Whose testimony prevails when the owner and usurper disagree on the value of the usurped property without evidence?

Primary text

The statement of the usurper (ghasib) prevails. This is because the fundamental principle is the acquittal of his liability, meaning nothing is incumbent upon him unless proof is established against him, analogous to when he admits part of a debt claimed against him. This principle extends if the owner claims the usurped item had a specific skill, like being a scribe, and the usurper denies it; the usurper's word prevails unless evidence proves the skill. Furthermore, if the usurper claims there was merchandise, an extra digit, or a defect present, the owner's word prevails because the original state is its absence. However, the usurper's word prevails regarding the value under all circumstances.