Whose testimony prevails regarding the destruction (talaf) of the usurped item when the usurper claims it was destroyed and the owner denies it?

Primary text

The statement of the usurper prevails because he has greater knowledge of the event, and establishing contrary evidence is impossible. If the usurper swears an oath concerning the destruction, the owner is entitled to claim its equivalent value because the return of the object itself has become impossible, mandating its substitute, similar to the case where a usurped enslaved person flees (abqa).