Rea dicit se innocentem esse, sed iudex adhuc quaerit quis pecuniam ceperit.

Because Latin uses se as a reflexive pronoun when the subject of the main verb and the subject of the subordinate idea are the same.

Here, the main subject is Rea. She says that she is innocent. Since the she in the second part refers back to Rea, Latin uses se, not eam.

• se = herself
• eam = her, referring to some other female

So:

• Rea dicit se innocentem esse = The defendant says that she herself is innocent.

Because it agrees with se, which is accusative.

In Latin indirect statement, the subject of the subordinate clause goes into the accusative, and the verb goes into the infinitive. Since se is accusative, any predicate adjective describing it must also be accusative.

So:

• se = accusative
• innocentem = accusative feminine singular, agreeing with se

Even though in English we say she is innocent, Latin changes the structure after dicit:

• direct statement: ea innocens est
• indirect statement: dicit se innocentem esse

Because dicit introduces an indirect statement, and Latin normally expresses indirect statement with:

• accusative subject
• infinitive verb

This is often called the accusative-and-infinitive construction.

So:

• se = the subject of the indirect statement
• innocentem = predicate adjective
• esse = infinitive, meaning to be

That whole phrase means that she is innocent.

It is an indirect statement.

A very literal breakdown is:

• Rea = the defendant
• dicit = says
• se = herself
• innocentem = innocent
• esse = to be

So Latin literally says something like:

• The defendant says herself innocent to be

But natural English is:

• The defendant says that she is innocent

This is one of the most important Latin sentence patterns to learn.

Because this is an indirect question, and quis here is the interrogative pronoun meaning who?

After a verb like quaerit (asks, investigates, inquires), Latin introduces the question with an interrogative word:

• quis = who?
• quid = what?
• ubi = where?
• cur = why?
• and so on

So:

• quaerit quis pecuniam ceperit = he asks/investigates who took the money

By contrast, qui is often a relative pronoun meaning who, which, that, as in the man who came.

Because quis pecuniam ceperit is an indirect question, and indirect questions in Latin regularly take the subjunctive.

So after quaerit, Latin does not use the indicative cepit, but the subjunctive ceperit.

Compare:

• direct question: quis pecuniam cepit? = who took the money?
• indirect question: iudex quaerit quis pecuniam ceperit = the judge asks who took the money

This is a very standard rule:

• Indirect questions use the subjunctive.

Because the action of taking the money is viewed as completed relative to the judge’s asking.

The judge is now asking about a past action: who took the money. Latin expresses that with the perfect subjunctive in this indirect question.

Since quaerit is present, this is also what you would expect from the normal sequence of tenses:

• main verb in a primary tense: quaerit
• verb in indirect question for prior action: ceperit

In translation, ceperit here can often be rendered simply as:

• took
• sometimes has taken, depending on context

Pecuniam is accusative singular because it is the direct object of ceperit.

The verb capere means to take, and the thing taken goes in the accusative.

So:

• quis = who? (subject)
• pecuniam = the money (direct object)
• ceperit = took/has taken

Rea means female defendant or accused woman.

It is the feminine form corresponding to reus, which means male defendant or accused man.

So the sentence specifically refers to a woman. That is also why later words referring back to her are feminine:

• innocentem is feminine singular
• se can refer to either gender, but here it refers to Rea

Adhuc means still, up to this point, or yet.

So:

• sed iudex adhuc quaerit = but the judge is still asking

It suggests that the matter is not settled yet. Even though the defendant claims to be innocent, the judge continues investigating.

Latin word order is more flexible than English because grammatical endings show how words function in the sentence.

For example:

• Rea is clearly the subject of dicit
• se is accusative
• innocentem agrees with se
• quis is the subject of ceperit
• pecuniam is the object

So Latin does not need to rely on word order as much as English does.

This sentence is actually fairly natural Latin prose order:

• Rea dicit se innocentem esse
• sed iudex adhuc quaerit quis pecuniam ceperit

English has to be more rigid:

• The defendant says that she is innocent, but the judge is still asking who took the money.

Yes. Quaerere can mean:

• to ask
• to seek
• to investigate
• to inquire into

So in this context, iudex adhuc quaerit quis pecuniam ceperit may mean not just that the judge is literally asking a question aloud, but that he is trying to find out who took the money.

Depending on context, a translation like the judge is still investigating who took the money could also work well.

They would be something like this:

For the indirect statement:

• direct: Rea dicit: ego innocens sum.
• indirect: Rea dicit se innocentem esse.

For the indirect question:

• direct: Quis pecuniam cepit?
• indirect: iudex quaerit quis pecuniam ceperit.

So this sentence shows two very important Latin patterns side by side:

• indirect statement after dicit
• indirect question after quaerit