When called to court, Hanna is unprepared to defend her position, especially because she is guarding a secret so closely; it is clear from the jury and the judge’s view that she is uncomfortable and hesitant, which, in their eyes, then translates to guilt and an unwillingness to admit to her crimes. As she tries to explain her actions, she approaches the situation with an unlikable defensiveness and also confusion, asking the judge “So should I have...should I have not...should I not have signed up at Siemens?” (Schlink 112). She “didn’t ask loudly or arrogantly, but with determination, and, I think, in visible and audible confusion and helplessness” (Schlink 109) and “had no sense of context, of the rules of the game, of the formulas by which her statements and those of the others were toted up into guilt and innocence, conviction and acquittal” (Schlink 110). Furthermore, she was not able to rebuke the accusation that she was the leader who wrote the documents and reports as she refused to give the judges a sample of her handwriting. A possibility is that she wants to keep her pride and would rather give in to the accusations instead of revealing her secret. If she was able to read, she might have been able to analyse the situation and the reactions of both the jury and the …show more content…
The inappropriate use of the law on Hanna Schmitz and the seemingly unjust condemnation of her invites the reader to think twice about the crimes she was accused of and wonder if anyone really ever is completely wrong or at fault. By creating the character Hanna Schmitz and revealing her secret, the author pushes the reader’s analysing skills and also tugs on the moral strings inside of us, asking us to reevaluate how we search for right and wrong and whether or not there are aspects in our justice system that should be