OK here we are, back to your normal Friday Fact-Checking post. Your assignment for this week was the following verses.
The 10 Commandments are in Exodus 20:2-14 and Deuteronomy
5:6-18; “Thou shalt not commit murder” is in Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17.
Judicial execution includes Exodus 21:12,
15-17, and Leviticus 20:8-20.
When you can use judicial execution is Numbers
35:30 and Deuteronomy 17:6.
I said in the last lesson that the issue is a faulty
translation. Exodus 20:13 and
Deuteronomy 5:17 use rtsch which means willful murder, not just
killing.
The second set of verses requires judicial execution in a
specific set of cases.
But Jewish law requires a procedure before judicial
execution can take place. It starts with
the verses in Numbers and Deuteronomy, and what do they say?
Numbers: Everybody who strikes a person in front of
witnesses, they may declare him a murderer but one witness shall not answer to
put anybody to death.
Deuteronomy: At the word of two witnesses or three
witnesses the dead person shall die, he shall not die at the word of one witness.
Who is a witness?
Torah doesn’t say. Mishnah
records the definition that developed by 2000 years ago in the “Damages”
collection (Sedra), in tractate Bava Kamma which deals with court procedures,
in chapter 1, Mishnah 3: Witnesses have
to be bney chorin (not bonded out) and bney brit (circumcised
Jews). In business dealings, women can
give testimony.
Other witness requirements include that in a case with a
risk of judicial execution, they can’t be relatives to the accused or each
other (Mishnah Damages Sanhedrin 3:1), including the rule that the accused is
his own relative and can’t give testimony against himself. Confessions don’t count in Jewish law.
It took the US 200 years of history to create the principle
that a confession is not valid evidence unless the accused’s due process rights
have been protected, the famous Miranda ruling. Jewish law never had to go there. For over 2000 years, plus the prior history
during which the rule developed, Jewish courts have rejected confessions by the
accused as evidence.
Why? It partly has to
do with the job a witness has to do. It
includes things no person can do for himself (or herself). These are in the next lesson.
It also partly has to do with a concept that developed in
Jewish law that says no wicked person is a valid witness. Witnesses can’t be dodgers of the
commandments. Examples include people
who make money off the produce that grows in the shemitta year when all
such produce is free to everybody. Or
people who make a living from pigeon racing and dicing, instead of a useful
trade – people with money on a race will cheat and lie so as to not lose their
money and that is unacceptable in a witness.
A person who confesses to a crime that carries the death
penalty by definition is a wicked person, if we take their word for it, and
since a court won’t accept testimony from a wicked person, the confession
doesn’t count. But if we reject their
claim of committing the crime, so that we don’t have to define them as a wicked
person, then we can’t try them for the crime based on their testimony. And around and around.
So Jewish law refuses to accept confessions from the accused
as evidence against them in law.
Your assignment for next week is to study Leviticus 19:17.
© Patricia Jo Heil, 2013-2018 All Rights Reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment