Unknown Pleader Against Evergus and Mnesibulus, About False Testimony (47-48)

I, for my part, hold that the proof should be drawn from the very course of procedure to which the fellow at that time fled for refuge, that is, from the examination of the woman by the torture, to determine which party struck the first blow; for this is what constitutes assault. And it is for this reason that I am suing the witnesses for false testimony, because they deposed that Theophemus was willing to deliver up the woman, whereas he never would produce her in person either at that time before the arbitrator or subsequently, despite my repeated demands.

They ought, therefore, to suffer a double punishment, both because they deceived the jurors by bringing forward false testimony—that of the brother-in-law and the brother—, and because they wronged me while I was zealously performing a public service, doing what the state commanded me, and obeying your laws and your decrees.

Now to prove to you that I was not the only one thus commissioned, when I received from the magistrates the name of this man with orders to exact from him the equipment which he owed to the state, but that others of the trierarchs took such measures against others whose names they had received, read, please, their depositions.

The Depositions