It says that you couldn't practice law in France without being catholic. The victim studied law but couldn't practice because he was protestant. That fascinates me. We tend to have very simple models of the past but this indicates some underlying complexity that I want to understand. Did he study law because he didn't think the rule would be enforced? Did he study at a law school? Why did they let him study if he was a protestant? Did he think the law was going to be changed? Did he think he would was going to lie and claim to be catholic but then changed his mind? What was it like being in that situation?
Denials and miscarriages of justice, without any recourse, are among the more dispicable acts of any society. In this case, there's one way, at least, to ensure that the option to recourse remains open.