Disinterment for Legal Evidence 107
against himself in criminal law.” So, too, Maimonides in Yad, Edus XII, 2. In fact, Jewish law seems to be even stricter than general law in this matter. Not only may he not be compelled to incriminate himself, but he may not incriminate himself even of his own free will. He is simply ineligible as a witness(even if voluntarily) against himself. Certainly by the electronic tape hes, as Mr. Strassburger says, made to incriminate himself. This is against Jewish law, as it is against American law.
: May the body of a young person who was murdered be disinterred after a number of years have passed? New evidence has arisen, and it is the contention of the attorney rep'esenting the husband of the person who was convicted of murder that this disinterment will provide additional clues about the teal killer.(H. B., Massachusetts )
ANSWER: This sad inquiry actually contains three separate duestions, First, we must ask about criminal procedures, espe“lally in cases which might lead to the death penalty. How far ‘An we go to obtain evidence? Secondly, we must turn to the gen¢al question of disinterment, and finally, to that of autopsy. Itis clear from the Mishnah(Makot, Sanhedrin) that every Precaution was taken in the case of capital offenses. The accused Vas provided with all conceivable opportunities to prove his Ocence, and all possible evidence had to be examined. He had Obe Specifically warned by two witnesses(M. Makot 9.6), etc. A curt of twenty-three had to be used(M. San. 4.1). Akiba and Others sought to eliminate the death sentence entirely(M. Makot