Liberal Forum

*Roshambo » 31 Mar 2026, 9:12 am » wrote: ↑

31 Mar 2026, 9:12 am

“This is not a minor evidentiary dispute,” Brian Allen wrote on X. “If the bullet doesn’t match the gun — the prosecution’s case has a fundamental problem.”“Where are all my neocons who have been ‘overwhelmed’ by the non existent evidence against Tyler Robinson?” Candace Owens wrote. “You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Hope the money was worth it.”    

https://i.postimg.cc/CxhrbbM2/showtime-beetlejuice.gif

It was inconclusive.  Big difference.

PolitiFact spoke to forensic science and criminology experts who said an "inconclusive" finding on a bullet fragment like this is not uncommon, and it does not rule out that the weapon used in Kirk's killing was the same one linked to Robinson.

 "When the results of a bullet fragment analysis come back as 'inconclusive,' that does not mean that the rifle did not fire the bullet," Christopher Ballard, a spokesperson for the Utah Country Attorney's Office and part of the prosecution team, wrote in an email to PolitiFact. "There just aren't enough marks on the fragment to make a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the bullet fragment was fired by the particular rifle

 It is also incorrect to say that the bullet "did not match" the rifle, the experts said. The bullet may simply be too small or too deformed for examiners to provide an accurate analysis.

 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/did ... sult-means