Snape could have?

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 152204

 

> Minluko:
>  If Snape is on our side, he didn't kill  Harry for obvious reasons. 
If he is on LV's side, he let Harry go because LV  wants to kill Harry 
personally. I don't have the book with me right now, but  he tells 
another DE something like that:"We have to leave him (Harry).  Remember 
our orders! He belongs to the Dark Lord."
> Hope it  helps.
> 

Tonks: 

Also if Snape was really a DE wouldn't he  have kidnapped Harry so the 
Dark Lord could finish him off? How is he going  to explain to LV why 
when he had the chance to grab Harry, he  didn't?


Julie:
Good question. I suppose one could assume LV labelled Harry as
"hands off" period, as he wants to be the one not only to kill Harry
but to capture/lure him into his lair. It doesn't seem very logical,  but
LV has never thought logically. So Snape, good or bad, would have
reason to leave Harry behind, and nothing to explain to LV, as he 
only acted as ordered. (Interestingly, a DDM!Snape would also have 
reason to encourage LV's Harry obsession to the point where LV
would not allow any other DEs to capture or kill Harry.)
 
Alternately, Snape could say that he was barely able to make it 
out of Hogwarts without trying to bring Harry along, though the DEs
who were present aren't likely to confirm that scenario.
 
BTW, the more interesting question to me has always been why
didn't Snape allow the DE to crucio Harry, or better yet why didn't
Snape crucio Harry himself? If he's DDM the answer is obvious.
If he's ESE or OFH, it's not so obvious. I doubt LV cares if Harry
suffers a little pain, so long as he's not rendered insane. And 
Snape hates Harry, with no deliberate exaggeration of that feeling
required or likely if he's ESE or OFH. He has no reason *not* to 
enjoy a bit of torture on the bane of his existence these past 
six miserable years at Hogwarts. 
 
Julie 


 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]