did you like Harry Potter And the Half-BLood Prince ?

Well he could have shown harry his patronus. Harry would have recognized it from leading him to the sword of Gryfindor. Commander-Gree

There is no way around it....Dumbledore did one of two things with Snape. Condemned him to death....or to prison.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Hard to succeed when several teachers are attacking. Let's face it....Dumbledore put Snape in bad circumstances to get any help. I doubt Harry would have listened to Snape though. You can't use memories to avoid Azkhaban...obviously. Or that would negate several books.

LJS9502_basic

Teachers weren't attacking when Harry got to where Snape was, and Snape was begging Voldemort to let him bring him Harry (which, as we later learn, was his excuse for trying to get to Harry to tell him the truth).

I know Harry wouldn't believe Snape; that's why Snape could still give him the memory.

You can use the testimonies of other, credible wizards to get out of Azkaban (as demonstrated by Dumbledore's defense of Harry in book 5), and Harry could've (and probably did, according to the events of the epilogue) offered his own, being of age and the defeater of Voldemort.

Who are these wizards that would know Snape was doing what Dumbledore wanted? The only one that knew was dead and can't be called to testify.

But Snape's memories would verify that Snape was not working for Voldemort.

Harry Potter knew. He would know by the time he defeated Voldemort and he would testify; there is no rule or policy in the entire series that Dumbledore's portrait would be unable to testify either.

And for the millionth time; Snape was cleared posthumously. He could've been cleared just as easy had he survived.

I don't know if it does or not, but it doesn't matter; the current headmaster was McGonnagall, who was a fanatical follower of Dumbledore anyway; Dumbledore obviously did not need permission to speak from his portrait.

Theokhoth

But Snape's memories would verify that Snape was not working for Voldemort.

Harry Potter knew. He would know by the time he defeated Voldemort and he would testify; there is no rule or policy in the entire series that Dumbledore's portrait would be unable to testify either.

Theokhoth

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"] Well he could have shown harry his patronus. Harry would have recognized it from leading him to the sword of Gryfindor. LJS9502_basic

There is no way around it....Dumbledore did one of two things with Snape. Condemned him to death....or to prison.

Snape's patronus was a doe, and it is Snape's patronus that he's talking about. Remember when Snape's patronus leads Harry and Ron to the sword?

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"] Well he could have shown harry his patronus. Harry would have recognized it from leading him to the sword of Gryfindor. LJS9502_basic

There is no way around it....Dumbledore did one of two things with Snape. Condemned him to death....or to prison.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

But Snape's memories would verify that Snape was not working for Voldemort.

Harry Potter knew. He would know by the time he defeated Voldemort and he would testify; there is no rule or policy in the entire series that Dumbledore's portrait would be unable to testify either.

LJS9502_basic

You're not understanding me. This is how it would go.

Snape would find Harry Potter and take him, one way or another, to the Pensieve (or summon the Pensieve himself).

He would show Harry, by force if necessary, the memory.

Harry, having seen this memory, would believe Snape.

Harry would kill Voldemort.

Should Snape be tried for Dumbledore's murder, Harry would testify in Snape's defense. This is allowed as shown in book 5.

Snape, having a defender as credible as Harry, would be let off.

There would be no need to use the Pensieve in any trial.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

I don't know if it does or not, but it doesn't matter; the current headmaster was McGonnagall, who was a fanatical follower of Dumbledore anyway; Dumbledore obviously did not need permission to speak from his portrait.

LJS9502_basic

The portraits are shown to be able to recount memories from their lives. There is no rule that says he cannot testify in a trial. He does not need permission to speak, because he and several other portraits speak throughout the entire series without the headmaster's permission.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"] Well he could have shown harry his patronus. Harry would have recognized it from leading him to the sword of Gryfindor. Theokhoth

There is no way around it....Dumbledore did one of two things with Snape. Condemned him to death....or to prison.

Snape's patronus was a doe, and it is Snape's patronus that he's talking about. Remember when Snape's patronus leads Harry and Ron to the sword?

You're not understanding me. This is how it would go.

Snape would find Harry Potter and take him, one way or another, to the Pensieve (or summon the Pensieve himself).

He would show Harry, by force if necessary, the memory.

Harry, having seen this memory, would believe Snape.

Harry would kill Voldemort.

Should Snape be tried for Dumbledore's murder, Harry would testify in Snape's defense. This is allowed as shown in book 5.

Snape, having a defender as credible as Harry, would be let off.

There would be no need to use the Pensieve in any trial.

Theokhoth

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Yet again an example of poor writing. NOWHERE in the books does it state what Lily's patronus was until it became important to the plot. But no one every told Harry what her patronus was. So really....that would mean nothing. Remember no one but Dumbledore knew Snape loved Lily. He is dead.

There is no way around it....Dumbledore did one of two things with Snape. Condemned him to death....or to prison.

LJS9502_basic

Snape's patronus was a doe, and it is Snape's patronus that he's talking about. Remember when Snape's patronus leads Harry and Ron to the sword?

It's not about Lily's patronus . Nobody even mentioned Lily's patronus. It's about Snape's patronus, which was a doe, which is what led Harry to the sword. Not Lily. Lily had nothing to do with it at all.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

You're not understanding me. This is how it would go.

Snape would find Harry Potter and take him, one way or another, to the Pensieve (or summon the Pensieve himself).

He would show Harry, by force if necessary, the memory.

Harry, having seen this memory, would believe Snape.

Harry would kill Voldemort.

Should Snape be tried for Dumbledore's murder, Harry would testify in Snape's defense. This is allowed as shown in book 5.

Snape, having a defender as credible as Harry, would be let off.

There would be no need to use the Pensieve in any trial.

LJS9502_basic

Of course, seeing as Hogwarts was busy burying their dead and seeing as Snape showed himself more than capable of flying to the headmaster's window without a broom, yes, he could get to the office, and even if he could not, there's still the summoning charm. Accio Pensieve, remember?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

But Snape's memories would verify that Snape was not working for Voldemort.

Harry Potter knew. He would know by the time he defeated Voldemort and he would testify; there is no rule or policy in the entire series that Dumbledore's portrait would be unable to testify either.

Theokhoth

You're not understanding me. This is how it would go.

Snape would find Harry Potter and take him, one way or another, to the Pensieve (or summon the Pensieve himself).

He would show Harry, by force if necessary, the memory.

Harry, having seen this memory, would believe Snape.

Harry would kill Voldemort.

Should Snape be tried for Dumbledore's murder, Harry would testify in Snape's defense. This is allowed as shown in book 5.

Snape, having a defender as credible as Harry, would be let off.

There would be no need to use the Pensieve in any trial.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Okay if memories are allowed...why was Sirius in Azkhaban? He didn't kill those muggles nor Pettigrew. Why was Lucius Malfoy free? His memories would have shown he wasn't under the Imperius Curse. You can't have it both ways. She didn't allow for memories to be used for trial.

Commander-Gree

You're not understanding me. This is how it would go.

Snape would find Harry Potter and take him, one way or another, to the Pensieve (or summon the Pensieve himself).

He would show Harry, by force if necessary, the memory.

Harry, having seen this memory, would believe Snape.

Harry would kill Voldemort.

Should Snape be tried for Dumbledore's murder, Harry would testify in Snape's defense. This is allowed as shown in book 5.

Snape, having a defender as credible as Harry, would be let off.

There would be no need to use the Pensieve in any trial.

Another good point.

It's not about Lily's patronus . Nobody even mentioned Lily's patronus. It's about Snape's patronus, which was a doe, which is what led Harry to the sword. Not Lily. Lily had nothing to do with it at all.

Theokhoth

Not to mention Dumbledore could have just explained Snape to Harry when they met at Kings Cross (Though I don't know if Dumbledore knew that would happen). Anyway Kingsley was the Minister of Magic so the OotP was in control of the ministry and could have cleared Snape once his innocence was realized. No trial needed really. Commander-Gree

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

It's not about Lily's patronus . Nobody even mentioned Lily's patronus. It's about Snape's patronus, which was a doe, which is what led Harry to the sword. Not Lily. Lily had nothing to do with it at all.

LJS9502_basic

No. . .which is why Snape would have to give Harry his memories. ;)

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

It's not about Lily's patronus . Nobody even mentioned Lily's patronus. It's about Snape's patronus, which was a doe, which is what led Harry to the sword. Not Lily. Lily had nothing to do with it at all.

Theokhoth

No. . .which is why Snape would have to give Harry his memories. ;)

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"]Not to mention Dumbledore could have just explained Snape to Harry when they met at Kings Cross (Though I don't know if Dumbledore knew that would happen). Anyway Kingsley was the Minister of Magic so the OotP was in control of the ministry and could have cleared Snape once his innocence was realized. No trial needed really. LJS9502_basic

Well I have seen every movie in theaters since the day they came out, but I missed the 6th one because I was in jail and I was supposed to see it today but I got held up. I heard from reliable sources that it was decent, but nothing special, it was the worst one I heard. And I believe these people.

Didn't explain to Harry that Snape was good? He didn't need to, Harry had already seen the memories. Dumbledore did not intend for Snape to die there because he needed Harry to know that Harry would have to die. It was by shear luck that Harry was able to get the memories before Snape died or he may never knew that he had to let himself die. Commander-Gree

I thought it was pretty good.

I was sick when I watched it, but I didn't really enjoy it much. Overall I was just kinda bored. The whole mess with Ron and the obssessed girl really annoyed me. I never read the book, so idk. Even though it was technically good, I didn't really enjoy myself.

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"] Didn't explain to Harry that Snape was good? He didn't need to, Harry had already seen the memories. Dumbledore did not intend for Snape to die there because he needed Harry to know that Harry would have to die. It was by shear luck that Harry was able to get the memories before Snape died or he may never knew that he had to let himself die. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"] Didn't explain to Harry that Snape was good? He didn't need to, Harry had already seen the memories. Dumbledore did not intend for Snape to die there because he needed Harry to know that Harry would have to die. It was by shear luck that Harry was able to get the memories before Snape died or he may never knew that he had to let himself die. Commander-Gree

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]You are assuming what wasn't written though. You can't assume that. Dumbledore really wasn't too concerned over how people were used. Like I said...he made no prevision for what would happen to Snape. He didn't care.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"] I really don't know what he could have done without giving Snape's true allegiance away. Snape was willing. If it hadn't been for Dumbledore, Snape would have been in Azkaban rather than teaching at Hogwarts in the first place. Commander-Gree

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]If it hadn't been for Snape Dumbledore would have had no clue what Voldemorte was up to...

LJS9502_basic

I don't remember the details of that exactly, but back then Snape was on his way to becoming a Death Eater so I don't think he was one of Dumbledore's favorite students. Anyway I think we can agree to disagree here. Its not really definitively written either way. Though we can agree that there are things that Dumbledore should have told Snape from the start, like the fact that Harry would have to die for example.

Commander-Gree

Yes, that is true. I just don't see the Dumbledore character as good. All things considered.

[QUOTE="Commander-Gree"]

I don't remember the details of that exactly, but back then Snape was on his way to becoming a Death Eater so I don't think he was one of Dumbledore's favorite students. Anyway I think we can agree to disagree here. Its not really definitively written either way. Though we can agree that there are things that Dumbledore should have told Snape from the start, like the fact that Harry would have to die for example.

LJS9502_basic

Yes, that is true. I just don't see the Dumbledore character as good. All things considered.