Captain, again thank you for another detailed and thoughtful response.
Actually, the reason I was pounding on lack of any direct evidence that Travis' brain was injured, as well as lack of any reference to brain injury in Horn's report, was not because I necessarily believe that Travis' brain was untouched by the bullet, but rather to draw attention to the lack of specifics around this point and Horn's lack of detail in his autopsy.
In fact, I do think it likely that the bullet penetrated Travis' right frontal lobe. Indeed, waaaay back in posts #258 and #269 (page 11 of this thread, my very first posts on Websleuths btw!), I argued the scenario in detail, as well as pulled some expert references to support the notion that Travis could very well have defended himself after sustaining a gunshot wound to a frontal lobe. I invite readers to go back to post #269 for more on gunshot wounds to the frontal lobes.
Now, the issue I continue to have is all this faith being heaped on select parts of Horn's testimony and autopsy report. I think we can all agree that his autopsy report did nothing to directly address whether Travis' brain had been penetrated by the bullet (and thus support his being incapacitated, a key point). As you've done above, the thoughtful reader has to go through gymnastics and arm-waving to support even this basic notion. There is also little to directly support a knife-first scenario. Indeed, I would suggest there is contradictory information which weakens the pillar that every gunfirster inevitably points to: lack of hemorrhaging in the brain cavity.
I return to Horn's autopsy report in describing Travis' lungs and the severe stab to the chest:
The lungs weigh 340 grams left and 280 grams right. The upper and lower airways are patent and of normal caliber. The pleural surfaces are smooth and glistening. The parenchyma is autolyzed dark re-purple, exuding moderate amount of blood and intermixed frothy decompositional fluid. There are no areas of induration, consolidation, hemorrhage, or gross scarring. The pulmonary are patent and of normal caliber.
and
A 1 1/2 inch oblique stab wound of the paramidline right chest, with penetration/perforation of the costochondral junction near the sternum at the level of the 3rd and 4th right ribs; the wound extends to a max depth of 3 1/2 inches with penetration of the superior vena cava near the base of the heart, with a small amount of surrounding hemorrhagic in the mediastinal soft tissues and the pericardial sac of the heart.
Doesn't sound like much blood in the lungs or chest cavity. We imagine a stab wound penetrating the vena cava and the right lung would have resulted in a large amount of blood. We would expect Travis' right lung would have had a substantial amount of blood.
Now, as danzin16 kindly pointed out, Horn was questioned about this on the stand (post 1390):
I guess you missed the part of the ME's testimony that said it was possible the lungs were punctured and he couldn't tell because of decomp. I guess you missed the part about how it was possible the knife stabs could have entered so deeply they entered the body cavities but decomp made it difficult to tell.
Based on Horn's testimony, five days of decomposition of Travis' body had a major impact on the level of detail and certainty Horn could ascertain around the wounds and the extent of hemorrhaging. However, everyone knows that this stab wound to the body's largest vein must have caused extensive hemorrhaging. And every knifefirster knows that Travis must have been coughing up blood at the sink.
Now, let's return to every knifefirster's favorite passage from Horn's report:
The wound track perforates the anterior frontal skull near the superior orbital bone and the traverses the right anterior fossa, without gross evidence of significant intracranial hemorrhage or apparent cerebral injury (although examination of the brain tissue is somewhat limited by the decomposed nature of the remains).
So in this famous line, Horn, to his credit, offers a caveat to the reader and to the court: here are my observations (one of which we already agree is inaccurate: lack of cerebral injury!), but understand that the area is extensively decomposed, limiting the certainty of my observations. This is the one time Horn feels compelled to comment on the extent of decomposition in his report. I would say we should probably take Horn at his word: the area was decomposed making it difficult to make an accurate assessment.
Now knifefirsters may parse this further in support of their theory, but the fact of the matter is that Horn himself is cautioning us not to put too much weight on these observations. Given the fact that Horn testifies similarly with respect to the chest injury, and given that the extent of hemorrhaging from the chest wound can't be accurately reported due to extent of decomposition, is it reasonable that we now pick out this one piece of Horn's report, the one piece that Horn himself cautions us about, as the key piece of support for a knife-first scenario?
I would suggest that this evidence, while consistent with a knife-first scenario, is insufficient to rule out a gun-first scenario.
In other words, if Horn were asked in court "Is is possible that the decomposition of the area made it difficult to ascertain with certainty whether Travis was alive when he was shot?"
How do we think Horn would answer?
Dave