The theme of this article is the persecutory mood of the magistrate in disfavor of the accused. The object of analysis of the work is the verification of the breach of the duty of impartiality of the magistrate when analyzing the records, through the application of successive understandings contrary to the interests of the accused. The research hypothesis is the verification of the existence or not of a duty of impartiality of the magistrate before motivated decisions, given in the independent exercise of the jurisdictional activity and can be challenged by autonomous action or action, with clear persecutory character. The method of approach will be deductive, adopting as a bibliographical procedure. Firstly, this article proposes a reading on the impartiality and protagonism of the magistrate in order to indicate how contemporary literature has been seeing the judge’s position vis-à-vis the accused, and then to analyze the issue of breach of the duty of impartiality before successive decisions that translate into a persecutory performance of the judge.
