Jerusalem Talmud Bava Kamma 7.3

משנה: גָּנַב עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם וְטָבַח וּמָכַר עַל פִּיהֶן וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין מְשַׁלְּמִין לוֹ אֶת הַכֹּל. גָּנַב עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם וְטָבַח וּמָכַר עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם אֲחֵרִים אֵילּוּ וָאֵילּוּ נִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין הָרִאשׁוֹנִים מְשַׁלְּמִים כֶּפֶל וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִים מְשַׁלְּמִים תַּשְׁלוּמֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה. נִמְצְאוּ הָאַחֲרוֹנִים זוֹמְמִין הוּא מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל וְהֵם מְשַׁלְּמִים תַּשְׁלוּמֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה. אֶחָד מִן הָאַחֲרוֹנִים זוֹמֵם בָּטְלָה עֵדוּת שְׁנִיָיה. אֶחָד מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנִים זוֹמֵם בָּטְלָה כָל הָעֵדוּת שֶׁאִם אֵין גְּנֵיבָה אֵין טְבִיחָה וְאֵין מְכִירָה.

MISHNAH: One was convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses and of slaughtering or selling on their testimony; if they are found perjured they pay everything to him. If he was convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses and of slaughtering or selling on the testimony of two others who all were found perjured, the first group pays double restitution and the second group triple. If the second group were found perjured, he pays double restitution while they pay triple. If one of the second group was found perjured, the second testimony is invalidated. If one of the first group is found perjured, the entire testimony is invalidated since if there is no theft there is no slaughter or sale.

הלכה: גָּנַב עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם כוּל׳. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. הָדָא אָמְרָה. עָד זוֹמֵם אֵין נִפְסָל בְּבֵית דִּין אֶלָּא מֵעַצְמוֹ נִפְסָל. פָּתַר לָהּ בְּהַתְרָיָיה. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בִּשְׁתֵּי עֵדִיּוֹת וּבִשְׁתֵּי הַתְרָיוֹת. אֲבָל בְּעֵדוּת אַחַת וּבְהַתְרָיָיה אַחַת כָּל עֵדוּת שֶׁבָּטְלָה מִקְצָתָהּ בָּטְלָה כוּלָּהּ. מָהוּ שֶׁבָּטְלָה מִקְצָתָהּ בָּטְלָה כוּלָּהּ. הָיוּ עוֹמְדִין וּמֵעִידִין עָלָיו בָּעֲשָׂרָה בְנִיסָן שֶׁגָּנַב שׁוֹר בְּאֶחָד בְּנִיסָן. טָבַח וּמָכַר בָּעֲשָׂרָה בְנִיסָן. הוּזְּמוּ בַחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן. כָּל עֵדוּת שֶׁהֵעִידוּ מֵעֲשָׂרָה בְנִיסָן עַד חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן לְמַפְרֵיעָהּ הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ פְסוּלוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל. תִּיפְתָּר בְּמֵעִידִין עָלָיו בְּכֶרֶךְ אֶחָד. וְלֵית שְׁמַע מִינָּהּ כְּלוּם. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. הֵן הָיוּ הָרִאשׁוֹנִים וְהֵן הָיוּ הָאַחֲרוֹנִים. הוּזְמוּ בָרִאשׁוֹנָה אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם. בַּשְּׁנִיָיה הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ עֵדוּת אֶחָד. שְׁלִישִית הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ שְׁתֵּי עֵדִיּוֹת. וְהֵיכִי דָמֵי. אִם בְּמֵעִידִין עָלָיו בְּכֶרֶךְ אֶחָד. לֵית שְׁמַע מִינָּהּ כְּלוּם. לָא אַתְיָיא דָא אֶלָּא עַל יְדֵי עֵדוּת סַגְיָא.

HALAKHAH: “A person convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses,” etc. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, this implies that a perjured witness is not disqualified by the court but is disqualified by himself. Explain it by warning, as it was stated: “Rebbi Yose said, when has this been said? For two testimonies with two warnings. But for one testimony and one warning any testimony which is partially disqualified is totally disqualified.” What does it mean that if it is partially disqualified it is totally disqualified? If they were standing and testifying against him on then tenth of Nisan that he had stolen an ox on the first of Nisan. He slaughtered or sold on the tenth of Nisan. They were shown to be perjured on the fifteenth of Nisan. Any testimony which they delivered between the tenth and the fifteenth of Nisan is retroactively disqualified. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, explain it if they deliver their testimony in one group and you cannot infer anything, as we have stated: “They were the first and they were the later [witnesses]. If they were shown to be perjured at first, there is nothing. At the second time, there is one testimony. At the third time, there are two testimonies.” And how is that if they give testimony in one group, you cannot infer anything? It comes only based on multiple testimony.

עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁבָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְעֵדֵי טְבִיחָה כְּאַחַת. בָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְלֹא קִיבְּלוּם וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּעוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה. אָמְרִין לָהֶן. הֲווּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁכְּבָר בָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְלֹא קִיבַּלְנוּם וְעַל יְדֵיכֶם אָנוּ מְקַבְּלִין אוֹתָן. נִמְצְאוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה זוֹמְמִין מְשַׁלְּמִין עַל יְדֵי עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה לֹא מַר כֵּן אֶלָּא. עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁבָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְעֵידֵי טְבִיחָה כְּאַחַת. בָּאוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה וְלֹא קִיבְּלוּ אוֹתָן וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּעוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה. אוֹמְרִין לוֹהֶן. הֲווּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁכְּבָר בָּאוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה וְלֹא קִיבַּלְנוּם וְעַל יְדֵיכֶם אָנוּ מְקַבְּלִין אוֹתָן. וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה. מְשַׁלְּמִין עַל יְדֵי עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה.

“One was convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses,” etc. So far if the witnesses for theft and those for slaughter came together. If witnesses for theft appeared but were not accepted and after that came witnesses for slaughter. One tells them “witnesses for theft already had appeared but were not accepted, but on the strength of your testimony we shall accept them.” If the witnesses for slaughter turn out to be perjured, they pay because of the witnesses for theft. Rebbi Ḥizqiah does not say so but: So far if the witnesses for theft and those for slaughter came together. If witnesses for slaughter appeared but were not accepted and after that came witnesses for theft. One tells them “witnesses for slaughter already had appeared but were not accepted, but on the strength of your testimony we shall accept them.” If the witnesses for theft turn out to be perjured, they pay because of the witnesses for slaughter.