The Prank in DH (LONG )

[wynnleaf]

No: HPFGUIDX 167330


> Alla:
 But still, aren't all statements of 
> Sirius about Snape factually looking more and more correct? Dark 
> Arts, etc.

wynnleaf,
Hm..  Sirius said Snape ran with a group of people that included the
Lestranges and some others that are, we later learn, much older than
Snape.  Nor do we see any hint of friends in the Pensieve scene.  Then
in HBP it's rather obvious that there's a lot of animosity between
Bella Lestrange and Snape.  So -- no collaborative evidence of any
friendships except with Lucius.

Sirius says Snape knew more curses at age 11 than 7th years.  Zero
collaborative evidence.  All we have in possible support is one curse
that Snape created 6 years later.  That doesn't collaborate anything
about what he knew at age 11.

Sirius says Snape was up to his eyeballs in the Dark Arts. 
Collaborative evidence?  One curse he invented in 6th year.  We also
know he wrote a whole lot on his DADA OWL, but since DADA is Harry's
best subject, we know that is no indication that a person loves the
Dark Arts.

Sirius said in GOF that Snape couldn't have been a Death Eater or
Dumbledore wouldn't have hired him.  Proven wrong.

Sirius didn't say anything about Snape's view of pureblood or
muggleborns, etc. so Snape's "mudblood" comment doesn't back up any of
Sirius' comments.

So really, none of Sirius' comments about Snape have much, if any,
support.

Alla
> So, what Zara said is  probably true – Sirius probably does not know 
> whether Snape loved DA, but I certainly take it as truth that he was 
> up to his ears in DA. Although who knows maybe he heard him 
> confessing that he indeed loves those.

wynnleaf
> Highly unlikely, because with Sirius dead we're unlikely to have any
sort of definitive info that Sirius heard some confession of Snape's.


> > wynnleaf
> > I'm not sure what you mean.  What arguments could 
> possibly "convict" 
> > Sirius of murder?  Who exactly did he kill??  Do you mean 
> attempted 
> > murder?  Hm.  Well, Snape has no proof.  On the other hand, in the 
> > Real World, a 16 year old setting up someone for a prank that 
> anyone 
> > should reasonably know is life threatening, would probably be 
> > considered a murderer if the person actually died.  It may not be 
> > premeditated, but it would still be considered murder.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I am going to only address couple of your points, because most of it 
> is just very different interpretation of the same canon.
> 
> Yes, when we have all the information about Sirius **setting Snape 
> up**. That is my problem - that we do not know  how Sirius set him 
> up and whether he set him up at all. Because yes, as I said if 
> Sirius put Snape under Imperius and told him to go in the Shack, 
> sure that can be considered attempted murder.
> 
> But if said sixteen year old had no idea, or I should say forgot 
> that werewolves can be dangerous for those who are not Animagi, I 
> think prosecution would have real trouble convicting.

wynnleaf
Sorry, that's highly unlikely to be the case.  In real life, a person
certainly might forget that a particular prank they are pulling is
extremely dangerous.  But the judgement would most likely fall around
what *most* people should normally understand to be dangerous and life
threatening.  Clearly in the Wizarding World, werewolves are widely
known to be life threatening.  How exactly would Sirius be able to
prove that he didn't intend anything, but to scare Snape?  Of course,
one could use veritaserum in the Wizarding World.  But if Snape had
actually *died* it wouldn't matter if Sirius didn't mean it -- it
would still be considered murder, just not murder in the first degree
probably.

Alla
> I do not do criminal law though. Somebody brought a very good 
> example some time ago - do you think Hagrid sending boys to follow 
> the spiders was attempted murder as well?

Depends.  Did Hagrid send the boys to the spiders maliciously because
he knew they'd be terrified of them?  If he knew they'd be terrified
of them, why would he think that?  Because the spiders are incredibly
dangerous.  But Hagrid doesn't even appear to think the dangerous
animals he brings *should* terrify anyone.  Hagrid really doesn't seem
to understand the danger.  But the point of Sirius' prank was at the
very least, to scare Snape.  And the only reason Snape would be scared
is because the werewolf is very, very dangerous.  So Sirius had to
know the werewolf would be very dangerous, or he'd have no expectation
that the "prank" would achieve anything at all, even a decent scare.
> 
> >> 
> > wynnleaf
> > I've read numerous comments that Snape shouldn't have been 
> following 
> > the Marauders around to try and get them expelled and that if he 
> > hadn't been doing that, it wouldn't have happened.  While 
> > technically that's true, it seems to me to indicate that many 
> > readers think Snape brought it on himself.  How dare he try to get 
> > those nice Marauder boys expelled!  However, perhaps you don't 
> feel 
> > that way.  
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> If there is nothing more besides that story, that Snape was only 
> going around spying after Marauders, no desire to kill Remus, no 
> specific desire to harm them with Dark Arts, no desire to harm Lily 
> because she is a muggleborn or anything like that, then no I do not 
> think he brought it upon himself, of course not.
> 
(snipping a paragraph)
> I will especially think that he brought it upon himself, if he was 
> indeed planning to kill "Dark creature" when he went to the Shack, 
> but as it stands now, no I do not. I do not like him spying after 
> Marauders one bit, but I do not think that justifies the Prank at 
> all.
> 

wynnleaf
Where in the world do you get all those possibilities from?  I try to
keep my possibilities and theories somehow tied to canon, but we have
no hints at all that any of those alternatives above were even
considered by anyone, even characters that hate Snape.  One might just
as well add in "what if Snape was planning to blow up Hogwarts?" or
"what if Snape wanted to get to the Shrieking Shack in a plan to
destroy Hogsmeade?"  or "what if Snape hoped to release a werewolf to
terrorize the countryside and maybe kill Dumbledore on the side?"  
> 
> > wynnleaf
> > What "more bad things" have we learned about what Snape did in 
> > school? 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Oh well, here we are having difference of opinion. What to you is 
> the bad word in the stressful moment, to me is the hint ( not 
> necessarily evidence, but a hint) that Snape shared Voldemort's 
> philosophy, full stop. 

wynnleaf,
Think so?  The odd thing is what James said in answer to Lily's
question of "what's he ever done to you?"  James wants to impress
Lily.  Now was the time for him to answer "Snape's up to his ears in
Dark Arts," or "Snape hexes us all the time.  We're just retaliating."
 or some other excuse that might placate Lily.  But no, James can't
think of an excuse other than, "because he exists."

Alla
Sectusemptra to me is the hint that Sirius 
> words about Snape knowing dark curses, etc is perfectly true. 

wynnleaf
So Snape creating a curse in 6th year is a hint that he knew more
curses than anyone else at age 11?  Does that mean that Harry being
able to do a patronus at age 13 means that he was actually able to do
all sorts of advanced magic at age 11?  No, of course not.

wynnleaf