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

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 169415

> Mike previously:
> > 1) Peter Pettigrew starts spying for Voldemort. 
> > <snip the sentence about Snape>
> > 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.

Mike now:
I see that my inclusion of Snape in this paragraph was confusing, so 
I take it out. It doesn't change what I believe was going on between 
Pettigrew, LV, and some (maybe one or two) DEs. I do not think that 
Snape knew or was in any way involved with Pettigrew's spying nor 
with Pettigrew as the Potter's SK. I only included Snape in my 
original paragraph to point out that Voldemort does not keep the 
identity of his spies completely secret, they are not known by only 
himself.


> houyhnhnm:
> 
> Snape was not spying for Voldemort at the time Peter 
> turned traitor.  He was not a member of the original 
> Order. He was not yet teaching at Hogwarts. There is 
> no clue in the books as to what Snape was doing for 
> *Voldemort* a year before GH. He may have been spying 
> for Dumbledore by that time, but no one would know 
> that except Dumbledore.

Mike:
Does my above answer your questions? I hope this also answers the 
questions that Hickengruendler and Pippin brought up on this point. 
Snape's position and/or job does not affect my contention. Sorry for 
the confusion. :)


> houyhnhnm:
> It is plausible that there was a middleman between PP 
> and LV, but there is no evidence even to show such was 
> the case, let alone who it was.  We have absolutely 
> no canon to explain how Peter came to spy for Voldemort.  
> Was he kidnapped? Did he approach Voldemort on his own?  
> Perhaps he was recruited.  Plausible, but Snape seems a 
> very unlikely candidate for recruiter and go-between, 
> however, because he was not placed for such a role.  
> He was not a member of the Order.  He was not a friend 
> of Peter's.  He did not move in the circle of Peter's 
> friends.  And they were no longer at school.

Mike:
Re the middleman, true enough, there is no canon. I am speculating 
based on how spying is normally handled. We don't even know the 
logistics of how Snape's spying was handled. I was left to make an 
educated guess. I would gladly entertain alternatives. How would you 
guess that Voldemort handled his spy Pettigrew?

And you're right, I never suggested that Snape was Pettigrew's 
recruiter nor handler. I specifically suggested that Snape didn't 
know anything about Pettigrew before GH.


> houyhnhnm:
> Or am I misunderstanding your argument.  Further down, 
> in the part I snipped, you seem to be implying that Snape 
> only found out Peter was the Secret Keeper after LV's fall.

Mike: Yep :)

> houyhnhnm:
> Again, where is the evidence, or for that matter, the need 
> to bring Snape into it?

Mike:
Nobody *brought* Snape into it. Snape was just another DE who learned 
of this spy Pettigrew that had been the one to lead LV to GH and his 
downfall. As all good spies, Snape was nobody special to his other 
DEs, he just was told like all the rest were told.


> houyhnhnm:
> Your argument seems to start with the assumption that 
> all of Voldemort's followers were in each other confidence.

Mike:
I'll stop you here and say emphatically NO that is not my assumption 
at all. I believe that Voldemort ran his organization using the 
Patron system. He had cell leaders who knew their charges. The little 
guys reported to their cell leaders. The cell leaders reported to 
Voldemort, or possibly another middleman who controlled several but 
not all the cells. The several cell leaders probably but not 
definitely knew the other cell leaders. The lower cell members 
probably knew their fellow members but not the  members of different 
cells; unless they were involved in a group effort like the DoM raid 
where two or more cells participated. 

Spies were probably handled under a different chain of command, and 
most likely did not know each other. But someone has to retrieve the 
spies information. The spies need to maintain their cover, they can't 
be running off to Voldemort every time they have some info. Nor could 
Voldemort be expected to always be available to accept time sensitive 
information. That is why I envision a handler for LV's spies. Again, 
not canon, we have very little canon to extrapolate from as to how LV 
ran his organization. 

Most of this idea comes from an LJ piece of Pharnabazus. If you'd 
like to read his piece, part 1 link is below:

http://pharnabazus.livejournal.com/715.html



>From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/169390
Pippin:
Only the secret keeper can have betrayed the secret. Unless these 
individuals were known friends of the Potters, they can't have been 
the secret keeper, so what have they to fear? The only reason Peter's 
handler would have to be afraid is if he were known to be a friend of 
the Potter's or a friend of Dumbledore's as well.


Mike:
Dumbledore warned Harry, in the OotP wrap-up soliloquy, that there 
were plenty of DEs still at large after LV's downfall and some of 
them almost as bad as LV. Bella and Co. tortured the Longbottoms some 
time after the downfall. What do you suppose Bella would have done if 
she had caught the one who led LV to his downfall? Especially if she 
thought that person didn't just lead but had a hand in causing LV's 
disappearance.

Say LV had held the identity of Pettigrew close, as we both believe. 
The rest of the DEs are looking around for someone to blame. That is, 
if they don't know about Pettigrew, they don't know about the 
Potter's Fidelius and their SK, they don't know who lured their 
Master to his fate. They start fishing around for a scapegoat and the 
spy handler become a likely target. 'Hey, he had LV's ear, he had 
priviledged information, he's the one who told LV to go to GH.' So 
that spy handler decides to give up the name Pettigrew to assuage 
Bella and her ilk, to deflect suspicion that it was him.

Yes, again I am speculating. I don't know what else to do with the 
lack of information. But it is canon that some of the DEs knew 
Pettigrew's name. I'm trying to bridge the gap between an assumed 
tight-lipped LV and the fact that PP's name got out. It didn't come 
from LV, he's gone. It had to come from another DE. Why? This is the 
best explanation I could come up with, based on my interpretation in 
canon. That the DEs all suspected each other, that LV liked it that 
way.


> > 8) Snape learns this info about PP in due course and reports it
> >  to Dumbledore.

Pippin:
Snape would not learn anything more, since Lucius is pretending
he was under the Imperius Curse and has no contact with
anyone thought to be a faithful DE. Snape wants to believe
Lucius, his old protector, thus the sudden movement when
Harry reveals that Lucius was at the graveyard.

Mike:
I am a bit confused. I don't understand where you think I brought 
Lucius into this?? Nor how Lucius pretending to be under the 
Imperious has anything to do with Snape learning about Pettigrew.
Related to Lucius, his admonishment to Draco in Borgin & Burkes (CoS) 
could stem from the DE rumor that Potter was a new Dark Lord. Potter 
had, at this point in time, faced Voldemort twice and bested him 
twice. Maybe Lucius wasn't as sure as Snape was in the opinion of the 
Potter boy.

Since many have questioned Snape learning about Pettigrew, I'll 
address that. Snape was not the type to burn his bridges. Neither he 
nor Dumbledore believed Voldemort was completely gone. He would not 
completely cut himself off from all the other DEs. Canon suggests 
that he at least kept in touch with Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy. Cissy 
knew where Snape lived. Canon also suggests that someone was 
informing on the DEs to the Ministry as to *who* were these former 
DEs still at large. So I don't think it a stretch that Snape kept in 
touch with some of his former DE mates.

Even more important is the time immediately following LV's downfall. 
If Snape cuts himself off then, he becomes the prime suspect for the 
rest of the DEs as the spy who caused the downfall. He has to play it 
cool and act outraged at LV's downfall, just like the other loyal 
DEs. He can truly play the innocent party, he didn't do it. Also, 
this time of confusion (for the DEs) is a prime oppurtunity to 
collect information from the DEs. This is why I don't believe Snape 
ran and hid from the rest of the DEs. And why he learned of Pettigrew 
just as the other DEs learned of Pettigrew.

Dumbledore's Dilemma:
If DD finds out subsequent to GH, Sirius' imprisonment, and his own 
testimony that PP was the SK, what can he do? He has even less proof 
than he had for his testimony. He heard from his spy who heard from 
some other DEs that another DE has let it be known that PP was the 
man. Barty Crouch is going to accept that? Dumbledore is going to 
chance exposing his spy for this longshot? And don't forget about the 
13 dead people that Dumbledore has no evidence to refute.

Furthermore, what did Dumbledore do as far as trying to clear Sirius 
after PoA, when he definitely believed Sirius was innocent? He had 
Barty Crouch, the man who locked up Sirius and threw away the key, up 
at Hogwarts. Does he ever pull him aside and say, 'you know, you were 
wrong about Sirius Black.'? Does DD go to the MoM and try to get 
Sirius cleared at any time after PoA? 

We have the same amount of canon that he pleaded Sirius' case to the 
MoM before PoA as after PoA: None. So why is it hard to believe that 
Dumbledore did nothing for Sirius before PoA if he did nothing to 
clear him after PoA? Conversely, if you believe he did try to clear 
Sirius after PoA, how do we know he didn't try before? It obviously 
didn't work in either case. Or, we could say in neither case did 
Dumbledore try. It all comes to the same thing. No canon either way, 
only canon that says that Sirius is just as guilty in the eyes of the 
MoM before and after PoA.

Mike