In defense of DD WAS musings on Dumbledore - Even Longer/Sirius and DD

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 158709

> Julie:
> What's stronger evidence than Dumbledore knowing Sirius was the
> secret-keeper? *ONLY* the secret-keeper can reveal the location
> of James and Lily. 
<SNIP>

Alla:

Let me ask again - do we have strong confirmation that DD indeed 
knew that Sirius was a secret keeper from James?

Julie:
<SNIP>
Dumbledore gave the evidence he had on
> Sirius, and didn't investigate further because not only was the
> evidence quite damning, I suspect Dumbledore also *believed* that
> Sirius had done the act. 
<SNIP>

Alla:

Well what evidence? Was it the word from James or maybe this word a 
hearsay from somebody else?

Julie:
Again, people who knew Sirius much better
> than Dumbledore--like McGonagall and Lupin--accepted it. So WHY
> should Dumbledore intuit something those people didn't? Why should
> he be any different, and question what seemed to be a closed case?

Alla:

You are arguing that Dumbledore **ever** questions himself if other 
people have a courage to contradict him? Well,Mcgonagall did 
question him on leaving Harry with Dursleys. Did he listen to her? 
But this was the only time when I remember anybody question DD 
decision to his face and she gave up pretty fast. Nobody questions 
Albus Dumbledore, ever and as Sherry said both Minerva and Lupin 
seem to trust Snape only because DD did so and starting to not trust 
him, like fast. IMO.

Julie: 
> As for the mention of Dumbledore keeping Snape out of Azkaban, it
> is likely Dumbledore knew much more about Snape's activities than
> he did about Sirius's. Snape approached Dumbledore after all. It's
> all just a suspicion, but I'm certain Dumbledore *knew* Snape much 
> better even as a child/teenager/young adult than he knew Sirius.
<SNIP>

Alla:

ANd Sirius was a member of small, supposedly trusted number of 
people whom Dumbledore lead, so I would like to challenge the idea 
that DD knew Snape so much better than he did Sirius. DD was Sirius' 
commander of the sorts, IMO during the war and I guess he was Snape 
commander too. :)

Julie:
> I have a feeling we'll learn more about that in Book 7 ;-) But
> the bottom line is that the Sirius and Snape situations don't
> appear to be analagous, even with what small amount of information
> we now have. 

Alla:

Sorry, they do look pretty similar to me with the amounts of 
information we have. DD was a commander of two men, doing different 
things during the war, but basically fighting for the Light, or so 
it seems ;)

He gave evidence to spare one the Azkaban and he gave the evidence 
that helped condemn another one. 

 
> Julie:
> Dumbledore gave evidence. He could have lied about what he knew
> I suppose, but again, he had no reason to suspect the evidence was
> anything but genuinely damning. It was the evidence that condemned
> Sirius, not Dumbledore. 
> 
> BTW, it was McGonagall who said James told Dumbledore that Sirius
> was his secret-keeper. I can't think of any reason for McGonagall
> to lie, or for Dumbledore to lie--either to McGonagall or at the
> trial--so I'm taking it as fact that Dumbledore knew Sirius was
> the secret-keeper. I suppose one doesn't have to take it as fact,
> and can assume Dumbledore lied just to get Sirius put away, but
> then we're straying into nothing more than ESE!Dumbledore and I
> don't see it at all. Some seem to see it though ;-)

Alla:

No, I don't think Mcgonagall lied, but I am not sure she says that 
DD said that and whoever else said that could have been mistaken or 
make this conclusion as fact, and no Dumbledore is not evil, but 
that night he did not act the way I would expect the commander who 
cares about his people to act, genuinely cares about them as human 
beings.
  
JMO,
Alla