Final answer:
In Jean's second visit to the courtroom, there is new evidence related to an intelligence test that may affect the jury's assessment of his mental state and culpability in the crime.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question pertains to what is present in the courtroom that wasn't there during Jean's first visit. It seems that the courtroom now has additional evidence or elements that contribute to the understanding of Jean's mental state, influencing the legal proceedings. In the context of intellectual capacity and criminal culpability, the courtroom setting may now include evidence from an intelligence test previously administered to Jean, which in 1915 was a new scientific tool, and could influence the jury's perspective on Jean's ability to understand the nature of his actions.
This change is significant as it may impact the legal question of whether Jean knew the quality and wrongfulness of his act, a central issue in the legal process. The presence of this new evidence in the courtroom highlights the evolving nature of how mental conditions are considered in legal cases, especially in relation to criminal responsibility. The passage implies a complexity in assessing Jean's culpability given his intellectual condition.