Forget Ayoob, it's the lawyer's statement I quoted concerning forensic evidence that's carrying the water here. There is absolutely demonstrable court precedence that handloads can badly muddy the water in the forensic dept of reconstructing a shooting. If that evidence would have proven exculpatory wouldn't it be best to have it on the firmest ground possible?
Setting aside the actual "likelihood" of it being an issue it's simply not possible to rationally dismiss the fact there IS a risk associated with handloads over factory IF forensic reconstruction of a shooting matters.
I'm not all that impressed with the lawyer's statement either, and the precedent doesn't seem remotely relevant to a defense shooting.
What if I provided 100 or more of my reloads to an independent lab to take down and measure the powder charge or do whatever they wanted to? That would provide more than enough statistical "certainty" that the effects could be recreated. And I'm not sure I even see how this would come up in a defense shooting, to be honest.
I blew up a 1911 once with factory ammo. I'd like to hear something about the certainty of that powder charge.
