What did Snape know, and When did he know it?

[hickengruendler]

No: HPFGUIDX 169377

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" <mcrudele78 at ...> wrote:
>
> Mike:
> I was going to respond point by point, but that didn't work so well 
> last time. So instead, let me lay out my theoretical timeline and 
you 
> all can point out where I'm off base. :)
> 
> 1) Peter Pettigrew starts spying for Voldemort.
> There are a fair few true DEs that know that Severus Snape is 
spying 
> for Voldemort. I gotta believe that although Voldie would hold 
> Peter's allegiance close to the vest, he would tell someone. 
> Pettigrew would have a handler, a middleman who took Peter's info 
to 
> LV. And he probably told more than just that one. He wouldn't want 
to 
> have to handle Peter personally all the time.

Hickengruendler:

That might very well be true, but given that Peter was a spy, it 
makes perfect sense for Voldemort to keep his identity as secret as 
possible. I would be surprised, if the majority of Death Eaters knew, 
who the spy in the Order was, simply because it makes sense for 
Voldemort not to tell anyone. Sure, a few obviously knew, but Snape 
doesn't have to be among them. And there's also Karkaroff's statement 
during his trial, that no Death Eater knew all the other ones. And 
this was at a time, where Karkaroff was willing to sell ot anyone for 
his freedom. And again, if Dumbledore kept the DE's identities a 
secret from most others, it would make particularly sense to do this 
with a spy. The fact, that a few DE's knew the truth, doesn't change 
this.

Mike:

> 2) Dumbledore suggests the Fidelius to the Potters. They tell DD 
they 
> are going to use Black, then switch at the last minute to Pettigrew.
> I would think that DD would have told Snape about the Fidelius and 
> that Black was going to be the SK. If for no other reason than 
Snape 
> would have the same plausible deniability that he had with Bella in 
> Spinner's End. To wit: I can't tell you where the Potters are, they 
> are under the Fidelius Charm. 

Hickengruendler:

The Fidelius charm, maybe. But why should he tell Snape about the 
Secret Keeper? According to your theory, which I do find possible, 
Snape just had to tell Voldie, taht the Potters were under the 
Fidelius Charm and that he wasn't the Secret Keeper.
 
Mike: 

> 7) The in-the-know DEs start spreading it around that PP was the 
> Potter's SK and led LV to the Potters, whereupon he vanished.
> As I explained previously, these few in-the-know DEs don't want to 
> take the fall for LV's demise. So they start releasing to their 
> bretheren who the spy was. And why not, they all believe that PP is 
> dead. Who better to pin the screw-up on than the dead spy? And why 
> keep the dead, screw-up spy's name a secret, that only makes the 
> others suspicious that one of them was the screw-up, if the others 
> don't get a plausible name.

Hickengruendler:

At a time, when Snape was already in Hogwarts! No matter on which 
side Snape is, why should he bother to meet the other Death Eaters 
know. He was in Hogwarts all year, and every disappearance would only 
look suspicious. Loyal to Dumbledore Snape had fulfilled his spy work 
for that time and no reason to meet the Death Eaters. And evil Snape 
(loyal to Voldie or OFH) would have no reason to risk his safety and 
freedom, because he associated with other Death Eaters again.

Mike:
 
> 8) Snape learns this info about PP in due course and reports it to 
> Dumbledore.
> Dumbledore has a dilemna. He now knows that Sirius wasn't the 
> Potter's SK, but he's already given testimony to the contrary. His 
> information comes from his double agent, so he doesn't necessarily 
> want to come forward with it. Without LV around, who knows how the 
> rest of the DEs may respond to finding out Snape told DD this info. 
> And the DEs would obviously suspect Snape as he is currently 
employed 
> by DD. 

Hickengruendler:

Sorry, but I hope you are aware, what kind of monster you are making 
out of Dumbledore. I know that he does have his flaws, that he might 
(or should) have investigated better in Sirius' case, and that he is 
sometimes incoherently written. But nothing in the books suggests, 
that he is the kind of person, to leave an innocent man rot in 
prison, if he knew that man was innocent. Besides, Snape was 
comparatively safe in Hogwarts. And it's not, that Dumbledore kept 
Snape's work as a spy a secret. He told it in front of the whole 
Wizengamot and many visitors at Karkaroff's trial, and it was 
mentioned during the trial, that he already made another testimony 
regarding Snape during an earlier trial. Besides, the Death Eaters 
knew anyway, that Dumbledore thought Snape to be a spy.  

Mike:

Besides all this, DD has no proof and no knowledge that Black 
> wasn't responsible for 13 murders (well 12 and change) and for all 
we 
> know, this is the primary charge that got Sirius thrown into 
Azkaban.

Hickengruendler:

Yes. But if he had heard from Snape, that at least one of the charges 
against SIrius was already wrong, he should have investigated more 
regarding the other one as well. 
  
Hickengruendler