Page 402 - 20818_park-B_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Magenta
Should a person reveal that he saw a mailman
destroying letters?
1 Question
Reuven, who works in the post office, saw Shimon, the mailman, de-
#
stroying letters (claiming that these letters do not belong to his mail
route.) Although Reuven warned Shimon and explained to him that
he is a thief, he then saw Shimon repeating the same acts. Is Reuven
obligated to tell Shimon’s supervisors, who will certainly fire him as
a result, or not?
1 AnsweR
If Shimon is only working for a short time in the post office and has
no tenure and is not entitled to severance pay, then Reuven is obligat-
ed to tell his superiors. However, if Shimon is a veteran worker and
is entitled to severance pay (which he will lose if he is fired) then per-
haps it is forbidden to speak up. We would have to study the matter
further, because there may be cases where it is allowed:
The Chafetz Chaim says (Hilchos Rechilus, Rule 9:5): If someone
knows that the person to whom he is revealing something is the type
of person who will believe him immediately and then rule on his own
and act based on his own judgment - in other words: On the basis of
the testimony of one witness, he will undo the employment agreement
he had with the person to whom the allegations are directed - then
even if he would do nothing worse than what a beis din would tell him
to do had there been two kosher witnesses, one is forbidden to relate
the information to him, since it will cause harm to the other person.
In our case as well, the postmaster is forbidden to harm Shimon
on the basis of the testimony of one witness. If he nevertheless does
so, then Reuven is guilty of causing him to sin.
This requires further study, however, because the Pri Megadim
writes (Orach Chayim #307 in Eshel Avraham #100:31) that one is
396 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Yellow 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Magenta 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Cyan 20818_efi-ab - 20818_efi-ab | 13 - B | 18-08-20 | 13:29:05 | SR:-- | Black
should turn him over to the authorities… Even according
to Rashi, who maintains that one is not allowed to save
him, giving him over to the authorities is nonetheless for-
bidden. This applies not only if we are unsure whether he
really killed, but even if a person deserves to be sentenced
to one of the death penalties of the beis din, and there are
witnesses and he was forewarned, only they did not bring
him to beis din yet, or they brought him to beis din but
his sentence has not yet been finalized — then if someone
killed him, he is guilty as the murderer of a righteous per-
son and is to be put to death [by a beis din].
Likewise, the Rambam (Hilchos Rotzeach 1:5) also writes: He who kills
intentionally is not killed by the witnesses, nor by those who saw him,
until he comes to a beis din.
If this is the halachah, then how can we give over a person to the
gentiles, who will sentence him to death contrary to Torah law?
Until now, we have spoken of a situation where we had clear infor-
mation that he killed someone. But, in our case, where a person says
that he killed someone and asks the physician not to reveal this to
anybody, there is a general rule that a person cannot present himself
as being evil, and he is not to be believed. We continue to believe that
he never killed anyone.
And these are the words of the Rambam (Hilchos Sanhedrin 8:6):
It is a decree written in the Torah that a beis din does not
put to death nor flog someone based on his own confes-
sion, but only on the testimony of two witnesses. And
the fact that Yehoshua killed Achan and David killed the
young Amalekite based on their own confessions was only
a temporary ruling… But the Sanhedrin would not put to
death nor flog someone on the basis of his own admission.
Perhaps he lost his mind, or perhaps the bitterness in his
heart has him awaiting death, and, like those who pierce
themselves with swords or throw themselves off roofs, he
claims to have killed someone so that he should die. And
Publicizing the sins of a psychiatric patient 2 385
#