Difference between revisions of "Translations:Is the premarital unchastity case of Deut. 22:13 an example of the justice system assuming guilt until a defendant proves her innocence?/5/en"

Latest revision as of 02:00, 1 December 2020

Information about message (contribute)

This message has no documentation. If you know where or how this message is used, you can help other translators by adding documentation to this message.

Message definition (Is the premarital unchastity case of Deut. 22:13 an example of the justice system assuming guilt until a defendant proves her innocence?)

The reason that the "signs of virginity" (a cloth with blood, perhaps?) is mentioned in the second case is that it would act as clear ''exculpatory'' evidence on behalf of the girl (in a circumstance where the husband used false witnesses).

The reason that the "signs of virginity" (a cloth with blood, perhaps?) is mentioned in the second case is that it would act as clear ''exculpatory'' evidence on behalf of the girl (in a circumstance where the husband used false witnesses).

TranslationThe reason that the "signs of virginity" (a cloth with blood, perhaps?) is mentioned in the second case is that it would act as clear ''exculpatory'' evidence on behalf of the girl (in a circumstance where the husband used false witnesses).

The reason that the "signs of virginity" (a cloth with blood, perhaps?) is mentioned in the second case is that it would act as clear exculpatory evidence on behalf of the girl (in a circumstance where the husband used false witnesses).