The fact that the witnesses are equally divided on the case indicates that the case cannot be resolved based on the kind of evidence the court asks for. The physical and circumstantial evidence the court presents is insufficient because it is inconclusive. When the court decides that du Tilh is guilty, the decision feels arbitrary: it is a decision made out of the judicial need to have a winner and a loser. Bertrande opposes the court’s need to punish one of the parties, revealing that she cares only about what is morally right, not what is legally just. And to her, putting a man to death—even if the court has justly and legitimately arrived at that outcome—is an immoral act.