"she cried out": to exclude her saying "Let him be (i.e., do not kill him)." These are the words of R. Yehudah. "and no one could save her": The implication is that if he could save her, he does so in any manner that he can, (including killing him.)
Version 1: (See translator's note below)) Version 2: (Devarim 22:28) "If a man find a maiden, a virgin": (Translator's note: The Zera Avraham writes: "Anyone who looks into this section will conclude with justice that it (the transcription) is extremely corrupt and cannot be explained at all." I humbly and respectfully submit. My translation resumes after the dots.) … "a virgin": to exclude one who has been cohabited with, whom he gives nothing. This tells me only of one who has been cohabited with. Whence do I derive (the same for) one who has lost her virginity through some accident? From (Shemoth 22:16) "the virgins" — to exclude the above. (Devarim, Ibid.) "who was not betrothed": to exclude one who was betrothed and divorced (i.e., A maiden who was betrothed and divorced receives the fine, and it belongs to her and not to her father, it being written "who was not betrothed … then he shall give to her father," the implication being that if she had been betrothed and divorced it belongs to her.) R. Akiva says: (The fine belongs to her father) even if she were widowed or divorced. And this follows, viz.: Since her betrothal money and her penalty money revert to her father, just as her betrothal money (reverts to him) even if she were betrothed and divorced, so, her penalty money (reverts to him) even if she were betrothed and divorced. If so, what is the intent of "who was not betrothed"? It is mufneh (free for interpretation) for purposes of comparison and identity (gezeirah shavah), viz.: It is written here "who was not betrothed" and elsewhere (Shemoth 22:15) "who was not betrothed." Just as here fifty, so, there, fifty; and just as there, shekels, so, here, shekels.