What is the ruling on the witnesses when testimony is conflicting regarding the woman's state (duress vs. willingness)?

Primary text

There are three opinions regarding the liability of the witnesses (the testifiers) to receive the Hadd punishment for slander (*qadhf*). The first opinion states that no Hadd is applied to them, which aligns with the position that ruled no Hadd on the man based on their testimony. The second opinion states that the Hadd must be applied to them because they testified to adultery, but their testimony was incomplete, thus mandating the Hadd upon them, similar to cases where the required number of witnesses is not met. The third opinion states that the Hadd must be applied only to the two witnesses who testified to her willing adultery because they slandered the woman without their testimony being completed against her. The two witnesses testifying to duress are exempt because they did not slander the woman, and their testimony against the man was complete, with the Hadd being averted for him only due to doubt (*shubha*).