Why didn't Snape turn Harry in?

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 159199

 


> Alla:
>
> I reread Magpie's post again and still  not hundred percent sure
> whether she asked the question allowing for  Evil or OFH! Snape or
> only for DD!M Snape.  Sorry!

Magpie:
Sorry!  I did mean to allow for ESE!Snape as well,  definitely.  I couldn't 
think of a good reason for him to hide the book  from DD either, since all 
Snapes' crimes of the past are pretty much  known.  I suppose one could say 
Dumbledore told Snape to destroy the  book and he didn't, only if that's the 
case Snape's just not nearly so  concerned about it as he should be.  He 
shouldn't be leaving it behind  in his classroom or letting Harry hide it.
 
Julie:
That is exactly my problem with the theory that Snape was hiding the
book, from Dumbledore or anyone. Who hides a book in plain sight,
in a cupboard where anyone can get to it? If Snape wanted to hide it,
he could have actually HIDDEN it. Instead it's more like he simply
forgot about it. And once he realizes Harry has it, he really doesn't
try very hard to confiscate it. He lets Harry get away with the  very  
lame Roonil Wazlib ploy, and allows Harry to keep the book.  This
is the way a guy--and a very clever guy at that--protects something?
Um, I don't think so. 


I can't really imagine there is anything in the book that would hurt
Snape, or he would have taken better care of it. Certainly he would
have gotten it back from Harry. It's still more suspicious to me that
Harry just *happened* to receive that particular book in the  first place.
Providential coincidence it may be, but if it turns out that someone 
deliberately arranged for the book to fall into Harry's hands, I  won't
be surprised. (And I also won't be surprised if that someone was 
Dumbledore.)
 
Julie 








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