What are the implications of the words "Ka'asher Zamam La'asos le'Achiv"?
Rashi and Ramban (citing Makos, 5b): It implies that the Eidim Zom'min are only Chayav as long as Beis-Din have not carried out the death-sentence.
What is the logic behind the current D'rashah? Why don't we say Kal va'Chomer if the defendant is killed, the Eidim Zom'min should be sentenced to death?
Ramban: Firstly, because the reason that by Eidim Zom'min we believe the second witnesses is due to the fact that Hashem sent them 1 to save the defendant because he is innocent. 2 But if they arrive only after the death-sentence has been carried out, there is no reason to believe them any more than the first witnesses. 3 Secondly, because Hashem would not allow the Beis-Din to spill innocent blood by sentencing an innocent man to death. 4
Ramban: Because Hashem would not have allowed the accused to be saved had he been innocent, as the Pasuk indicates in Mishpatim, Sh'mos, 23:7.
Ramban: Because Hashem would not have allowed the accused to die had been innocent, as the Pasuk indicates in Tehilim, 37:33.
Why does the Torah add the word "le'Achiv"?