I looked at this question for a few minutes, because everybody regards events through the lens of their own particular beliefs and worldview.  But then, I decided that the question was not regarding value judgements, but rather simply the full span and breadth of the facts.  It seems to me to be almost self explanatory, that there [i]is[/i] absolute truth.  By the word "absolute", that views the facts that support all viewpoints involved, plus takes into account the emotions that take part in influencing the views (and therefore behaviors) that make up the whole.
Conversely, the claim that there is no such thing as absolute truth seems to be addressing mainly that it is difficult to fully understand and take counsel of all views involved, and still make a value judgement that is "fair" to all parties and viewpoints involved.  However, that is another question entirely, because "absolute truth" is a different entity from "value judgements", even though they have the potential to intertwine and influence each other.
Confused yet? [;)]

The absolute truth is all our knowledge and experience combined.  However, because of our finite presence due to our location on this planet and the universe, not even all our experience and knowledge combined is the absolute truth.  There is facts about the universe that we do not know.  Those facts are an integral part of the absolute truth, even if we have no knowledge of them ,and as yet no ability to gain knowledge of those facts.
There is also the viewpoint that the absolute truth includes a description of that which you/we do not know.  
Again, if you mean "Is there any valid value judgements?" the answer is yes.  The common thread in most world religions seems to be what activities hurt self or other people, when it comes to right and wrong.    The obvious exception to this is responding to provocations.  It is wrong to initiate force against another, if they have not wronged you.  However, it is not wrong to respond to a transgression with a comensurate action, or a greater action if the purpose of the response is to stop the transgression in progress.
If course, none of this has any bearing on, and should not be construed to reflect, any presence or absence of absolute truth or value judgements.  I hope this clears things up a bit [;D]