Reference for Bava Kamma 135:22
רב נחמן אמר חייב ומכרו אמר רחמנא והא זבין לא שנא לפני יאוש לא שנא לאחר יאוש רב ששת אמר פטור חיוביה לאחר יאוש הוא דאהנו מעשיו אבל לפני יאוש דלא אהנו מעשיו לא מיחייב דומיא דטביחה בעינן דאהנו מעשיו
It must therefore surely still be said that the whole teaching refers to the time before Renunciation, but we have to transpose the ruling of the concluding clause to the case in the middle clause, and the ruling of the middle clause to the case in the concluding clause and read thus: If one stole [a sheep or an ox] and sold it, and another came and stole it, the first thief has to make four-fold and five-fold payments [respectively], but the second has not to pay anything but the principal, as a change in possession without Renunciation transfers no ownership. If, however, one stole [a sheep or an ox] and slaughtered it and another came and stole it, the first thief makes four-fold and five-fold payments [respectively], and the second makes double payment,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 391, n. 4. ');"><sup>17</sup></span>