Order.
(Actually, the information was useless because Snape didn't know
Black's hiding place at the time, and when he did learn it, he could
not reveal it because of the Fidelius Charm.) And as I noted earlier,
Snape *canonically* informed Black that he [Black] had been seen and
recognized in dog form by Lucius Malfoy on Platform 9 3/4, so that
Black knew he couldn't safely leave 12 GP. It was his own decision to
do so, against Snape's (admittedly sarcastic) advice.

Carol earlier:
> > As for Emmeline Vance, perhaps as a double agent he provided some
> > small bit of information on her (probably with DD's permission)
> but he clearly didn't kill her or he would have said so.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Perhaps, or perhaps he did more than that, since played a part in
the death (paraphrasing) sounds like pretty significant participation
to me.

Carol responds:
Actually, he says that the *information* he passed to LV led to her
capture and murder (BBP Am. ed. 30). He doesn't claim to have
participated in either event or he would have said so. The Vance
claim, like the Black claim, may have been exaggerated, but even if it
isn't, he *has to* pass on potentially useful information to LV.
That's what a double agent does. 

> Alla:
> 
> Please refer me to the part of Karkarov's testimony where he says
> that those DE whom he sells out as spies or torture specialists
> never killed anybody? He mentions their tasks yes, where does he say
> that they never killed at all?
> 
> You are telling me that Dolohov for example who tortured Muggles
> never killed anybody? How likely it is? Not likely if you ask me.

Carol responds:
Likely or not, Karkaroff is trying to get himself off the hook by
providing information on other DEs. If he knew that Dolohov had killed
someone, it would have been to his advantage to say so. He actually
*saw* Dolohov torturing "countless Muggles and non-supporters of the
Dark Lord" (GoF 589). If, as Moody believes, Karkaroff "helped him do
it," Karkaroff would have witnessed any murders Dolohov committed as
well. It would be odd for Karkaroff to conceal the fact that Dolohov
had killed someone had he actually done so when he's trying to get out
of Azkaban by revealing what he knows about Dolohov and others. And
Karkaroff actually uses the word "specialized" in referring to
Mulciber (589). 
> 
> Carol:
> <SNIP>
>   I'm guessing that Voldemort, whatever doubts he had or has about
where Snape's loyalties lie, would not have risked the life (or
arrest) of a uniquely valuable servant by sending him out to maim and
kill when others were ready and eager
> to
> > do exactly that.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> And I am asking again. How do you know that Snape received such an
honor of being allowed not to kill anybody? 

Carol responds:
I didn't say that I know. I said "I'm guessing"--based on the evidence
that Voldemort recognizes particular talents and assigns particular
tasks accordingly. Not to do so would be like Dumbledore randomly
assigning teachers to different subjects without considering their
expertise. Voldemort (unless he's less self-interested than we think)
wouldn't send a man with Snape's talents out to torture Muggles any
more than DD would assign Trelawney to teach Potions. Or, to use an
LV-related example, you don't assign Goyle Sr. to make a potion that
requires exceptional knowledge and skill. You assign a potions expert.

Alla:
> Sure, he has many talents suitable for Voldemort's, but as far as we
know other DE also can have many talents and Snape is the only one who
never got his hands dirty?

Carol:
I never said that Snape was the only one who didn't get his hands
dirty, or rather, the only one who didn't go around casting
Unforgiveable Curses because his job didn't require it. Rookwood, for
one, was not out killing people. He was maintaining a respectable
cover as a Ministry official (and obtaining information from Ludo
Bagman as well). As for Snape, I'd say that making poisons for LV to
use on enemies or potions designed to help LV achieve physical as
opposed to spiritual immortality* (the tasks that LV seems likely to
have assigned to him, IMO) *is* "getting your hands dirty," or at any
rate, it's knowingly aiding and abetting a murderer. As someone
(Magpie?) said upthread, not everyone in a terrorist organization is a
hitman. There are researchers and spies, too. And you don't send one
to do the job of the other.

Once again, I'm *not* arguing for an "innocent" Snape (he obviously
served LV in some capacity), just arguing that we can't safely assume
that Snape had cast an AK before he killed DD. What evidence we do
have points in the other direction.

Carol, wondering why Yahoo delayed posting her response to Sherry
(written yesterday afternoon) till three in the morning

* I said "mortality" upthread but I meant "immortality, of course!