Torah law can be harmful to society

Aruch HaShulchan (C.M. 2:1-3): 1) Even though the Jewish court does not judge cases involving capital punishment or flogging or fines outside of Israel – but if the beis din sees that the times require it - because there is a breakdown in law and order – then it is permitted. Everything depends on the judgment of how serious the problem is. Not only can the court judge these cases when there is community lawlessness but even when a single individual sins it is permitted to punish him if they think it is necessary - as long as they do it for pure motivation. This ability to judge these cases in emergency situations is even when there are not valid witnesses but only a reasonable basis that it is true and constant rumors are heard when there are no enemies who would create them. Thus if the times require that this case be tried it must be done if we have the ability.  That is because if we insist that everything be done in accordance with the laws of the Torah - and we require 2 valid adult witnesses and proper warning not to commit the crime – the result will be that the world is destroyed. In fact Jerusalem was not destroyed except for the fact that the courts insisted in totally compliance with the Torah law [Rashba 3:393]. Thus in times of need, the courts have the right to administer corporal punishment and to give monetary punishments according to what they see is needed to correct the problems of society. If the litigant is a powerful person then he can be reported to the secular government to be tried and the secular authorities will order him to comply with what the Jewish religion requires of him. Anyone who has the power to make a protective fence to the Torah and doesn’t do it, he will have no protective fence either in this world or the next nor will he have descendants or remnants in his dwelling [Beis Yosef citing Zohar]. Similarly we are obligated to make sure that there shouldn’t be anyone with thoughts of rebellion – even unexpressed against the government of the Czar and his leaders. Our Sages said that G‑d made us take an oath not to rebel against the governments which rule us (Kesubos 111a)… 2) This ability to judge and punish - not according to the laws of the Torah - is only for the greatest Torah scholars or for the community leaders. That is because community leaders have the same power as that of the Great Sanhedrin.  Thus in our days the obligation is on the rav and the community leaders to fix the breaches in society with all of their ability. Thus every tax they impose, the community must comply and pay it – even though it means that some benefit from it while others suffer a loss. That is because this is important to correct community problems or take care of some other urgent need. Whoever interferes with this – is considered like Yeravam ben Nevat. One should not go against the decisions of community leaders even if there are scholars who support the opposition. That is because it is likely that those who are opposed to the community leaders have no fear of heaven. Investigate and you find it to be true. 3) However any matter which is not needed for the welfare of society or for emergency correction – the community leaders have no power to deal with against the wishes of those involved. All they can do is try and persuade the community to follow traditional practices or to collectively accept a particular action. Thus if a practice is firmly accepted by the community, the community leaders can force compliance with it…. Without either being an emergency matter for the community or having been fully accepted by the community – the leaders cannot do anything beyond the Torah law when there is gain for one party but loss for a second party. Alternatively if the community has an accepted practice that the leaders can do what ever they think is good or the community has fully accepted that the leaders can do whatever they wish – then in fact they community leaders can do whatever they see fit even if there is benefit to one party but loss to a second party. The leaders of the community should have their hearts directed to the desires of heaven and G‑d should help them. That is because someone who wants to achieve perfection receives Divine assistance.

 Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 2:1): Every court – even those that do not have semicha from Israel – if they see that the see that the people is corrupted by sin (and thus it is an emergency situation) can issue judgments whether concerning capital punishment or financial matters or any other punishments even without testimony according to Torah standards. If the transgressor is a powerful person than it is possible to punish him through the agency of non-Jews. Furthermore the court has the power to appropriate his money and to do with it what they see fit to strengthen the community. All the activities of the court need to be for the sake of heaven. This license to go beyond the letter of the law is specifically only for the greatest rabbis of the generation or the community leaders. It has been the practice in every place that the community leaders have the status similar to that of the Sanhedrin in that they can give beatings and punishments as well as appropriate a person’s property – all according to the local practice. Even though there are those poskim which disagree and say that the local communities authorities do not have such powers but can only pressure the community according to the local practices or their actions need to be agreed upon by everyone. However according to these poskim they have no power to make any changes in law in situations where there is benefit to one party and loss to another or to appropriate someone’s money without his agreement. Nevertheless one should follow the practices of the city. And surely these powers exist in fact everyone member of the community accepts that the leaders have these powers. The achronim mention in their responsa that some who is deserving of lashes should give 40 gold coins as a substitute for the 40 lashes. This is not according to the letter of the law but is only an emergency measure. Therefore the court has the emergency power to administer lashes or to take money according to what they see are the needs of the times (migder milsa).

Extradition in Jewish Law

 https://www.jlaw.com/Articles/extradition_in_jewish_law.html

 In summary: As we have seen, it is indisputable that in principle, just as one should not return a runaway slave who has fled to freedom, so one should not harbor criminals who have fled justice; rather we are obligated to see that they face trial. The source of this double principle is in the Torah itself: "Do not deliver a slave to his master," on the one hand; and "He shall be taken to die from my altar," on the other. The principle of just punishment is especially fundamental in the case of a murderer: "Nothing is as objectionable to the Torah as bloodshed... which entails the destruction of society."

Mesira - reporting tax fraud

Rav Wozner (Shevet HaLevi 2:58): 1) Question: Concerning someone who works for the tax department and he discovers someone cheating the government and is required by law to report it to the justice department. He wants to know whether he is considered an informer (moser) according to halacha or do we say that “the law of the land is the law” and thus he would not be an informer? Answer: Concerning the issues of taxes – there is no halachic authority who denies that this is included in the principle “the law of the land is the law.” This is true even for those who disagree with the Rema (C.M. 369:8) as to the nature of “the law of the land is the law.” See the Shach and Levush and the responsa Hashiv Moshe… Concerning the issue of reporting the tax cheat to the government see Bava Metzia (83b) concerning R’ Eliezer the son of Rav Shimon bar Yochai. The gemora reports that he reported thieves to the government. This is proof that where the government has authorized a Jew to report thieves that it is permitted. Even though he was criticized “how long are you handing the people of our G‑d to be killed” – because the punishment for thieves in those days was death. This is relevant also for a similar criticism from Eliyahu Hanavi to R’ Yishmael which is reported in that gemora. However the actual halacha seems that even when it results in the death penalty it is considered “the law of the land is the law.” See the Ritva on that gemora which is found in the Shita Mekubetzes. The Be’er HaGola (C.M. 388) writes that it has already become accepted practice that the leaders of the community supervise that there should not be any fraud or deception against the secular government. The community leaders have announced that it was permitted to publicize and reveal those men who were cheating the government. A person who wishes to escape paying taxes owed to the government and another Jew reveals this – this is not considered the crime of informing. Even though the Rema states that revealing this information is bad because it is like returning a lost object to a non‑Jew – but that is only concerning an individual non‑Jew. But that which is applicable to the government and the tax auditor was appointed to discover fraud – there is no prohibition in revealing the fraud. However it is best if a person should not work as a tax auditor which requires revealing this type of information. Even though revealing the information is permitted – it is not a pious thing to do as we see from the Yerushalmi. Also look at the Responsa of the Alshech who states that a person is not considered an informant for those things required by the law of the land….

Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Ve'aleyhi lo Yuval, volume 2:113-114 from R’ M Broyde’s Informing on other’s): R' Yehuda Goldreicht said: “I asked Rav Auerbach about a particular Jew who stole a large sum of money and he was caught by the police in America. He was sentenced to a number of years in prison in America. Was it proper to assist in the collection of money for him [we were speaking about a large sum of $200,000] in order to fulfill the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim to have him released from prison? When Rav Auerbach heard this he stated "Pidyon shvuyim?! What is the mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim here? The mitzvah of redeeming captives is only when the goyim are grabbing Jews, irrationally, for no proper reason, and placing them in prison. According to what I [Rav Auerbach] know, in America they do not irrationally grab Jews in order to squeeze money from them. The Torah says "do not steal" and he stole money -- on the contrary, it is good that he serve a prison sentence, so that he learns not to steal!”

Reporting crime to police Mesrira

 Tzitz Eliezer (Nishmas Avraham): If the case is rape of young children in school when the teacher does a disgusting act on either boys or girls. It would appear that since in the case of boys, the act of sodomy is liable to capital punishment from a beis din – therefore this is a case of rodef and thus it is permitted to informed the secular authorities as it is in the two previous cases [which were classified as rodef.] However in a case where the teacher is molesting girl it would appear that it is permitted for the doctor who discovers the abuse to expose the matter and to inform the principal of the school. If the principal doesn’t do anything then it would be permitted to report the matter to the police – even outside of Israel. That is because a person who molests more than one person is someone who harms the community and there is no prohibition of informing the authorities (mesira).  In fact, not only is it not prohibited as informing (mesira) but there is an obligation to inform the authorities so that the teacher will not continue his evil deeds – not only in this school but also in other schools. It is absolutely clear that in all cases that the doctor is not to take any action without first being convinced that his facts are correct and before he consults with a major rabbinic authority – because this is a life and death situation [not only for the children but for the teacher].

Gedolim shouldnt report crime to police

 Maharam Shick[1](C.M. 50): [In the case of someone’s brother who had died suddenly and his sister‑in‑law is suspected of poisoning her husband. Based on Bava Metzia (83b) regarding R’ Eliezer catching Jewish robbers for the Roman the halacha would allow reporting her to the police.]. While that is the halacha, nevertheless that gemora itself indicates that it is inappropriate for gedolim to be the ones to report the transgressor to the secular authorities. This is also the view of the Rashba cited by the Beis Yosef (C.M. 388). An even greater proof against reporting transgressors to secular authorities – even when there is a possible danger in not reporting – is found in the Rambam. The Rambam (Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 5:5) writes that if non‑Jews specify which Jew they want and they will kill all the Jews if he isn’t handed over – they should give him over. However the Rambam notes that if that wanted Jew deserves the death penalty he can be given over to save the others – but this halacha is not to be publicized.  This is also the view of the Yerushalmi (Terumos 8:4)…. Consequently while one should not protest against those who follow the straight halacha and report the criminal to the authorities - which has many poskim to rely on - nevertheless the gedolim should not get involved in reporting these crimes but rather should be passive. This is as we saw with Shimon ben Shetach who did not have proper evidence that someone was a murderer - even though it was obvious – and therefore he did nothing. Also look at Sheilas Yaavetz (2:9)…

---

[1]  מהר"ם שיק (חושן משפט נ'): אמנם כל זה לדינא אבל מהתם עצמו מוכח דלכל הפחות אין לגדולי ישראל להתאמץ ולהשתדל וכמ"ש הרשב"א בתתשובה הנ"ל המובאת בב"י סי' שפ"ח. וגדולה מזה אפילו יש חשש סכנה לכלם כ' הרמב"ם דאפילו יחדוהו ואפילו חייב מיתה דאין מורין כן. וכמו"ש בפ"ה מה' יסודי התורה הלכה ה' והוא מהירושלמי (תרומות ח:ד), והגם דהב"ח בתושבה סי' מ"ג צידד בזה וכ' סברות לחלק ולדבריו יש גם כאן מקום לחלק ולהתירץ מ"מ הש"ך ביו"ד סי' קנ"ו סקט"ו לא ישרו בעיניו החילוקים עיי"ש. ולכך נהי דאין למחות לאחרינא ומאלה דעביד ומשתדל כדין עביד דיש לו הרבה פוסקים לסמוך עליהם. מ"מ עכ"פ אין לגדולי ישראל להשתדל בזה אלא להיות בשב וא"ת וכמו שאמר שמוען בש"ט ומה אעשה שאין דמך מסור בידי ועיין בשאילת יעב"ץ (ב:ט) וכעת אינו בידי כו' והמקום יפרע מהם וד' יגזור פרצת עמו בני ישראל ברחמים ...

Mesira if it results in punishment greater than prescibed by Torah?

 Rabbi Hershel Schachter (Dina Di'Malchusa Dina 1:103 118 (1981) J. Halacha & Contemporary Society): One critical point should however be added: there is no problem of "mesirah" [informing] in informing the government of a Jewish criminal, even if they penalize the criminal with a punishment more severely than the Torah requires, because even a non-Jewish government is authorized to punish and penalize above and beyond the [Jewish] law . . . for the purpose of maintaining law and order. However, this only applies in the situation where the Jewish offender or criminal has at least violated some Torah law.

Mesira if required by government?

 Igros Moshe (C.M. 1:92): Is it permitted to take a job as a government financial auditor when there are times when he will find fraud and therefore he would have to inform (moser) on the transgressor to the government which will punish the tax cheat more than the proscribed by the Torah? Yes it is permitted since the job of government auditor is to find transgressions. It is clear however that if this person did not accept the job there will obviously be others to take the job and they will find the transgressions. Consequently the transgressor suffers the same loss  whether this person takes the job or not or someone else takes the job and he doesn’t cause him any harm.. Therefore if no one is actually harmed by his taking the job it isn’t relevant to prohibit taking the job…. And this is exactly our case when the government orders someone to bring their account books to be examined by an auditor because the government already controls the situation to find his fraud and will find it through any one of their auditors. Therefore this is another reason for exempting any particular auditor when they find fraud…. And even if they don’t force him to testify but he is required to testify about the fraud because this is like the case of someone designated to testify for a non‑Jews and he is fact required because of chillul hashem that would result if he didn’t testify. This is the accepted  halacha (C.M. 28:3)

Shock in Jerusalem community as rabbi outed as undercover Christian missionary

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/shock-in-jerusalem-community-as-rabbi-outed-as-undercover-christian-missionary/

 

Family supported by ultra-Orthodox community after mother dies of cancer, father worked as scribe and mohel; investigators say they faked being Jewish to move to Israel

חשיפת 'בחדרי': זהותו של הגוי שהתחזה לאברך הייתה ידועה זה שנים

 https://www.bhol.co.il/news/1212095

 עסקנים המתמחים בפעילות נגד המיסיון מאשרים את הפרשייה שנחשפה הבוקר ב'בחדרי חרדים'. "ידענו מזה כבר לפני שש שנים" | "בעקבות פנייה שלנו הוא נזרק מכולל מקובלים" | "האברך" בשיחה היום עם 'בחדרי חרדים' גמגם לנוכח הפרסום | פרטים נוספים על הפרשייה המסעירה

Aguna?

 

Shidduchim

 Rabbi Aharon Rakefet(Personal communication): Rav Aharon Kotler  gave a shiur at Chevron Yeshiva. All were very attentive to his brilliant Torah analysis - except for one. There was a bachor sitting in the back who seemed bored and inattentive - sitting with his feet propped up. Rav Aharon Kotler angrily walked to the back of the room to confront this arrogant young man. Rav Aharon Kotler had a deep impatience with anyone who was not interested in Torah - especially to his own insights which he had worked for hours to understand properly. [My brother – Rav Dovid Eidensohn - who learned in Lakewood under Rav Aharon told me that he had a special briefcase to carry his chidusshim. When he was finally given permission to leave communist Russia with minimum belongs - he personally carried that briefcase. At the border he was stopped and the official perused the papers and asked him whether they were state secrets. When Rav Ahron told him it was Torah chiddushim - the guard laughed and told him he could keep the "nonsense" and cross the border to freedom. Rav Ahron was furious and started yelling at the official for his chutzpah and contempt for Torah. Fortunately there were others who quickly got him past the check point - or he probably would have been sent to jail or worse.] Rav Aharon stood over the bachor and demanded to hear what he thought of the shiur. Rav Dov Schwartzman nonchalantly replied, "The Kletzer is a great Torah genius - but his shiur is based on an error. He forgot an explicit mishna." Rav Aharon fainted from the shock and when he recovered said -"that is the one I want as my son-in-law."

Need to speak lashon harah

 Pischei Tshuva (O.C. 156): I want to note here that while all the books of mussar are greatly concerned about the sin of lashon harah, I am greatly concerned about the opposite problem. I want to protest about the even greater and more common sin of refraining from speaking negatively when it is necessary to save someone from being harmed. For example if you saw a person waiting in ambush to kill someone or breaking into someone’s house or store at night. Is it conceivable that you would refrain from notifying the intended victim to protect himself from the assailant - because of the prohibition of speaking lashon harah?  By not saying anything you commit the unbearable sin of transgressing the prohibition of Vayikra (19:16): Do not speak lashon harah [but] do not stand idly by when the blood of your fellow man is threatened? By not speaking up, you violate the mitzva of returning that which is lost to its owner Devarim (22:2). Now if you can understand the obvious necessity of speaking up in these cases then what is the difference between a robber breaking into someone’s house or store or seeing that his servants are secretly stealing from him or that his partner is deceiving him in their business or that another person is cheating him in commerce or that he is lending money to someone that you know doesn’t repay? How is this different from stopping a proposed marriage to someone you know is a wicked person who would be a horrible husband. Saving a person from these situations is clearly included in the command (Devarim 22:2) to return to the person himself or his money. From where do we get the mistaken idea that in the case of murder, I will speak up but that it is prohibited to say anything in other situations where someone is being harmed? The general principle is that these are matters which depend upon the speakers motivation. If the informant’s intent in relating these matters is entirely to cause harm that is lashon harah. However if his intent is to bring about benefit to the other person and to save him and to protect him – then it is a great mitzva. In my opinion this is the underlying intent of the Yerushalmi which the Magen Avraham brings which says that it is permitted to speak lashon harah about people who cause disputes. … It is obvious that even concerning those who cause disputes it is not permitted to speak lashon harah gratuitously about them in all matters. It is only permitted for those things directly related to the particular dispute. It is only permitted concerning that which they are trying to harm others. In such a case it is permitted to reveal degrading things about them in order to save others. … Unfortunately I have seen many times where someone witnesses another person trying to cause harm to someone – and he suppresses the information and says, “Why should I get involved in a matter which isn’t my business…However one needs to be very careful about these and similar matters. Our Sages have said – when the permissibility depends on motivation - it says, “And you should be afraid of your G‑d.”

Execute a Jew because the goyim expect it

 Rosh (7:8): Question: Let it be known to our teacher, may he be well, that there was a very serious incident that happened here in Cordova. The ears of all those who hear about it become singed.  There a certain low person who was arrested by the non‑Jews on certain charges. He made a deal with them to go free in exchange for money. Some of his friends went to console him. He went out to greet them and stood at the entrance of his courtyard. One of them said, “Blessed is He who frees prisoners.” He reacted by blaspheming and reviling his King and G‑d…. The prince agreed that this wicked person should remain in prison until the Responum of my teacher will arrive which will instruct us what to do with him…Response: … Your asking me concerning capital punishment is very strange. That is because in all the lands that I have heard about, no one judges capital cases anymore– except in Spain. I was very astonished when I came to Spain. How were they able to judge capital cases without Sanhedrin? They explained to me that it was because the king had authorized it. Another consideration is that if the Jewish courts don’t judge these cases than a much greater amount of blood would be spilled if they were tried by non‑Jews. Therefore I permitted them to continue with this practice of trying capital cases. However I never explicitly agreed with them on a particular case involving execution. Nevertheless I see that all of you have agreed that it is necessary to destroy this evil from your midst. There is no question that he has profaned the Name of heaven in public and that this has already been heard amongst the non‑Jews who are very strict in any matter concerning their religion and faith. There would be even greater profanation of G‑d’s name if he weren’t executed for blasphemy for the sake of the order of society (migder milsa). Furthermore it is imperative that they sanctify G‑d’s name by executing this wicked man. Therefore you do what you think is best because I know that your intent if to sanctify G‑d’s name.

Punishment needed for deterrence

 Rambam (Moreh Nevuchim 3:41): Concerning the punishment of those who sin against others, the general rule is that it should be done to him exactly as he has done to the other person. If he damaged the other person’s body then he should be punished physically. If he caused monetary damage he should pay for it with money. However the one who suffered monetary damage should be ready to forgive and be lenient. It is only in the case of murder that we are not lenient at all and we don’t take a monetary payment for the crime.  Therefore even if the victim of the attack lived for an hour or days and was able to speak and he requested that his assailant be forgiven because he had forgiven him – we don’t listen to him. We are required to take life for life and there is no distinction made whether it is the life of a child or an adult, a slave or a free man, a scholar or a fool – because there is no greater sin than this. If someone caused the loss of a limb then he must be punished with the loss of his limb. Vayikra (24:20) says, As he has caused a blemish in a man so shall it be done to him. Don’t be bothered by the fact that this is never done but rather a monetary penalty is always imposed. Our purpose in this composition is only to give the reason for the Torah verses and not the reason for the Talmudic practice. Nevertheless I have what to say regarding the view of the Talmud but will only communicate it in private. Those injuries which can not be done exactly to the assailant as he did to his victim are compensated by monetary payment as it says (Shemos 21:19), “Only he shall pay for the loss of his time and full payment for medical expenses. Someone who has damaged another’s property should pay back exactly the monetary amount that he damaged. An important principle is that to the degree that a sin or transgression is more frequent and more probable to be committed – the more severe must the punishment be in order to serve as a deterrent. In contrast that which rarely occurs receives a lighter punishment. … There is a basic principle that the greatness of the punishment and how painful it is depends on the following four factors. 1) The enormity of the sin. Those actions which bring about great loss have severe punishments, while those actions which produce little harm have minor punishments. 2) The frequency the crime occurs. Those crimes which happen more often need to have more severe punishments to deter them. In contrast to the degree that a crime is rare to that degree the punishment is reduced because that is sufficient to deter it. 3) The degree of temptation. A crime of great temptation – either because the lust for it is great or people are accustomed to do it or the crime causes a great reduction pain – then it is obvious that there will be no deterrence unless there is a fear of severe punishment. 4). The ease of doing the crime secretly and hidden from detection and unnoticed by others. Deterring such acts can only be done by fear of a great and severe punishment…

Rodef - violating traffic laws

 Rav Sternbuch 1:850): Question: A Jewish driver who normal speeds or doesn’t have a license – is it permitted to report him to the police? Answer: It states explicitly in Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 388:12) that if someone is engaged in counterfeiting and is thus a danger to the community – he should be warned to stop. If he doesn’t listen to the warning it is possible to report him to the police. The Gra there says that the counterfeiter has the status of a rodef (pursuer) even though he does not intend to harm others and even though the harm is an indirect result of his actions and even though the danger is only a possibility not a certainty. There is nothing more dangerous than a reckless driver who is speeding or one who has no knowledge of proper driving skills - as indicated by the fact he has no license. Such people are likely to kill other, chas v’shalom and therefore they have the halachic status of rodef (pursuer).  That is why in fact the secular law that requires a skilled driver with a license is in fact a just and obvious law for the welfare of society and we are fully obligated to observe these laws. Anyone who treats these laws with contempt and disobeys them, we are concerned that such a person can come to kill and therefore he deserves serious punishment – even imprisonment. (See Tashbatz 3:168 regarding having non-Jews imprison a Jew as punishment and also Maharshdam C.M. 55.6). However it is appropriate not to hand him over to the government immediately but only after he has been warned first by the rav of the community or the beis din. They should tell him that if he continues violating traffic laws they will report him to the police so that he will be punished appropriately. (It should be done this way because if he is simply warned he will not believe that he will be reported to the police.). If despite the warning he insists of violating traffic laws and showing contempt for the community he should be reported. (R’ Yaakov Kaniefsky was very angry with those who violated traffic laws whose purpose is to protect the lives of the members of society.  I heard that someone once came to him because he was worried that he was about to receive a very severe punishment because he had violated the traffic laws. He wanted to receive a beracha that he would be free of the punishment. R’ Kaniefsky replied with a very sharp admonition and told him that in truth he deserved to be punished!) (This was even though R’ Kaniefsky was not necessarily in agreement with the secular laws in general). Therefore it would appear that if the person is considered a danger to society and since we can’t punish him ourselves, he should be reported to the police – with the permission of beis din or the rabbi of the community. This is in fact a mitzva since it is saving the community from harm and possible death.

 Minchas Yitzchok (8:148): Is it permitted to report to the police reckless drivers who are a danger to other motorists and pedestrians? Concerning the question regarding motorists who drive their vehicles in a manner which endangers all those who are on the road with them by means of the means different scenarios that are described in his letter. Is it permitted to report them to the police? This will typically result in a monetary punishment or the cancellation of their driver’s license for a fixed period or incarceration in jail and it serves as a deterrent to actions which endanger others. Answer: Even though halacha prohibits causing a Jew to be given bodily or financially to the secular justice system, nevertheless a Jew who endangers other people is not included in this prohibition. This is explicitly stated by the Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u’Mazik 8:11) and Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 388:12): “All those who disturb the community and cause it distress it is permitted to give them over to the secular government to be punished whether by beating, imprisonment or fines…” It is obvious that all those who drive carelessly and in a wild manner, endanger the lives of all those are near them. We in fact have been commanded to avoid danger and to prevent it from happening. Perhaps by taking actions against these drivers it will prevent danger and reduce the number of accidents. There is a difficulty however. The Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u’Mazik 8:9) states that it is prohibited to hand over a person to the secular government whether physically or financially even if he is wicked and even if he disturbs and distresses… And then the Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u’Mazik 8:11) states, “And thus all those who disturb and distress the society it is permitted to hand them over to the secular government to be beaten or imprisoned or fined..” What is the source of the distinction that the Rambam makes between those who disturb individuals and those who disturb the community? I could not find a source in the standard commentaries on the Rambam. However I found a source in the Chasam Sofer and his son the Ksav Sofer on their commentary to Gittin (7) and this supports the view of the Rivash (239). The Rivash notes, “If someone is disturbing and distressing the community then he should be punished according to what the beis din sees fit as we find in the Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u’Mazik 8:5): ‘All those who disturb and distress the community it permitted to give them to the judges to be beaten, or jailed or to be fined - while if it only concerns an individual it is prohibited.’ And similarly when the beis din sees a need to restore order to that generation…and the needs of the time require and they want to punish more than the halacha specifies for the sake of preserving society… they are permitted…” This ruling of the Rivash is cited by the Rema (C.M. 388:15). Thus we see from the Rivash- based on the explanation of the Rambam by the Chasam Sofer and the Ksav Sofer - that for an individual who is only being verbally abused it prohibited to report his abuser to the secular authorities. But that verbal abuse of the community is sufficient justification to call the police or surely to have him punished by a Jewish court…. However the Sema (C.M. 388:30):“This that the abuser is not reported to the secular authorities is only when he is verbally abusive but if he causes financial loss and surely if he beats him or causes bodily suffering it is permitted to report him to the secular authorities as is stated in the Rema and the Darchei Moshe. See also the Tur (C.M. 425:2).” This distinction is readily seen according to the Chasam Sofer’s explanation of the Rambam… Rashi also would seem to support the idea that if the abuser caused a loss of money and forgery then it is permitted to report him… The Rambam (Chovel u’Mazik 8:11) seems to being saying that only when it is verbal abuse that the abuser is not reported to the police but if he causes actually loss than it is permitted to prevent him suffering a loss. This is also the Rema (C.M. 388:9) and the Shach (C.M. 388:59-60)…The reason that the moser can be reported to the police is because he has the status of a rodef (pursuer) - as we find stated in the Rema (C.M. 388:12) and in the Sema (C.M. 388:29). The law of rodef is discussed in Shulchan Aruch (C.M. 425:1). Every Jew has the obligation to save others from a rodef according to the procedure discussed there. The Rema (C.M. 388:12) states that the rodef is someone who endangers the community such as a counterfeiter and it is permitted to report him to the police after warning him to stop…. Returning to our question, it is obvious that someone who drives at excessive speeds and thus cannot stop quickly enough when needed without causing an accident - has the status of a rodef (pursuer) even if his behavior was much less serious. … If after warning him he continues to act in this way, it is permitted to report him to the police. It is obvious that this is true for the other behaviors mentioned such as stopping at stop signs which enable pedestrians to cross the street or if he is dangerously tailgating the car in front of him. The same applies if he is driving without a license – all of these are in the category of rodef which endangers himself and others. Even if he doesn’t intend to endanger others he is still considered a rodef. Also included is if he stops his car in a way that endangers pedestrians or by parking on the sidewalk which forces the pedestrians to go into the street or any of the other ways that that are described in the letter. All of these are equivalent to digging a pit in the public area… However as is explicit in Shulchan Aruch in all these laws – whether it is rodef (Shulchan Aruch C.M. 425) or moser (Shulchan Aruch 388:10) or whether it counterfeiting – before the perpetrator is reported to the police he needs to be formerly warned. Also in our case he should not be reported without beis din first warning him. Therefore those who are involved in this mitzva of life saving should first go to beis din and to present their claims before them…

International Extradition: A Guide to U.S. and International Practice

 https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/perspectives/publications/2020/11/international-extradition-a-guide

Extradition treaties are intended to operate like contracts and obligate the parties to arrest and surrender a person to a foreign treaty partner upon request, provided that the treaty's requirements are met and no exceptions apply. Extradition treaties are individually negotiated and may vary in order to accommodate the legal systems and priorities of the negotiating countries, but they generally share common elements. They establish requirements for both the country sending the extradition request (the "requesting state") and the country receiving the request (the "requested state").

How Jewish American pedophiles hide from justice in Israel

 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-jewish-american-pedophiles-hide-from-justice-in-israel/

 A CBS News investigation has found that many accused American pedophiles flee to Israel, and bringing them to justice can be difficult.

 Jewish Community Watch (JCW), an American organization that tracks accused pedophiles, has been trying for years to find Karow and help bring him to justice. 

JCW says Karow and other wanted men and women have been able to exploit a right known as the Law of Return, whereby any Jewish person can move to Israel and automatically gain citizenship.

Since the small organization started tracking accused pedophiles in 2014, it says more than 60 have fled from the U.S. to Israel. Given its limited resources to identify these individuals, JCW says the actual number is likely much larger.

Brooklyn child-molest monster ‘got away with it’ after fleeing to Israel

https://nypost.com/2012/06/03/brooklyn-child-molest-monster-got-away-with-it-after-fleeing-to-israel/ 

Here is Avrohom Mondrowitz, New York’s most notorious child molester — living scot-free in Israel.

Called the “Bin Laden of pedophiles” by one victim, the bogus rabbi and self-proclaimed psychologist fled the United States in 1984 just before cops broke into his Borough Park, Brooklyn, home with a search warrant. They found a cache of kiddie porn and lists of hundreds of names of local boys, most referred to Mondrowitz by Jewish families and child-service agencies for counseling and his yeshiva-style program.

“He was known in the insular community as the go-to therapist, child mentor,” said an outspoken victim, Mark Weiss, whose parents sent him to Mondrowitz at age 13. “He had a certain knack with kids.”

 

Silence and self-rule: Brooklyn's Orthodox child abuse cover-up

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/29/brooklyn-orthodox-jews-child-abuse-cover-up-feature

 Last summer the rabbis on the Crown Heights Beit Din even ruled that reporting child abuse is not mesirah – the ancient taboo against informing on another Jew – and that cases must not be taken to them, but to the secular authorities.

 As it is, the rabbinic leadership shows little sign of acting on its own accord.

When Brooklyn Assemblyman Dov Hikind first started using his radio show to discuss child sexual abuse some questioned his right to interfere, he says. "So I told the leader of a major Jewish organisation in the religious community: 'I will stop doing everything I'm doing if you commit to me that you will take charge of this and do what needs to be done. If you accept my offer, please call me and I will be out of it.'" That was five years ago. Hikind is still waiting.

Child advocates blast systemic failures in Israel’s handling of sex abuse cases

 https://www.jta.org/2019/07/01/israel/child-advocates-blast-systemic-failures-in-israels-handling-of-sex-abuse-cases

In May, the state comptroller’s annual report revealed that 60 percent of Israelis jailed for sexual crimes ended up being released without undergoing any sort of therapeutic treatment to prevent recidivism.

While he felt that he could not comment on specific allegations against Litzman, American activist Rabbi Yakov Horowitz said there was definitely a pattern in how such cases are handled in Israel, especially when it comes to extraditing accused abusers such as Leifer and Avrohom Mondrowitz, who has been living openly in Israel for years. Mondrowitz is a Gur Hasid and accused serial molester who fled Brooklyn for Israel in the 1980s. Tablet reported that some believe that local authorities in New York declined to have him extradited because of haredi political pressure.

 

Sexual Assault Allegations Rock an Israeli Hasidic Community

 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-sexual-assault-allegations-rock-an-israeli-hasidic-community-1.8293926

 The son of Rabbi Yaakov Aryeh Alter, leader of Ger Hasidic community, has been accused of abusing male yeshiva students over years ■ Sect, which denies allegations, did not notify authorities and paid a large sum to prevent publication

Israeli police recommend Yaakov Litzman indictment over Malka Leifer case

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/07/israeli-police-recommend-yaakov-litzman-indictment-over-malka-leifer-case

The Israeli police say they have enough evidence for an indictment of Litzman for tampering with witnesses.

“With the end of this investigation the Israeli police’s position is that there is enough alleged evidence against deputy minister of health Yaakov Litzman of offences of fraud, breach of trust, and impeachment in testimony in the [Leifer] extradition case,” the statement said.

The investigation allegedly found that psychiatrists feared they would be fired if they did not follow the orders of Litzman, who is also chairman of the ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism party.

Adass Israel School sex abuse scandal

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adass_Israel_School_sex_abuse_scandal

In February 2019, it was revealed that Israel's deputy health minister, Yaakov Litzman, was questioned by police on the suspicion that he had been using his position to prevent the extradition.^[13] It was alleged that Litzman pressured doctors to falsify psychiatric evaluations that deem Leifer unfit to stand trial, therefore preventing her extradition.^[56][57] Litzman claimed that everything he did was legal, and that he was acting "for the good of the public". Like Leifer, Litzman is a Gur Hassid;^[58] it was revealed that Leifer had previously held a position at a school run by the ultra-Orthodox group.^[59]

Violence In America

 https://www.americanheritage.com/violence-america

 Men, especially young men, are at the heart of American violence. Their behavior is most dangerous in their teens and twenties, the years when they are likeliest to kill, riot, vandalize, steal, and abuse alcohol or other drugs. The surest way to reduce crime, the psychologist David T. Lykken of the University of Minnesota has remarked, would be to put all able-bodied males between the ages of twelve and twenty-eight into cryogenic sleep.

 

Arab communities shattered, as organized crime fuels a skyrocketing murder rate

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/arab-communities-shattered-as-organized-crime-fuels-record-levels-of-bloodshed/

Many Arab Israelis blame the violence on organized crime, and accuse police of devoting too few resources to root it out in Arab cities, towns and neighborhoods. Experts, policymakers and activists argue that even as Israeli police have cracked down on crime among Israeli Jews, not enough has been done to combat endemic violence in the Arab community, which has long suffered from official neglect.

 

Litzman to be indicted for interfering in case of alleged child abuser

 https://www.ynetnews.com/article/ByprFIyvd

 Former health minister set to be hit with charges of bearing false witness, fraud and breach of trust in Malka Leifer affair for allegedly trying to influence psychiatrists tasked with assessing her mental fitness

Anulling marriage when husband is impotent

Igros Moshe (E.H. 1:79) Impotent husband. Concerning a woman who married a man and immediately after the wedding it was clear that he was totally impotent and incapable of having sexual relations at all. It was also clear that  his problem existed prior to getting married since he was not able to have intercourse the night of the wedding. Furthermore there is the testimony of expert doctors who treated him with various medicine that were ineffectual that his condition is incurable and the wife is young and needs to remarry but her husband refused to divorce her and he ran away and it is impossible to obtain a get.  The question is whether the marriage can be annulled because if she had known that he was impotent she would never have married him?. This issue has been thoroughly discussed in contemporary and ancient  tshuvos. Some conclude that it is prohibited and some permit it theoretically but not in actuality. Others claim that it is permitted by the Torah but prohibited by the rabbis. However since this is an issue of helping an aguna the matter needs to be investigated despite the fact that I am not worthy in particular to decide between the words of our teachers. G-d should help us to not err in the halacha and we should teach the true actual halacha. It would seem clear and obvious  that if the husband is incapable of intercourse -which is the basis of sexuality and it is the reason why a woman marries and that the Torah describes the absence of intercourse as affliction (Yoma 77).  Tosfos (Kesubos 48) indicates that a woman marries in order to have sexual intercourse. Consequently it is clear and obvious that if the man is incapable of sexual intercourse that it is a very great defect in terms of the reason she got married and there is no need to bring proofs to this. But there is also a great proof as we see in the Ein Yitzchok (E.H. 24.6) in citing Tosfos (Yevamos 65) that if the husband is impotent he is required to divorce his wife.  This is also the view of the Tur and Shulchan Aruch (154) and also the Beis Yosef cites it in the name of Rashba that we force the impotent husband to divorce her since she got married to have sex. .  Thus we see it is a major deficit. So even if you have a doubt that perhaps there are some women who don’t care if their husband is impotent and therefore we can not force a divorce. But perhaps this last proof shows that we can force a divorce even though we are concerned that even though most women do care about this even though there is a minority that doesn’t care.  However it is more likely that the reason we can force a divorce is because all woman only marry for intercourse. And thus this is a case of mekach ta’us (mistaken transaction)to annul the marriage  The reason that they say to force the divorce and don’t say the marriage is annulled is because their case was of a man who became impotent after they got married. This distinction is important regarding all serious deficits, since there are some woman who prefer marriage under almost any circumstances.  Impotence is not only a major deficit but it is worse than a case such as mucha shechin (skin disease) because sex can not exist at all with it. All the Achronim agree that is a major defect and therefore it can be the basis to annul the marriage if she wasn’t aware of it before she got married and only learned of it after the marriage.  Consequently after much analysis in this case of an impotent husband and it has been determined that he was this way even prior to marriage and it is impossible to obtain a get from him – she should not be an aguna and she should be permitted to remarry because of annulling the marriage (kiddushei ta’os).

Republicans Are One Bill Away From Making It Legal to Shoot a Protestor Whose Sign They Don’t Like

 https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/04/gop-anti-protest-bills

 Following the signing of a Florida “anti-riot” law that, among things, grants civil immunity to people who decide to drive their cars into protesters who are blocking a road and makes it a second-degree felony to destroy a plaque, memorial, painting, flag, or other structure commemorating historical people or events, the New York Times reports that GOP lawmakers in dozens of states have introduce anti-protest bills meant to silence people speaking out for justice. Oklahoma and Iowa, for instance, were apparently inspired by what Florida did re: basically encouraging drivers to strike protestors with their cars, and passed similar bills granting legal protections in certain situation for drivers who hit protestors supposedly blocking the street. In Indiana, a Republican proposal would ban anyone convicted of unlawful assembly from holding state employment. A Minnesota bill would bar people convicted of unlawful protesting from receiving unemployment benefits, housing assistance, and even student loans. In Kentucky, where Breonna Taylor was killed by the police inside her apartment last year, the State Senate passed a bill that would make it a crime to insult a police officer with “offensive or derisive” words or gestures that could “provoke a violent response.” (In other words, one could be charged for using words that caused a police officer to violently respond to them.) That measure would have required those arrested to be held in jail for a minimum of 48 hours, a rule that does not automatically apply to people arrested in Kentucky on charges of arson, rape, or murder. While the bill died in the statehouse, its lead sponsor, Republican State Senator Danny Carroll, said he would refile it next session.

As the Times notes, these bills are completely unnecessary given the fact that (1) last summer’s protests were overwhelmingly peaceful—96% involved no police damage or police injuries, while a report found that it was police officers or counterprotesters who often instigated violence and (2) laws already exist to punish rioting. Instead, the measures are clearly aimed at scaring people into staying silent.

Students beat rabbi in Ponevezh Yeshiva

 https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/304703

 The riots inside the Ponevezh Yeshiva Hall in Bnei Brak have resumed, with students from the 'Jerusalem Faction' beat one of the teachers today. One of the students also spat on him.

Rabbi Aryeh Kahaneman, the son of Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Eliezer Kahaneman, was the victim of the attack. He was taken to Tel Hashomer hospital.

The quarrel was part of a longstanding dispute between the two factions over control of the yeshiva and the division of its territory. The supporters of Rabbi Shmuel Markovitz on the one hand, nicknamed the "haters," and Rabbi Eliezer Kahaneman's rival camp, called the "terrorists" have long been at loggerheads and tensions frequently lead to violence.

גרסת פלג 'המחבלים' בפוניבז': "מדובר באלימות מתוכננת"

 https://www.kikar.co.il/390096.html

האלימות בישיבת פוניבז' - גרסת 'המחבלים': לאחר יומיים רצופים של אירועים בגבעת הישיבה, הפלג של 'המחבלים' מציג את גרסתו: "הכל מתוזמן מראש, 

האלימות מכוונת" - וחושף תיעוד חדש

 

Police called as Bnei Brak yeshiva brawl turns violent

 https://www.ynetnews.com/article/rJ7izd2I00#autoplay

 Long-standing battle for control of Ponevezh seminary erupts into violence when mainstream faction returns after pandemic regulations lifted; two people hospitalized, including son of yeshiva dean

Ultra-Orthodox mob locks cops in building; then suspect flees dressed as woman

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/ultra-orthodox-mob-locks-cops-in-building-as-arrest-raid-turns-violent/

 Police ran into violent clashes Monday night in Jerusalem’s ultra-Orthodox Mea She’arim neighborhood, with three officers suffering mild injuries.

During an initial arrest raid, a group of officers was trapped in a building after local residents barricaded them inside with chains. A suspect wanted by police tried to evade arrest the next day by dressing as a woman.