This as all been explained. I’m not a ballistics expert so I can’t give you the details. But they have recreated these wounds exactly with ballistic gel and a recreation of the vehicle. No magic bullet nonsense. All straight shots into a moving vehicle and the difference in wound height of the two victims is explained by the fact that one was in a fold down jump seat that sat lower. One shooter, one rifle.
Take a screwdriver and stab ballistic gel. Then take a screwdriver and, with the same force, stab an ice cube. Notice a difference in how the substance responds to the force?
It’s quite possible not to encounter anything hard (bone) going through a neck or chest. A skull not so much.
This as all been explained. I’m not a ballistics expert so I can’t give you the details. But they have recreated these wounds exactly with ballistic gel and a recreation of the vehicle. No magic bullet nonsense. All straight shots into a moving vehicle and the difference in wound height of the two victims is explained by the fact that one was in a fold down jump seat that sat lower. One shooter, one rifle.
What are you even talking about a magic bullet for?
It is a simple question of ballistics, entrance wounds vs exit wounds.
First shot into the upper back does not match the second shot into the skull.
Wouldn’t he have a gaping hole either in his upper back or throat similar to the damage done to his skull?
The second shot doesn’t match the first that’s always been the question
Take a screwdriver and stab ballistic gel. Then take a screwdriver and, with the same force, stab an ice cube. Notice a difference in how the substance responds to the force?
It’s quite possible not to encounter anything hard (bone) going through a neck or chest. A skull not so much.