Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 8:5 ירושלמי בבא קמא ח׳:ה׳

MISHNAH: It is bad to meet a deaf-mute, an insane, or an underage person⁵²These are not prosecutable and cannot be sued. Even if they were healed or grew up they cannot be sued for what they did when they were not responsible.: Anybody who injures them is liable but they who cause injury are not liable. It is bad to meet a woman⁵³A married woman, any of whose private property is administered by her husband who has the usufruct and therefore can block any payment which would diminish his income. A married woman whose husband had waved his right of administration and usufruct before marriage is counted as a male for the rules of this Mishnah. or a slave⁵⁴Any whose property is his master’s. This rule was contested by the Sadducees, Mishnah Yadayim 4:7.: Anybody who injures them is liable but they who cause injury are not liable, but they might have to pay later. If the woman was divorced or the slave manumitted, they have to pay.
A person who hits his father or mother causing a concussion³⁹Ex. 21:15 declares hitting father or mother to be a capital crime. Hitting one of the parents without causing visible damage is a sin but not a crime. Therefore there is no obstacle to pressing monetary claims. Cf. Mishnah 7. or who causes injury to a fellow man on the Sabbath⁴⁰Desecrating the Day of Atonement is a deadly sin but not a prosecutable crime; it is outside the purview of the human court. Injuring somebody on the Sabbath is a capital crime. Cf. Mishnah 7. is not liable for anything since he is tried for his life⁶⁰Even if he cannot be tried because of lack of eyewitnesses or other reasons; cf. Terumot 7:1, Note 16.. One who injures his own Canaanite slave is not liable for anything.

HALAKHAH: “It is bad to meet a deaf-mute, an insane, or an underage person,” etc. It was stated⁵⁵Tosephta Makkot 1:4.: If the witnesses said, we testify that X blinded the eye of his slave and broke his tooth, for that is what the master said, and they are found to be perjured, they pay to the slave⁵⁶The master in fact blinded the slave and broke his tooth. Since the payment for the loss of an eye is much larger than that for the loss of a tooth, it is to the advantage of the master to free his slave for the eye and to pay only for the tooth. If the witnesses are found to be perjured, they have to pay the difference of the payments for eye and tooth to the slave, irrespective of what happened in reality.. How can they say this about the case⁵⁷How can such a case really occur? The same question can be asked about the case treated in the preceding Halakhah since even if it looked as if both eyes were blinded simultaneously, it might have been that one was injured a fraction of a second before the other.? Rebbi Nasa said, those might say the following: We testify about X that [the slave] came to his hand unimpaired and left with two injuries⁵⁸This is unproblematic testimony.. Then he gains his freedom with the first and he has to pay him for the second⁵⁹Since the burden of proof is on the claimant, the slave becomes free on the injury to the eye and receives payment for the injury to the tooth unless he can prove by witnesses that his tooth was knocked out first..