Can a court rely on irregular testimony when it is clear the witness is not lying?
Can a court rely on irregular testimony when it is clear the witness is not lying?
This source asks how much weight can be given to testimony that does not meet the ordinary evidentiary form when the judge is convinced it is truthful. The central tension is between procedural rules, confidence in truth and the danger of replacing formal evidence with personal certainty.
The practical force of the question lies in the boundary it draws. The Torah discussion must keep the source distinctions, conditions and competing values together rather than reducing the issue to a slogan or a one-line ruling. This localized text therefore stays within the exact canonical case and does not add new sources, factual claims or a broader practical ruling.