Q&A: The Claim of a Robber
The Claim of a Robber
Question
In Bava Kamma 56 there is a discussion whether someone safeguarding a lost item has the status of an unpaid bailee or a paid bailee. As part of Abaye’s objections to Rav Yosef, a statement of Rabbi Yohanan is brought about a finder safeguarding a lost item who claimed it was stolen, and it turned out he was lying; the ruling is that he must pay double compensation. After Rav Yosef suggests that the case is speaking about an armed bandit, Abaye argues that “an armed bandit is a robber.”
If so, according to Abaye, what is the liability of someone safeguarding a lost item who claimed that it was taken by an armed bandit (that is, a robber), and then it turned out that he lied?
And is there any connection to the payment of an additional fifth?
Thank you very much!
Answer
I’m writing off the top of my head. According to Abaye, someone safeguarding a lost item is an unpaid bailee. If he had made a true claim that it was taken by an armed bandit, he would be exempt. Therefore, if he claims it was taken by an armed bandit, then seemingly he is liable only for the principal, like in the case of a real armed bandit.