Marietta

[lanval1015]

No: HPFGUIDX 176846

 
> Angel:
> 
>  
> 
> Absolutely not!!!  This was no defensive act on Hermione's part.  
It was no
> preemptive.  Who did she hope to defend by this trickery?  No one 
that I
> could see, Harry only got off because of Dumbledore's trickery.
> 
>  
Lanval;
Absolutely yes. It was desigend to warn the DA not only that they 
had been betrayed (granted, only if there was enough time, which in 
the actual event was not the cause), but also by *whom*. No one 
could have foreseen the precise way in which the betrayal took place.

> Angel:
> Hermione had no part in anyone's defence here.  Defence would 
imply there
> was a means to do something to protect everyone.  Hermione's spell 
was
> retribution pure and simple.  If you told, you get scarred.   
There is no
> liplock spell in action here to pre-empt telling.
> 
>  
Lanval:
Seems to that had the Marauders signed a similar contract, the 
small problem of exactly who went to Voldie and blabbed would not 
have existed. Hermione knew this tale, and learned from it. 

Liplock spell? Nice idea. For how long? A day? The end of the school 
year? Forever? Will it have to go hand in hand with a ...handlock 
spell? Because I'm pretty sure Marietta and every other student is 
able to write. 

Lanval, smiling at the thought of the sheer amount of angry 
responses here, had Marietta been struck mute and unable to 
write. 

 

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