The Recanted Testimony
‘A Solitary Witness Said To Him’
(Kiddushin 65b)
The Torah states (Devarim 19:15), “A single witness shall not stand up…” In general, bet din will not accept testimony given by a single individual. There are exceptions, though:
1) ritual prohibitions, such as kashrus
2) incidental statements of fact – in certain cases we may believe a non-Jew who, in casual conversation, testifies to something.
3) identification of a father that someone is his son
4) the testimony of a woman that she heard from a single witness that her husband died. She may remarry based on this testimony even though two witnesses are ordinarily required in matrimonial matters – see Yevamos 25a.
The Childless Widow
The Ran discusses the following case: A widow, whose husband left her no children, was unsure whether her husband’s brother was alive (if he was, she would need chalitza in order to remarry). A certain person told the woman that her husband’s brother was alive, but when he later appeared before bet din, he retracted his original statement, stating that the brother died long ago. The bet din was unsure whether to believe the first statement or the second.
The Gemara (Sanhedrin 44b) states that once a witness has given his testimony, he cannot alter it. But this individual did not make his original statement in bet din. Perhaps different rules apply to statements made outside beit din – statements which presumably are made with less seriousness.
The Ran rules that a person is permitted to retract a statement made outside a bet din. This ruling is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 17:20) as well.
Self Incrimination
The Chazon Ish, however, argues that the individual in this particular case cannot retract his statement since doing so will be a form of self-incrimination, which is forbidden (Sanhedrin 25a). He maintains that we must distinguish between cases where a person’s original testimony prohibited something and his later testimony allowed it, and cases where the original testimony permitted something and the later testimony prohibited it. Since in our case the first statement prevented the widow from remarrying, the witness cannot now change his testimony to permit the widow to remarry.