Shulchan Arukh Choshen Mishpat · Siman 32

Shulchan Arukh Choshen Mishpat 32 — English translation

Translation: Sefaria Community Translation. Section numbers match the Hebrew text above.

1. 1Witnesses Who Witnessed a Confession Must Relate the Words As Is and a Case Where a Party Says He Was Kidding: Paragraph 1- If Reuven says in front of witnesses that he owes Shimon a maneh, the witnesses should not testify simply that Reuven confessed in front of them that he owes Shimon a maneh. Rather, they should say the words exactly as is because it is possible that Reuven can exempt himself by saying he was kidding or that his intention was so as not to make himself look wealthy in the manner that will be explained in Siman 81. The court will be able to evaluate whether or not these claims would work for these words.
2. 22. One who hires false witnesses in order to transfer a maneh from Reuven to Shimon is exempt under human law but liable under heavenly law. RAMA: This only applies where he did not, in fact, owe him money. If, however, Reuven did owe Shimon money, but the witnesses happen to be false, he would be exempt even under heavenly law, but would violate “midvar sheker tirchak.” [Meaning, stay away from a lie]. The same applies if he did not hire them but simply convinced them to testify falsely (Tosefos). This all applies to a case where the individual hires false witnesses for a friend and the friend does not confess. If, however, he hired false witnesses for himself and illegally transferred money or if the plaintiff confesses, he is required to remove the stolen item from his friend’s hand (Beis Yosef). If he claims it was done properly, but the witnesses admit they testified falsely, they would be liable to pay, as was explained above in 29:2 and will be explained later in Siman 38.

License: CC0