Your claims were first of all demolished by me pointing out the photos are of insufficient quality to tell the extent of hypostasis.
You did not point out anything. You came up with an excuse.
Second hypostatis doesn't always develop and can be mild if it does. What is one of the biggest things that inhibits such? Hemorrhaging like Sheila suffered. All the autopsy stated is that hypostatis didn't conflict with the position her body was found in. It didn't declare she had extensive hypostatis let alone describe where all it said was it wasn't inconsistent with the position her body was found. If there had been extensive hypostatis on her butt and entire back that would be inconsistent with her being found in the position she was because her butt should not have hypostasis because it was in heavy contact with the floor.
In your mind your nonsense is intact but in reality your claims have been dismantled.
Yawn. Heard this before.
This part of Sheila's autopsy has been attributed to the following literature Conversely, the development of lividity may be delayed in persons with chronic anemia or massive terminal hemorrhage.Why haemorrhage can delay or stop hypostasis and why it does not apply to Sheila
Haemorrhage is the discharge/escape of blood from the blood vessels. Post mortem hypostasis depends on blood pooling in the deceased according to the direction of gravity. If haemorrhage results in enough blood leaving the body it can effect the development and appearance of hypostasis. Hypostasis is not always seen in a body and it may be absent in the young, the old and the clinically anaemic or in those who have died from severe blood loss.
Simpson's Forensic Medicine, 13th edition
It is the size of the wound that important but the amount of blood lost as a result of those wounds. Now lets compare Sheila's blood loss to those of other cases were hypostasis is mentioned Comparative analysis no1
The death of David Kelly in 2003. Having cut his own wrists, he bled to death losing around 4-5 pints of blood. As a result you can see from the autopsy report examiners noted the hypostasis was weakly developed. Comparative analysis no2
Nicole Brown Simpson 1994, Having had her throat cut open hypostasis still developed and this played an important part of the case.MR. KELBERG: Doctor, yesterday, you were talking about--on direct examination, if I can find my--talking about Dr. Lakshmanan's testimony concerning, as he described it, a mottled area of ecchymosis along the right side of the back area of Nicole Brown Simpson. Do you recall talking about that in your direct examination?
DR. BADEN: Yes, I do.
MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, would it be accurate to say on your direct examination, you said, no. 1, in your opinion, that's not a shoeprint that is present there?
DR. BADEN: I said it's not an ecchymosis, it's not a bruise, no. 1. No. 2, it's not a shoeprint, but it's not even a bruise.
MR. KELBERG: And you said in fact that it was lividity although you didn't use the term "Lividity." Isn't that what you said?
DR. BADEN: Well, I said it was a form of lividity. That is, the postmortem settling of blood in the way the body settles after death, the blood settles after death depending on what the body is lying on.
Comparative analysis no3
last but not least lets compare Sheila to June. Based on the crime scene photos alone, The haemorrhages inflicted on June has allowed more blood to escape the body of June than that of Sheila. June having sustained 7 gunshots as opposed to Shelia's 2 gunshots wounds is the primary reason June has lose more significantly more blood than Sheila. Yet hypostasis is strongly developed in June but only just beginning to develop in Sheila. This leads back to my original conclusion that there is a disparity in the time of death. Thus the haemorrhage excuse is unfounded and baseless since the original theory is based on comparing Sheila to someone who has infact lost more blood as a result of her own haemorrhages caused by the same weapon.
In your mind my claims have been dismantled. But in reality my claims are not faltering.