Against Aristogeiton II (20-21)

Furthermore, if he had not already deceived you by using these same arguments, when he was on trial at the earlier information, even so it would not be just to make any concession contrary to the existing laws; for you must not allow some persons to break the law and insist on the rest obeying it. Yet just possibly it might then have been more reasonable to trust him and grant him privileges and sacrifice some of these principles.

But after you had let him off, admittedly in hope of amendment, and then shortly after had to punish the same man again for speaking and acting against the best interests of the city, what reasonable excuse is left you if you are a second time hoodwinked? When you have tried him by deeds, why need you trust his words? In cases where you have not yet an accurate test ready to hand, it may perhaps be necessary to judge by words.