brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
1. The Rabanan maintain that Malkus can be imposed by three judges, while Rebbi Yishmael maintains that twenty-three judges are required.
2. If three witnesses testify falsely and are found to be Zomemim, all three witnesses are punished equally.
3. If three witnesses come to testify and one of them is found to be a relative of the defendant or a Rasha whose testimony is invalid, the testimony of the remaining witnesses is voided as well.
4. If a sinner received Hasra'ah from someone other than the witnesses, Rebbi Yosi maintains that the Hasra'ah is invalid and the sinner may not be put to death, but the Rabanan argue and maintain that any Hasra'ah is sufficient for the sinner to incur the death penalty.
5. Ben Zakai once interrogated the witnesses (in a murder trial) regarding the shapes of the date stems that were visible at the time of the murder.
6. In a trial of a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah, if the husband's witnesses are proven to be Edim Zomemim, they are put to death but they are not required to compensate the Na'arah for the loss of her Kesuvah.
7. However, in a case of a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah, if the witnesses who testified against her become Zomemim, but then the witnesses who incriminated them are *themselves* proven to be Zomemim, the second pair of witnesses *is* subject to two punishments. The witnesses are put to death, and they are also required to compensate the husband for the monetary loss they tried to cause him.
8. The victim of a forced Revi'ah (male-raping) may testify against the perpetrator, but if the Revi'ah was committed with his consent, Rav Yosef and Rava disagree as to whether his testimony is accepted.
A BIT MORE
1. The Gemara continues to offer various interpretations of the Machlokes between the Chachamim, who maintain that a woman who was Mezaneh must be tried by a Beis Din of twenty-three judges, and Rebbi Meir, who maintains that she may be tried by a Beis Din of three judges. Rav Ashi suggests that this dispute refers to a case in which the woman received Hasra'ah before she was Mezaneh, but the witnesses told her that her transgression would incur a penalty of Malkus rather than Misah. Since she was not warned that she might receive the death penalty, she cannot be punished with Misah and she can receive only a penalty of Malkus, for which she did receive Hasra'ah. The Chachamim require her to be tried by a Beis Din of twenty-three judges in accordance with the opinion of Rebbi Yishmael, who requires twenty-three judges for every case that involves a penalty of Malkus. Rebbi Meir, on the other hand, agrees with the Rabanan who argue with Rebbi Yishmael and allow cases of Malkus to be tried by a Beis Din of three judges.
2. A defendant can be incriminated on the basis of two witnesses' testimony alone, so it would seem that a third witness who conspires with two Zomemim does not cause any additional damage to the defendant. Nevertheless, the third witness shares in the punishment of the first two and becomes an Ed Zomem as well.
3. If one member of a group of witnesses is found to be a relative or a Rasha, Rebbi Yosi maintains that the entire group of witnesses is disqualified to testify in a capital case, but in a monetary case, the testimony of the remaining witnesses would still be valid. Rebbi argues that the remaining witnesses are disqualified to testify even in a monetary case. Rebbi adds, however, that even in a capital case, the testimony of the entire group of witnesses is voided only if the relative or the Rasha gave Hasra'ah to the transgressor. If the relative or Rasha did not give Hasra'ah to the transgressor, he thereby demonstrated that he did not intend to be part of the group of witnesses, and the testimony of the remaining witnesses remains valid. Rebbi Yosi disagrees with this and maintains that the entire group of witnesses is disqualified for a capital case even if the relative or Rasha did not give Hasra'ah.
4. Rebbi Yosi maintains that a sinner can be killed for his transgression only if he received Hasra'ah from the witnesses themselves, but a Hasra'ah from any other person is not a valid Hasra'ah. The Rabanan maintain that even if someone other than the witnesses gave Hasra'ah, the sinner can be killed for his actions.
5. The witnesses in a court case are questioned both with Bedikos (interrogations about non-essential details) and Chakiros (interrogations about essential details, such as the date and time of the incident). Ben Zakai maintains that if the witnesses contradict each other even in the Bedikos, their testimony is rejected. The Rabanan, however, maintain that if the witnesses contradict each other in the Bedikos, their testimony remains valid. According to the Rabanan, only if witnesses contradict each other in the Chakiros is their testimony rejected. Once, when two witnesses testified about a murder that took place beneath a palm tree, Ben Zakai questioned them about the shapes of the date stems on that tree, in keeping with his position that the witnesses would be disqualified even if they contradicted each other about such a tangential detail.
6. If witnesses testify that a Na'arah committed adultery and the witnesses become Zomemim, they are put to death because they gave false testimony that the Na'arah was Chayav Misah. However, they are not required to compensate the Na'arah for the Kesuvah they tried to cause her to lose, because Beis Din does not impose more than one punishment on a sinner.
7. When the second set of witnesses is found to be Zomemim, the false witnesses are put to death because their false testimony against the husband's original witnesses would have caused those witnesses to be put to death. In addition, the false witnesses tried to cause the husband to have to pay the fine for Motzi Shem Ra, and they are required to pay him that amount. In such a case, Beis Din does impose two punishments on the witnesses because they must be punished for misdeeds that they committed to two different people.
8. If two witnesses testify that another man had forced relations with one of them, their testimony is accepted. Even though the witnesses' own testimony states that one of them was involved in an act of Mishkav Zachor, since he claims that it was against his will, his testimony does not incriminate him and it is therefore accepted. If the witness testifies that he agreed to the Revi'ah, however, Rav Yosef maintains that his testimony is not accepted because it indicates that he is a Rasha, and a Rasha's testimony is never accepted in Beis Din. Rava argues and maintains that Beis Din may accept even such testimony and execute the defendant. According to Rava, Beis Din accepts the witnesses' testimony that a Revi'ah occurred, but Beis Din does not accept their statement that the Revi'ah was done with consent. This is because a person is never believed when he makes a statement that he is a Rasha.
Next Daf Index to Revach for Maseches Sanhedrin