-
Главная
-
- Книги
-
- Авторы
-
- Франц Кафка
-
- Процесс
-
- Стр. 22/42
Для того чтобы воспользоваться озвучкой предложений, необходимо
Войти или зарегистрироваться
Озвучка предложений доступна при наличии PRO-доступа
Купить PRO-доступ
that
the
first
documents
submitted
are
sometimes
not
even
read
by
the
court
.
They
simply
put
them
with
the
other
documents
and
point
out
that
,
for
the
time
being
,
questioning
and
observing
the
accused
are
much
more
important
than
anything
written
.
If
the
applicant
becomes
insistent
,
then
they
add
that
before
they
come
to
any
decision
,
as
soon
as
all
the
material
has
been
brought
together
,
with
due
regard
,
of
course
,
to
all
the
documents
,
then
these
first
documents
to
have
been
submitted
will
also
be
checked
over
.
But
unfortunately
,
even
this
is
not
usually
true
,
the
first
documents
submitted
are
usually
mislaid
or
lost
completely
,
and
even
if
they
do
keep
them
right
to
the
end
they
are
hardly
read
,
although
the
lawyer
only
knew
about
this
from
rumour
.
This
is
all
very
regrettable
,
but
not
entirely
without
its
justifications
.
But
K.
should
not
forget
that
the
trial
would
not
be
public
,
if
the
court
deems
it
necessary
it
can
be
made
public
but
there
is
no
law
that
says
it
has
to
be
.
As
a
result
,
the
accused
and
his
defence
do
n't
have
access
even
to
the
court
records
,
and
especially
not
to
the
indictment
,
and
that
means
we
generally
do
n't
know
-
or
at
least
not
precisely
-
what
the
first
documents
need
to
be
about
,
which
means
that
if
they
do
contain
anything
of
relevance
to
the
case
it
's
only
by
a
lucky
coincidence
.
If
anything
about
the
individual
charges
and
the
reasons
for
them
comes
out
clearly
or
can
be
guessed
at
while
the
accused
is
being
questioned
,
then
it
's
possible
to
work
out
and
submit
documents
that
really
direct
the
issue
and
present
proof
,
but
not
before
.
Conditions
like
this
,
of
course
,
place
the
defence
in
a
very
unfavourable
and
difficult
position
.
But
that
is
what
they
intend
.
In
fact
,
defence
is
not
really
allowed
under
the
law
,
it
's
only
tolerated
,
and
there
is
even
some
dispute
about
whether
the
relevant
parts
of
the
law
imply
even
that
.
So
strictly
speaking
,
there
is
no
such
thing
as
a
counsel
acknowledged
by
the
court
,
and
anyone
who
comes
before
this
court
as
counsel
is
basically
no
more
than
a
barrack
room
lawyer
.
The
effect
of
all
this
,
of
course
,
is
to
remove
the
dignity
of
the
whole
procedure
,
the
next
time
K.
is
in
the
court
offices
he
might
like
to
have
a
look
in
at
the
lawyers
"
room
,
just
so
that
he
's
seen
it
.
He
might
well
be
quite
shocked
by
the
people
he
sees
assembled
there
.
The
room
they
've
been
allocated
,
with
its
narrow
space
and
low
ceiling
,
will
be
enough
to
show
what
contempt
the
court
has
for
these
people
.
The
only
light
in
the
room
comes
through
a
little
window
that
is
so
high
up
that
,
if
you
want
to
look
out
of
it
,
you
first
have
to
get
one
of
your
colleagues
to
support
you
on
his
back
,
and
even
then
the
smoke
from
the
chimney
just
in
front
of
it
will
go
up
your
nose
and
make
your
face
black
.
In
the
floor
of
this
room
-
to
give
yet
another
example
of
the
conditions
there
-
there
is
a
hole
that
's
been
there
for
more
than
a
year
,
it
's
not
so
big
that
a
man
could
fall
through
,
but
it
is
big
enough
for
your
foot
to
disappear
through
it
.
The
lawyers
"
room
is
on
the
second
floor
of
the
attic
;
if
your
foot
does
go
through
it
will
hang
down
into
the
first
floor
of
the
attic
underneath
it
,
and
right
in
the
corridor
where
the
litigants
are
waiting
.
It
's
no
exaggeration
when
lawyers
say
that
conditions
like
that
are
a
disgrace
.
Complaints
to
the
management
do
n't
have
the
slightest
effect
,
but
the
lawyers
are
strictly
forbidden
to
alter
anything
in
the
room
at
their
own
expense
.
But
even
treating
the
lawyers
in
this
way
has
its
reasons
.
They
want
,
as
far
as
possible
,
to
prevent
any
kind
of
defence
,
everything
should
be
made
the
responsibility
of
the
accused
.
Not
a
bad
point
of
view
,
basically
,
but
nothing
could
be
more
mistaken
than
to
think
from
that
that
lawyers
are
not
necessary
for
the
accused
in
this
court
.
On
the
contrary
,
there
is
no
court
where
they
are
less
needed
than
here
.
This
is
because
proceedings
are
generally
kept
secret
not
only
from
the
public
but
also
from
the
accused
.
Only
as
far
as
that
is
possible
,
of
course
,
but
it
is
possible
to
a
very
large
extent
.
And
the
accused
does
n't
get
to
see
the
court
records
either
,
and
it
's
very
difficult
to
infer
what
's
in
the
court
records
from
what
's
been
said
during
questioning
based
on
them
,
especially
for
the
accused
who
is
in
a
difficult
situation
and
is
faced
with
every
possible
worry
to
distract
him
.
This
is
when
the
defence
begins
.
Counsel
for
the
defence
are
not
normally
allowed
to
be
present
while
the
accused
is
being
questioned
,
so
afterwards
,
and
if
possible
still
at
the
door
of
the
interview
room
,
he
has
to
learn
what
he
can
about
it
from
him
and
extract
whatever
he
can
that
might
be
of
use
,
even
though
what
the
accused
has
to
report
is
often
very
confused
.
But
that
is
not
the
most
important
thing
,
as
there
's
really
not
a
lot
that
can
be
learned
in
this
way
,
although
in
this
,
as
with
anything
else
,
a
competent
man
will
learn
more
than
another
.
Nonetheless
,
the
most
important
thing
is
the
lawyer
's
personal
connections
,
that
's
where
the
real
value
of
taking
counsel
lies
.
Now
K.
will
most
likely
have
already
learned
from
his
own
experience
that
,
among
its
very
lowest
orders
,
the
court
organisation
does
have
its
imperfections
,
the
court
is
strictly
closed
to
the
public
,
but
staff
who
forget
their
duty
or
who
take
bribes
do
,
to
some
extent
,
show
where
the
gaps
are
.
This
is
where
most
lawyers
will
push
their
way
in
,
this
is
where
bribes
are
paid
and
information
extracted
,
there
have
even
,
in
earlier
times
at
least
,
been
incidents
where
documents
have
been
stolen
.
There
's
no
denying
that
some
surprisingly
favourable
results
have
been
attained
for
the
accused
in
this
way
,
for
a
limited
time
,
and
these
petty
advocates
then
strut
to
and
fro
on
the
basis
of
them
and
attract
new
clients
,
but
for
the
further
course
of
the
proceedings
it
signifies
either
nothing
or
nothing
good
.
The
only
things
of
real
value
are
honest
personal
contacts
,
contacts
with
higher
officials
,
albeit
higher
officials
of
the
lower
grades
,
you
understand
.
That
is
the
only
way
the
progress
of
the
trial
can
be
influenced
,
hardly
noticeable
at
first
,
it
's
true
,
but
from
then
on
it
becomes
more
and
more
visible
.
There
are
,
of
course
,
not
many
lawyers
who
can
do
this
,
and
K.
has
made
a
very
good
choice
in
this
matter
.
There
were
probably
no
more
than
one
or
two
who
had
as
many
contacts
as
Dr.
Huld
,
but
they
do
n't
bother
with
the
company
of
the
lawyers
"
room
and
have
nothing
to
do
with
it
.
This
means
they
have
all
the
less
contact
with
the
court
officials
.
It
is
not
at
all
necessary
for
Dr.
Huld
to
go
to
the
court
,
wait
in
the
ante-rooms
for
the
examining
judges
to
turn
up
,
if
they
turn
up
,
and
try
to
achieve
something
which
,
according
to
the
judges
"
mood
is
usually
more
apparent
than
real
and
most
often
not
even
that
.
No
,
K.
has
seen
for
himself
that
the
court
officials
,
including
some
who
are
quite
high
up
,
come
forward
without
being
asked
,
are
glad
to
give
information
which
is
fully
open
or
at
least
easy
to
understand
,
they
discuss
the
next
stages
in
the
proceedings
,
in
fact
in
some
cases
they
can
be
won
over
and
are
quite
willing
to
adopt
the
other
person
's
point
of
view
.
However
,
when
this
happens
,
you
should
never
trust
them
too
far
,
as
however
firmly
they
may
have
declared
this
new
point
of
view
in
favour
of
the
defendant
they
might
well
go
straight
back
to
their
offices
and
write
a
report
for
the
court
that
says
just
the
opposite
,
and
might
well
be
even
harder
on
the
defendant
than
the
original
view
,
the
one
they
insist
they
've
been
fully
dissuaded
from
.
And
,
of
course
,
there
's
no
way
of
defending
yourself
from
this
,
something
said
in
private
is
indeed
in
private
and
can
not
then
be
used
in
public
,
it
's
not
something
that
makes
it
easy
for
the
defence
to
keep
those
gentlemen
's
favour
.
On
the
other
hand
,
it
's
also
true
that
the
gentlemen
do
n't
become
involved
with
the
defence
-
which
will
of
course
be
done
with
great
expertise
-
just
for
philanthropic
reasons
or
in
order
to
be
friendly
,
in
some
respects
it
would
be
truer
to
say
that
they
,
too
,
have
it
allocated
to
them
.
This
is
where
the
disadvantages
of
a
court
structure
that
,
right
from
the
start
,
stipulates
that
all
proceedings
take
place
in
private
,
come
into
force
.
In
normal
,
mediocre
trials
its
officials
have
contact
with
the
public
,
and
they
're
very
well
equipped
for
it
,
but
here
they
do
n't
;
normal
trials
run
their
course
all
by
themselves
,
almost
,
and
just
need
a
nudge
here
and
there
;
but
when
they
're
faced
with
cases
that
are
especially
difficult
they
're
as
lost
as
they
often
are
with
ones
that
are
very
simple
;
they
're
forced
to
spend
all
their
time
,
day
and
night
,
with
their
laws
,
and
so
they
do
n't
have
the
right
feel
for
human
relationships
,
and
that
's
a
serious
shortcoming
in
cases
like
this
.
That
's
when
they
come
for
advice
to
the
lawyer
,
with
a
servant
behind
them
carrying
the
documents
which
normally
are
kept
so
secret
.
You
could
have
seen
many
gentlemen
at
this
window
,
gentlemen
of
whom
you
would
least
expect
it
,
staring
out
this
window
in
despair
on
the
street
below
while
the
lawyer
is
at
his
desk
studying
the
documents
so
that
he
can
give
them
good
advice
.
And
at
times
like
that
it
's
also
possible
to
see
how
exceptionally
seriously
these
gentlemen
take
their
professions
and
how
they
are
thrown
into
great
confusion
by
difficulties
which
it
's
just
not
in
their
natures
to
overcome
.
But
they
're
not
in
an
easy
position
,
to
regard
their
positions
as
easy
would
be
to
do
them
an
injustice
.
The
different
ranks
and
hierarchies
of
the
court
are
endless
,
and
even
someone
who
knows
his
way
around
them
can
not
always
tell
what
's
going
to
happen
.
But
even
for
the
junior
officials
,
the
proceedings
in
the
courtrooms
are
usually
kept
secret
,
so
they
are
hardly
able
to
see
how
the
cases
they
work
with
proceed
,
court
affairs
appear
in
their
range
of
vision
often
without
their
knowing
where
they
come
from
and
they
move
on
further
without
their
learning
where
they
go
.
So
civil
servants
like
this
are
not
able
to
learn
the
things
you
can
learn
from
studying
the
successive
stages
that
individual
trials
go
through
,
the
final
verdict
or
the
reasons
for
it
.
They
're
only
allowed
to
deal
with
that
part
of
the
trial
which
the
law
allocates
them
,
and
they
usually
know
less
about
the
results
of
their
work
after
it
's
left
them
than
the
defence
does
,
even
though
the
defence
will
usually
stay
in
contact
with
the
accused
until
the
trial
is
nearly
at
its
end
,
so
that
the
court
officials
can
learn
many
useful
things
from
the
defence
.
Bearing
all
this
in
mind
,
does
it
still
surprise
K.
that
the
officials
are
irritated
and
often
express
themselves
about
the
litigants
in
unflattering
ways
-
which
is
an
experience
shared
by
everyone
.
All
the
officials
are
irritated
,
even
when
they
appear
calm
.
This
causes
many
difficulties
for
the
junior
advocates
,
of
course
.
There
is
a
story
,
for
instance
,
that
has
very
much
the
ring
of
truth
about
it
.
It
goes
like
this
:
One
of
the
older
officials
,
a
good
and
peaceful
man
,
was
dealing
with
a
difficult
matter
for
the
court
which
had
become
very
confused
,
especially
thanks
to
the
contributions
from
the
lawyers
.
He
had
been
studying
it
for
a
day
and
a
night
without
a
break
-
as
these
officials
are
indeed
hard
working
,
no-one
works
as
hard
as
they
do
.
When
it
was
nearly
morning
,
and
he
had
been
working
for
twenty-four
hours
with
probably
very
little
result
,
he
went
to
the
front
entrance
,
waited
there
in
ambush
,
and
every
time
a
lawyer
tried
to
enter
the
building
he
would
throw
him
down
the
steps
.
The
lawyers
gathered
together
down
in
front
of
the
steps
and
discussed
with
each
other
what
they
should
do
;
on
the
one
hand
they
had
actually
no
right
to
be
allowed
into
the
building
so
that
there
was
hardly
anything
that
they
could
legally
do
to
the
official
and
,
as
I
've
already
mentioned
,
they
would
have
to
be
careful
not
to
set
all
the
officials
against
them
.
On
the
other
hand
,
any
day
not
spent
in
court
is
a
day
lost
for
them
and
it
was
a
matter
of
some
importance
to
force
their
way
inside
.
In
the
end
,
they
agreed
that
they
would
try
to
tire
the
old
man
out
.
One
lawyer
after
another
was
sent
out
to
run
up
the
steps
and
let
himself
be
thrown
down
again
,
offering
what
resistance
he
could
as
long
as
it
was
passive
resistance
,
and
his
colleagues
would
catch
him
at
the
bottom
of
the
steps
.
That
went
on
for
about
an
hour
until
the
old
gentleman
,
who
was
already
exhausted
from
working
all
night
,
was
very
tired
and
went
back
to
his
office
.
Those
who
were
at
the
bottom
of
the
steps
could
not
believe
it
at
first
,
so
they
sent
somebody
out
to
go
and
look
behind
the
door
to
see
if
there
really
was
no-one
there
,
and
only
then
did
they
all
gather
together
and
probably
did
n't
even
dare
to
complain
,
as
it
's
far
from
being
the
lawyers
"
job
to
introduce
any
improvements
in
the
court
system
,
or
even
to
want
to
.
Even
the
most
junior
lawyer
can
understand
the
relationship
there
to
some
extent
,
but
one
significant
point
is
that
almost
every
defendant
,
even
very
simple
people
,
begins
to
think
of
suggestions
for
improving
the
court
as
soon
as
his
proceedings
have
begun
,
many
of
them
often
even
spend
time
and
energy
on
the
matter
that
could
be
spent
far
better
elsewhere
.
The
only
right
thing
to
do
is
to
learn
how
to
deal
with
the
situation
as
it
is
.
Even
if
it
were
possible
to
improve
any
detail
of
it
-
which
is
anyway
no
more
than
superstitious
nonsense
-
the
best
that
they
could
achieve
,
although
doing
themselves
incalculable
harm
in
the
process
,
is
that
they
will
have
attracted
the
special
attention
of
the
officials
for
any
case
that
comes
up
in
the
future
,
and
the
officials
are
always
ready
to
seek
revenge
.
