Page 392 - 20818_park-B_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Magenta
in general, this [fact that we don’t kill based on confession]
is a decree of the King.
We can learn from this in our case that we are not to believe someone
who claims he killed someone else.
The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 12:2) also writes that a person does
not disqualify himself [from being a kosher witness] by claiming to
#
have committed a sin. For example, if a man comes to a beis din and
says he stole or robbed or lent money with usury, even though he pays
on the basis of his own word, he is not disqualified.
The Meshaneh Halachos writes that even when a person comes to
repent, there is a difference of opinion on whether or not one should
believe him. The Sema (#34:60) cites from the Mordechai that even if
he says “I will repent and return the usury that I took,” we still don’t
believe him because a person cannot bear testimony to his own wick-
edness, and we say he is only pretending. But in Bedek Habayis (Yoreh
Deah #157) it says in the name of Teshuvos Hageonim that if a person
comes to repent, we do flog him and give him atonement, but we do
not disqualify him from testifying in court.
The Meshaneh Halachos also writes that one is forbidden to hate
a person based on his own admission. It says (Tzofnas Paaneach,
Pesachim, 113b) that if one sees his fellowman behaving immorally,
he is permitted to hate him. However, if his fellowman comes and
confesses to him that he transgressed some sin, he is forbidden to
hate him on the basis of that confession.
In view of the above, it seems that the physician is forbidden to tell
anyone about the murder and certainly not the authorities (and he
is forbidden to hate him). Even if the physician has proof that he is
speaking the the truth, if there is a possibility that the authorities will
give him capital punishment, it is forbidden to turn him in. If there
is no possibility that they will kill him, the physician should conduct
himself according to the Maharshal (above) and not conceal him.
This applies if the patient confesses to one incident. If, however, his
words indicate that he is a habitual murderer, one should be concerned
about possible pikuach nefesh and hand him over to the authorities,
if they will not kill him. As the Beis Yosef writes (Choshen Mishpat
386 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Yellow 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Magenta 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Cyan 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:29:04 | SR:-- | Black
capital cases immediately, saying that he is worse than any
other person in this city and it is a mitzvah to pursue him
indiscriminately, then one has to be extremely careful not
to speak badly of this person, because doing so is simply
like shooting an arrow with his speech.
The Chafetz Chaim adds that if a person heard some negative in-
formation about his fellowman, it would seem that on the basis of
this information he is allowed to warn others to be careful, as the
Rosh writes (Niddah, ibid.). Nevertheless, there is room to deliberate
whether this is really permitted, for by saving one person from harm,
he may be causing undue harm to another. Perhaps the negative
information is false, and as a result of his words, this man will be
publicized as a thief and find no way to support himself. Perhaps the
Rosh’s leniency only applies where there is no chance that the warning 13
will cause harm to the other party.
In view of the above, if exposing the school-director’s supposed
misdeeds will cause a public scandal, and it is possible that he will not
be able to completely disprove the suspicions cast upon him, and his
superiors will be influenced by the slander, leaving the man without
a livelihood, then we cannot permit the exposure. This is especially
true since we do not know if the patient is a reliable source of infor-
mation. On the other hand, one must consider that he may be telling
the truth and we cannot allow this possibly immoral behavior and
lawlessness to continue.
Therefore, it seems to me that the right thing for the therapist to
do is to call the school-director to a beis din of G-d-fearing rabbanim,
who will not spread any rumors or lashon hara. They will investigate
whether there is truth to the allegations. If iso, they will hand the
matter over to his superiors and the police in order to remove him
from his post

Patient reveals sins 2 395
#