Ballistic forensics is nowhere near as certain as shows like CSI make you think.
Thankfully, forensics has been a thing for centuries, so as you illustrate., we can piece together the scene to determine events.
Ten, or even five years ago, I fully agreed.
But there's such a thing as trade-secrets, and all I can say is that ballistic forensics have come a
long way since CSI.
But even so, the simplest answers are most often correct; SWAT entry teams don't often use pistol-caliber anything anymore during dynamic entries (MP5s are expensive, and 5.56 frangibles are a thing). It's mostly a liability issue, on a lot of different levels (tactical mostly).
However, nobody is clean in this particular clusterfuck. If it's not a perfect example of what an "incident pit" is, I can't think of any others. At least in diving, the idea is to identify the pit beforehand.
So much of this shit all comes down to training, and a reliance on informants; because once the dime is dropped, and even a modicum of probable-cause is discerned, the onus is going to be on the informed-upon to defend themselves... be it in court (hopefully), or on their doorstep. And we've all seen how well that usually turns out.
Being set up for failure indeed, on both sides.... and lately I've been getting the feeling that it's all by fucked up design.
