One mustn’t entirely blame the jury though, it is said that actions speak louder than words, and judging solely by his actions, Meursault does seem immoral. He sends his mother away to a home, doesn’t visit her, appears uncaring when she dies, engages in an affair with Marie the very next day, and kills a man in cold blood. It is only because the reader is shown his thoughts and given ample opportunity to step into Meursault’s shoes that the reader can see that he is moral. For example, when Meursault is at his mother’s funeral, the other visitors will see only his haste in getting away, while the reader is able to feel his frustration and confusion, even his anger at the situation. While the court views Marie as a mistress and calls her relationship a “dubious liaison” the reader knows that Meursault has feelings for her, and needed her to comfort him after the death of his mother. The jury at the trial is not afforded these insights though and is instead forced to view Meursault’s morality based solely on his actions, but the reader sees all this and can thus judge Meursault