Talmud zu Hoschea 8:4

Rebbi Abba bar Mamal asked: Think of it, if he erroneously has sexual relations with it²⁰²If a male thought that bestiality was not forbidden.. Should it be stoned because of him while he is not liable²⁰³Instead of simply stating that the verse requires that the animal be killed, the Mishnah states two different reasons for it. The first reason, that it led a human into sin, applies even if the human is not prosecutable because he was not duly warned of the criminality of the intended act. The second reason, that the animal was known as the one for which a human was stoned, does not apply. Babli 55b in the name of Babylonian Amoraïm.? Rebbi Simeon asked: Think of it, if he used it to plough on the Sabbath. Is he not being stoned while it is not liable²⁰⁴The second reason stated in the Mishnah would apply here, but no animal can be stoned for a Sabbath violation.
Since R. Simeon is quoted after R. Abba bar Mamal, it seems that he is to be identified with R. Simeon ben Laqish.? You have only, as Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac explained: ²⁰⁵Hos. 8:4.With their silver and gold they made idols for themselves; it is not written “that they be extirpated” but that he be extirpated²⁰⁶It is possible that of a group of criminals only one actually is prosecutable. There is nothing remarkable if human and animal are treated differently.. As if a person say: the bones of X be ground up for he led his son to evil ways.