AKs and Horcrux!Harry and soul-ripping (was: Re: Stupid question about...)

[pippin_999]

> 1)Voldemort cast some spell at Harry that night. Belief in the WW
is 
> that that spell was an AK and that Harry is the only person to have 
> survived it.
> 
> We Muggles have problems with this AK. *Why the heck* does anybody
in  the WW think Harry was subject to one? 


Pippin:
Because the ministry has ways of detecting it.
"The Ministry, on the other hand, knew at once that this was a
wizard's murder." "They can detect magic but not the perpetrator." 
HBP-US  367,368

Now, Voldemort presumably has ways of interfering with the detection
when he wants a murder to remain secret, as in the case of Frank Bryce
or Bertha Jorkins, but I am sure that if all had gone as Voldemort 
planned, the Dark Mark would have blazed above Godric's Hollow that 
night.  The Potter murder was not supposed to be a 
secret.

BTW, a lack of magical evidence might account for Dumbledore's 
confusion about how Frank Bryce died, though Harry did tell 
Dumbledore that he'd seen an old man emerge from Voldemort's wand. 

Eloise:
> What does Diary!Tom *know*? The fact that he knew about Harry's
early history is intriguing. 

Pippin:
Diary!Tom says he learned about Harry from Ginny :"Well, you see,
Ginnytold me all about you. Your whole *fascinating* history."

Eloise:
> So we have a spell that doesn't act like an AK and yet it not being
one  just doesn't make sense from where I'm sitting.
> 
> I can only believe with Neri that if Harry *is* a Horcrux, then he
is  an unintentional one and even then...


Pippin:
Well, we know that wizards can do unintentional magic, especially if
they're angry or frightened. Voldemort, seeing his own AK bounce
off and come at him would be very angry and frightened indeed, I
would think.

He might have formed a horcrux the same way Harry blew up
Aunt Marge, as a subconscious expression of his rage and fear,
and like Harry, he would have no idea that he'd done it until he
saw the results.


Eloise:
> Do/can the rips heal? Does *any* killing rip the soul? Are those
who  kill in the course of war similarly damaged? And what damage
exactly  does the ripping do? 


Pippin:
Slughorn says "By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart." 
It sounds like he is using "killing" as a synonym for murder and that
malice and premeditation are important. And we have this from
Sirius, "I'll say this for Moody, though, he never killed if he could 
help it. Always brought people in alive where possible." GoF  ch27.
So Moody has killed, and yet he's an order member in good standing.

I don't think Dumbledore would accept someone he considers
to be an unrepentant murderer into the Order. Repentant murderers,
on the other hand, might be allowed. Dumbledore says, "Never
forget, though, that while his soul may be damaged beyond repair,
his brain and magical powers remain intact." --HBP-US 509 ch 23.
That sounds as though a soul could be repaired under certain 
circumstances. 


Pippin