Sirius's Betrayal (long) - (was: CHAP DISC: Chapter 5: The Dementor)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 189524



> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/189517
> Pippin:
> What about Lupin's connection to James? I don't think Dumbledore
> believed that Lupin could have any sway over Black, but at this
> point Dumbledore needed a DADA teacher who really knew his stuff
> and could be counted on to protect Harry.

Mike:
I see your point about needing a teacher who knew his DADA. And certainly Lupin had Dumbledore's confidence in the protecting Harry department. If that's what you mean by suggesting his connection to James, I can see that. 


> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/189519
> > Alla:
> > 
> > I was under the impression that Grindelwald was *always* on dark > > side, <snip>

> Pippin:
> If Grindelwald was *always* on the Dark Side, he wouldn't have been a welcome guest in Bathilda's home and Dumbledore wouldn't have wanted to be associated with him. Dumbledore says that he knew in his heart was Grindelwald was, but he closed his eyes to it. It wasn't until the argument with Aberforth became a fight that Grindelwald lost control and what Dumbledore had sensed in him sprang "into terrible being."

Mike:
Maybe I'm remembering the chronology incorrectly. I thought Grindelwald had already been kicked out of Durmstrang when he came to visit his Aunt Bathilda. If that is so, then someone expelled from Durmstrang, of all places, for dark magic, well,... they can't have had much of a sunny reputation now could they? That is to say, what Dumbledore sensed in Grindelwald might have had a basis in the known facts about who Grindelwald was and what he was capable of. Like I said, that's if I have the chronology correct.



> Pippin:
> I think Dumbledore  believed that he sensed a similar darkness in
> Sirius, to which James was closing his eyes. It was an illusion, 
>   <snip>
> Of course Sirius never showed any ambitions towards gaining
> political power by force,
>   <snip>
> He might have feared that Voldemort had done the same thing
> with Sirius. 

Mike:
Rather a *delusion* than an illusion, I would say. To out of the blue conjure up dark intentions for Sirius, based on what had happened with himself 80 years previous,... I never sensed that Dumbledore was capable of this kind of self deceit. 



> > Alla: 
> > And yes, since all it took for Dumbledore is one conversation
> > with Sirius in PoA to believe in his innocence, I am also under
> > opinion that Dumbledore never [believed the lie].

> Pippin:
> There's more than a conversation. If Sirius had wanted to kill
> Harry or take him to the Dark Lord, he'd had the chance already.
> That at least proved that Sirius was not a crazed murderer who
> was out for Harry's blood, and the shape of Harry's patronus gave
> evidence that the story of the animagi was not a fabrication.

Mike:
Sorry Pippin, not convincing to me. First off, Sirius hadn't had much of a chance until that night in the Shack. The thought that Dumbledore had correctly worked out Sirius's intentions the night he got into Harry's bed chambers would indicate he's far more intuitive than I'm ready to give him credit. For Dumbledore to somehow realize that Sirius wasn't after Harry, but instead after Ron's rat,... not buying it.

That leaves only the night in the Shack as a wasted opportunity, and Dumbledore doesn't know that story until he talks to Sirius. So just as Alla said, one conversation was supposedly all it took to change Dumbledore's mind about Sirius's guilt, if you believe Dumbledore. I don't!

 
> > > Pippin:
> > <SNIP>
> > > Don't forget that Sirius wasn't sent to Azkaban for betraying
> > the Potters, he was sent there for the daylight murder of 
> > thirteen people. If he was capable of that, who
> > could doubt that he'd set up the Potters as well? <SNIP>
> > 
> > Alla:
> > 
> > Huh, I always thought he was sent in Azkaban for both events.
> What about Dumbledore giving "evidence" that Sirius was Potters
> secret keeper at the hearing?
> 
> Pippin:
> 
> What hearing? There was no trial. Dumbledore would have been
> questioned by the Ministry, rather as Harry was after Dumbledore's
> death. Dumbledore gave evidence of what he knew, which was that
> James had insisted on using Sirius as his secret keeper, despite
> Dumbledore's warnings that someone close to the Potters was passing
> information on their movements to Voldemort.

Mike:
Alla was right, Dumbledore said he "gave evidence to the Ministry that Sirius had been the Potter's Secret-Keeper."(PoA, p.392, US) Hearing, administrative proceding, kangaroo court, it doesn't matter. The salient point was that Dumbledore gave evidence of something that he *did not know to be fact*. Why does Dumbledore bring this up in the conversation with H & H if it wasn't to affirm that his evidence was part of the reason for Sirius's incarceration? The WW has a strange justice system, who's to say that Dumbledore's evidence wasn't just as much a reason for locking up Sirius as his murder of 13 people in broad daylight? Especially considering it was done without the benefit of a trial, thank you very much Barty Crouch.


> Pippin:
> That was not a lie, so far as we know. The liars were James and
> Sirius, who pretended that Sirius, not Pettigrew, was the secret
> keeper.

Mike:
Yes, it was a lie. Even if it was unintentional, the "evidence" Dumbledore gave was a lie, by definition. Whether or not Dumbledore knew the real truth is at the heart of this debate.


> Pippin:
> It all fit together, or seemed to. Sirius was the spy, he had betrayed the Potters, and then he had gone berserk and murdered thirteen people. There really was not, at the time, any other credible explanation for how those people had died.

Mike:
And now we come to the critical point of the saga. What would have ever foreshadowed this supposed change in Sirius? Taking the whole story into context, where is the sense in believing that Sirius was the spy that came in from the cold? I read nothing of those critical years leading up to Voldemort's attack of the Potters that gives the slightest inclination that Sirius would be the logical suspect. We need "someone close to the Potters" to be the spy. If that leaves only Black, Lupin, and Pettigrew, which of those seemed more likely to fit the bill? I submit that Pettigrew, followed by Lupin, were more likely than Sirius.

So what trap does Dumbledore devise to find the spy? If it was the Fidelius Charm, that was pretty poor. That would only eliminate one person if it worked. If it didn't work, it would result in the Potters' deaths. And it was incumbant upon Dumbledore knowing absolutely who the secret-keeper was. Sorry to say, Dumbledore wasn't as close to the Potters as he believed he was, or that he deluded himself into believing he was. Because they did the whole thing without him. Whether they didn't trust Dumbledore, I cannot say. That they didn't let Dumbledore in on the secret, points to a little distrust, imo.

So, the Potters get betrayed, Harry is left an orphan, Dumbledore devises a plan to place Harry with Lily's sister so he can perform his "blood protection" charm, and now what? Dumbledore *thinks* he knows who betrayed the Potters, despite the fact that they didn't involve him in the Fidelius charm. On this slim "evidence" - slim because it was hearsay, not because of the gravity - Dumbledore jumps on the bandwagon, with a Ministry that he rarely trusts, and helps put Sirius away. Conveniently enough, there is now nobody to contradict his plans for Harry. There is nobody to consider Harry's best interest, instead of Dumbledore's plans to - as Snape put it - raise a pig for slaughter. 

Did Dumbledore have this plan all worked out before he gave his "evidence"? Probably not. But if you ask me whether or not Dumbledore understood the significance of "the boy who lived", whether or not Dumbledore understood the potential of the Prophecy's line "power the Dark Lord knows not", and whether Dumbledore knew he needed to explore these avenues unfettered and unhampered by a untrusting - of Dumbledore - godfather to Harry,... I'd say YES!

Besides, whether the spy was Black or Pettigrew matters not, at that point. Pettigrew is dead and Black's going away for his death. Why explore it any longer? They didn't trust DD to be involved, why should he care about Black's fate? So what that Black had been the Potter's closest friend, trusted ally, ardent supporter of the fight against Voldemort? He's a liability now, and possibly a hinderance to whatever plan Dumbledore might come up with for Harry. Better that Black goes away, even if he wasn't guilty of what he was charged with. In fact, Dumbledore can throw a little fuel on the fire if he gives his "evidence", who cares if he really doesn't know his "evidence" for a fact? It serves his purpose.

Like I said earlier, I would never have accused Dumbledore of complicity in this farce, back at the time. But I was always confused by why Dumbledore did not try harder to find the truth. He certainly went to great lengths to find out everything about Tom Riddle, why wouldn't he do the same for someone that was once his ally in the fight against Voldemort and supposedly an integral part in a crucial chapter of Voldemort's morphology? This part always puzzled me. Now, I can see a reason, even if I wouldn't have believed that reason back then.

~Mike