Thank you for that information. That is very interesting. Funny the ME doesn't seem to know that one can function with a small caliber bullet wound to the head.
I thought the same thing about Det Flores. It is unlikely he misheard Dr. Horn. But he ended up taking the hit for it like a good trooper. The State's first position was gunshot first.
There were only two stab wounds that were fatal. The rest were superficial wounds. I find it interesting what you say about the upward thrust wound--about how that would not be a wound of choice for a woman. I wonder, did someone tell her to do it that way? Sometimes I wonder if she had a male accomplice. That was one of the two fatal wounds and was very deep. Some of the wounds, like those on the back, were just slices, not stab wounds. But, the two fatal wounds were different.
When she 'gripped the knife' on the stand, she held it in a downward direction I think.
I'm thinking that JM just might return to gunshot first for his closing argument. I would hope he wouldn't want to hang up the Jury with this debate. It would really turn her testimony on its head if he agreed with her--yes, gunshot first, but you brought the gun.
If you have any other insights to share, I hope you will.
IMO
You tend to twist what is said and either overlook or ignore simpler explanations. He said that the path of the bullet would have passed through the brain, but he could not see the track of the bullet due to the decomposition of the brain. That is not saying that it might have missed the brain, it is stating that the wound tract through the brain collapsed on itself, so he could not identify the path through the brain. He also did not say that someone with a head wound is not functional, he said that the gunshot that Travis received would have passed through his brain and rendered him incapable of fighting like is evidenced by his defensive wounds.
Also the woundlds to the back are described as being stab wounds, about and inch deep that all impact bone, not slashes and cuts. The one abdominal wound near the Umbilicus, I believe, was described as a cut. Everything else was a stab, witht he exception of the wounds to the hands.
As for the stab wounds, the slightly upward projection of the wound is completely reasonable. She is several inches shorter than him, so any thrust
4020
type attack toward his heart is going to be upward. The overhand attack that you are talking about (the Psycho-style attack) is the most obvious knife attack. It is also, from my experience, the easiest to defend. You can attack your attacker with less exposure to the knife. You can get to their forearm without having to expose your hands to the blade. The short straight thrust from the waist means you have to get to one side or the other of the blade, so you don't get stabbed, and you risk getting your hands cut as you attempt grab the wrist/arm of the attacker. The straight thrust is also a more surprising attack as it can be hidden until the attacker actually committs to the attack. The overhead attack means you have to start the attack from distance because if you are too close you won't be able to get the knife into position or from a reasonable distance where you can get the knife into position, you telegraph the attack and give the victim time and options that they would not have with the thrust. Unless you attack from the back, which the 9 stab wounds to the back are more consistent with the overhand motion that you describe. All of the wounds to the front are more consistent with the short stright thrust type attacks.
Also if you don't believe that she cut her hand at work, the cuts she took pictures of on her fingers had to come from somewhere. If she attacked with the overhead style that you suggest, where would the cuts on her hand be when her hand slipped down the knife when she impacted bone?
The way she picked up the knife in court has nothing to do with what happened in that bathroom. It also does not match with most of the evidence left in the victim.