Isn't that the way many stories go, though? There's always as many sides to a situation as there are people in it. Everyone in the story is an unreliable narrator; everyone has a bias, a conviction, a version of the story only they know because of what role they play in this tale.
Yes, the other nobles don't know what Helga truly means to the CP and Dilett, and only know what they've been presented. Thus, based on what they know, they make the logical conclusions based on standing, merit, and recent developments. But just because something makes sense given outside information, doesn't mean you can't feel certain things regardless. I'm guilty of letting my emotions and personal biases getting the better of me and driving certain decisions in situations where I know logically from an outsider's point of view, it makes sense that things happen in particular ways. I'm certain very few people are free of this conundrum; if you're one of those people who are able to always 100% take yourself out of a situation and think rationally without fail, good for you, but there's a reason why things like the Solomon's paradox exists.
The way I see it, we are being told this story with the knowledge of the context precisely to highlight that we are in a tale built upon unreliable narration and secrets being withheld. Everyone is holding back something from somebody else, and we are watching the consequences unfold as a result of what is and isn't being communicated.