In 1895, Frederik Zahlmann, a bailiff office clerk, pondered the growing chorus of criticism surrounding the Danish criminal justice administration, particularly the inquisitorial nature of criminal trials. He wrote:
Just as the inquisitorial process seems appropriate to our judiciary, it also seems appropriate for our—in many ways—proper criminal class. When implored to reveal the truth and confess, the judge appeals to sentiments the criminal himself harbors. The judge speaks to him much as his parents did at home, teachers did in school, and as his master has since childhood whenever he erred. It is hard to detach from old reminiscences, and the criminal, knowing he must confess, will, at least initially, find it hard to resist a benevolent exhortation. Perhaps, over time, he may harden as a habitual offender, but even then, it will be difficult to completely shake off the old sense of duty.
This patriarchal and somewhat idyllic interpretation was common among certain adherents of ...
