Q. See question (2939) above. Dear Rabbi, thank you for your prompt answer to our Beis Din shailah. Horav Miller’s permission to demand a lie detector test, did have great consequence on our case, since even refusing to take the test, does look very suspicious for the defendant. Then, surprisingly the case took an unusual turn. Before the defendant conceded and offered to pay the very significant sum that he owed, the plaintiff, who has been his partner on other very profitable businesses for many years and very likely desires to continue, offered a practical solution. Since these two litigants who are very wealthy, are big time donors to many institutions, the plaintiff offered that both parties should donate the moneys contested to a Hospital to which both are significant donors (and can claim evenly the tax credit).
What our Beis Din would like to know, at this point, when it is clear to all that the defendant was untruthful and guilty, should the Beis Din agree to this pesharah (mutual settlement) that although it maintains sholom between the parties, does not follow the truth of the case, or rather give a psak that sticks to the facts and the emes of the din. What is the correct thing for the Beis Din to do?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that although the truth may now seem obvious to the Beis Din and both parties, since both parties agree to a pshara in order to avoid the public embarrassment for the defendant if declared guilty, and also to maintain sholom and good relations between both parties including their families and friends, the best option for the Beis Din is to declare that a p’shara settlement was accepted as the ruling of the Beis Din.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as advised by Horav Shlomo Miller and Horav Aharon Miller Shlit’a