Support #1 (Beraisa - R. Yosi): What is the case? It is when there were two testimonies and two warnings, but if it was one testimony and one warning, any testimony that is partially Batel is totally Batel;

Question: What is the case in which [testimony] that is partially Batel is totally Batel?

Answer: If they testified on the 10th of Nisan that he stole an ox on Nisan 1, and he slaughtered or sold it on Nisan 10, and they were Huzam on Nisan 15, all testimonies that they testified from Nisan 10 until Nisan 15, retroactively they are Pasul.

Rebuttal (R. Ba bar Mamal): The case is, they testify about [theft and sale] at once, so you cannot learn from here anything. (If he was not there to see one, he was not there to see the other, so he was Huzam about both of them. We explained this like HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA.)

Support #2 (Tosefta): If the first were also the last (the same two witnesses testified about all three years of Chazakah), if they were Huzam about the first [year], there is no [testimony] at all. [If they were Huzam] about the second, there is one testimony (testimony about the first year remains. If they were Huzam) about the third, there are two testimonies (those of the first two years).

Question: What is the case? If you will say that the testimony is at once, and you do not learn from here at all [this cannot be, for they testify about different years]!

Answer: This must discuss separate testimonies [and we properly learn that an Ed Zomem is disqualified retroactively. We explained this like NESIVOS YERUSHALAYIM.]