It isn't spot on at all. Its full of conjecture and factually incorrect.
The pathologist made clear he was unable to gauge the degree of force used to cause the non gsw injuries other than one that resulted in a laceration and severe superficial skin injury without underlying fractures which he said involved considerable force from a light object. I'm a petite female and hit golf balls with considerable force using a light object.
Where's the evidence for NB's watch coming off as a result of injuries sustained? NB did not sustain any non-gsw injuries to his left arm and the non-gsw to his right arm was restricted to his forearm. The watch was found near the kitchen sink under a rug.
I hope Caroline doesn’t mind, but I’ve taken the liberty of copying her reply to you as she explains all the points you deny so perfectly:
“
He was "unable to gauge the degree of force used" in one sentence but in the next sentence he described the force as "considerable"?
Where in his dialogue does he state that the injury was caused by considerable force with a light object? He also agreed that it could have been caused by a heavy blow from a first or a lighter blow from a heavy object. I'm surprised G-Unit wasn't all over your posr like she ws mine ....... oh hang on, she's a supporter so would miss these little 'nuances'.
”
There are titbits I could add, but I’m becoming weary of explaining the obvious to you, Holly, as you seem to either dismiss it because you’re not capable of replying; or perhaps you don’t quite understand...
One quick thing: Nevill’s watch was found (broken strap) yards from his body, and it doesn’t take much logic to realise it flew off in the violent struggle. And it must have been extremely violent for it to fly across the room.
By the way, why are you stating things that aren’t correct?
People can see what you’re doing...