[the_old_crowd] Re: Snape's Remorse

[Waldo Glatisant]

--- nkafkafi <nkafkafi at ...> wrote:

> > Pippin:
> > "Judge" Hall,   a real life lawyer, instructed the
> Accio jury that if
> > they believed that Dumbledore had died as a result
> of the Avada
> > Kedavra curse, either directly or by being blasted
> off the tower, ... [yadda yadda yadda]

... snip ...

> Neri:
> In this case I must question the process of
> assembling this jury. If
> they said that there was a 20/80 chance of
> Dumbledore dying of the
> poisoning during the 3 seconds in which he was
> sailing off the tower,
> this implies they were 100% sure he would have died
> of the poisoning  ... [etc., etc., etc.]


Waldo aka Justin Felt-Flatulent:

Well, I was there and it was not what you might call a
thorough, rational, and unbiased proceeding.  

Firstly,the trial took place late on Friday evening
whilst many of us were quite tired from traveling and
/ or setting up the event. Secondly,  the jury was
stacked with folks with erotomanic obsessions for
Severus Snape (and, surprisingly, Snape is the target
of their fascination and not Alan Rickman).  

Perhaps more significantly we were all probably more
interested in whether Snape was "guilty" in terms of
the narrative, and less concerned with whether he was
"guilty" of causing DD's death in the legal sense.
These two aspects of guilt were probably quite muddled
in our collective thinking and in the proceedings. I
myself am leaning towards "not guilty" in terms of the
narrative (i.e., he was acting in loyalty to DD and
against the DE's),  but I imagine that he would be
"guilty" in the legal sense.  After all,  "I killed
him because he really wanted me to,  I am quite sure
of it ..." isn't really considered a valid legal
defense.  On the other hand,  I believe that in Texas,
"He looked like he needed killin'" actually is a valid
legal defense.  

Peace,

Waldo



		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs