I'm not following your logic here.

Justice, for example, is simply the state of all social contracts being met as agreed upon. If a soccer player takes a shot on goal, and it crosses the goal line, and the ref grants their team a goal, that's justice. And that can happen without free will. A computer with a camera could evaluate whether the ball crossed the line. And if the camera had too few frames per second to know for sure, the computer might even get it wrong sometimes, just like a human ref (which would be unjust).

Truth is harder to define, but knowledge, at least, is just memory. And memory is ultimately just any change to a system that in some way records what happened to it - and which, incidentally, can also cause it to behave differently in the future. The craters on the moon are a memory of the things that have hit it, which is similar to the grooves on a vinyl record, the chips on a computer, and whatever goes on in our brains.

And wisdom, meanwhile, is just the heuristics that we use within a context that's too complex to understand fully. It's the hunches that an experienced chess player uses when making a move that could lead to innumerable different pathways. And again, the most advanced computer chess programs do this too. They gain the wisdom to have better hunches as they play and witness more games, much like what humans do.

And perhaps that's the spot where, at least from my perspective, it seems like you're getting confused. Just because someone doesn't have free will doesn't mean they can't gain knowledge and wisdom. Someone who's behaved badly in the past might behave better in the future if the rest of us are able to orchestrate the right experiences for them now. And the "right experiences" could be something as simple as a series of conversations that help them see things differently. Or it could be something else, like lining them up with a job, or making them go to AA meetings. Or it could be a more traditional form of punishment. Whatever it is, it just has to leave an impact - a memory.

And the fact that we, the jurors, and the rest of society, don't have free will doesn't change any of this. All of us are constantly gaining experiences, which gives us new knowledge and wisdom, which makes us make different decisions with respect to everyone else, who are all going through the same process. It's a big, self contained, constantly changing feedback loop.

But we don't need to posit free will in order for it to work. We just have to recognize that every person is driven to seek out things they like, and avoid things they fear, and that they are capable of taking on knowledge and wisdom that changes their actions over time, in ways that - usually, hopefully, in the long run, and in the big scheme of things - end up making them better at surviving, and improving their well-being over time.