>> introducing such notions as corroborative evidence <<
You might ask, "Where does the bible establish such legal principles as corroborative evidence?" In the book of Daniel, there is a passage of three men who conspire and rape a young woman of great virtue. Fearing consequences, they conspire to accuse HER of trying to seduce THEM. Alone to face three accusers, Mosaic law seems certain to condemn the woman.
Using interrogation tactics that seem straight from "Law and Order," Daniel is able to establish to establish the falseness of their testimony, nullify the authority of their claims, vindicate the woman, and prosecute the offenders.
Protestants accept most of the Book of Daniel as cannonical and authoritative. But for some strange reason, this story seems to have been very threatening to the "reformers," who frequently denounced it. I wonder why.
Which part of the Apocrypha are you looking at? None of this appears in my Bible. That said, corraborative evidence can be found elsewhere in the Bible.
"One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses." Deuteronomy 19:15
If one was able to prove that witnesses were lying, the penalties for false accusation were stiff:
"If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse a man of a crime, the two men involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the LORD before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time. The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against his brother, then do to him as he intended to do to his brother.You must purge the evil from among you." Deutoronomy 19:16-19
So, according to Mosaic law, there should have been an investigation into the testimony anyway and those three men should have been put to death.