Part, Question

 1   2, 31  |        except inscription." [*The accuser was bound by Roman Law to ~
 2   2, 31  |          inscription was that the accuser bound himself, if he ~failed
 3   2, 65  |           even though there be no accuser. Therefore it seems that
 4   2, 65  |          even though there be no ~accuser.~Aquin.: SMT SS Q[67] A[
 5   2, 65  |            1/1~OBJ 2: Further, an accuser is required in judicial
 6   2, 65  |           without there being an ~accuser.~Aquin.: SMT SS Q[67] A[
 7   2, 65  |          was at the same time the accuser and ~the judge of the wicked
 8   2, 65  |       being at the same ~time his accuser.~Aquin.: SMT SS Q[67] A[
 9   2, 65  |           not ~condemn without an accuser, since our Lord did not
10   2, 65  |         unless the latter has ~an accuser, according to Acts 25:16: "
11   2, 65  |       sinner's conscience as his ~accuser, according to Rm. 2:15, "
12   2, 65  |    disgrace takes the place of an accuser. Hence a ~gloss on Gn. 4:
13   2, 65  |           There ~is no need of an accuser when the crime committed
14   2, 65  |          but for him, so that no ~accuser is required. The punishment
15   2, 65  |           it stands instead of an accuser. The fact that the judge
16   2, 65  |            Hence a man cannot ~be accuser, witness and judge at the
17   2, 65  |           is. Daniel was at ~once accuser and judge, because he was
18   2, 65  |           he has to judge between accuser and ~defendant, while the
19   2, 65  |          First on the part of the accuser, ~whose right it sometimes
20   2, 65  |     injury committed against the ~accuser - because it is not in the
21   2, 66  | sufficient proof, since it is the accuser's duty to prove: as, for ~
22   2, 66  |    Accusatorum) that "the role of accuser must never be sanctioned
23   2, 66  |         by way of accusation, the accuser is in the position ~of a
24   2, 66  |          judge stands between the accuser and the accused ~for the
25   2, 66  |     necessity of writing when the accuser is present.~Aquin.: SMT
26   2, 66  |        acquit one another." [*The accuser was bound by ~Roman Law
27   2, 66  |          inscription was that the accuser bound himself, if ~he failed
28   2, 66  |        then by mutual consent the accuser and the ~defendant acquit
29   2, 66  |        Thes. Para. 1/1~Whether an accuser who fails to prove his indictment
30   2, 66  |            It would seem that the accuser who fails to prove his indictment ~
31   2, 66  |        case the judge acquit the ~accuser, as stated in Decret. II,
32   2, 66  |       poenituerit.] Therefore the accuser who fails to prove his ~
33   2, 66  |         by way of accusation, the accuser holds the position of a
34   2, 66  |        levity of mind. But if the accuser desist from ~accusing an
35   2, 66  |        Para. 1/1~Reply OBJ 3: The accuser deserves the punishment
36   2, 67  |          his guilt and be his own accuser. ~Therefore he is not bound
37   2, 67  |           but also as regards his accuser, who is punished if he fail
38   2, 67  |            1/1~OBJ 2: Further, an accuser who is guilty of collusion
39   2, 67  |    accused for collusion with the accuser. ~Therefore it would seem
40   2, 67  |           1/1~Reply OBJ 2: If the accuser is guilty of collusion with
41   2, 68  |         some danger threatens the accuser, it matters not since he
42   3, 81  |       with the others ~without an accuser and evident proof. lest
43 Suppl, 55|       prove his accusation. [*The accuser was bound by Roman Law to ~
44 Suppl, 55|         in a matrimonial suit the accuser does not bind himself to
45 Suppl, 55|           runs as follows: "If an accuser present himself after the ~
46 Suppl, 55|       same ~person cannot be both accuser and witness. Neither therefore
47 Suppl, 55|            the same person can be accuser and ~witness; that evidence
48 Suppl, 84|        hearing, the ~witness, the accuser, and the defendant need