Why does the Torah present so many words that imply the same thing - "Vedarashta, Vechakarta Vesha'alta Heitev"?
Rashi: From "Vedarashta", "Vechakarta" and "Heitev" 1 plus a Gezeirah Shavah 2 "Heitev" "Heitev" from Shoftim 19:18 & 17:4, we learn seven 3 Chakiros 4 that Beis-Din must ask the witnesses for their testimony to be accepted.
Rashi, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: From "Vesha'alta" the Chachamim learn Bedikos. Refer to 13:15:2:1 and note #2.
See Rashi.
See Sifsei Chachamim and Torah Temimah, note 47.
Crucial questions concerning the exact time and location where they claim that the event took place - on which their evidence hinges.
Why does the Torah add "ve'Hinei Emes Nachon"?
Why does the Torah mention investigating testimony here and by one who served idols, but not above regarding Navi Sheker and Meisis?
Ramban: Because whereas the Navi Sheker publicizes himself, and with regard to the Meisis, the Torah is addressing his victim [whom he tried to entice], 1 Ir ha'Nidachas and one who served idols become known only through testimony, 2 in which case, a full-fledged inquiry is necessary.
And not the Beis-Din. Ramban: Adding "ve'Lo Sachmol ve'Lo Sechaseh alav". (Chakiros are needed to enable Hazamah! Perhaps for Meisis, the Ramban allows testimony that cannot be Huzam. Refer to 13:10:1:1*? PF)
Why does the Torah insert the (otherwise superfuos) word "Ne?es?s?ah ha?To?eivah ha?Zos be'Kirbecha"?
