Not an expert, but years ago I was taught in a forensics class that bullets do weird things sometimes.
https://www.jackhopkinsnow.com/p/the-exit-wound-myth-why-the-charlie
I could be wrong tho
⚡️🔎 NEW - Executive Producer of The Charlie Kirk Show Andrew Kolvet calls it a miracle that Charlie Kirk had no exit wound.
Kolvet says the surgeon who operated on Charlie explained the bullet absolutely should have gone through, but Charlie’s body stopped it.
He adds that the coroner eventually found the bullet just beneath the skin.
“It was an absolute miracle that someone else didn’t get killed.”
https://blossom.primal.net/ca21cd59039222a468043320f57be8bb5164f9a43a8c422ae939ddb549b55a18.mp4
Discussion
When someone takes the time and effort to elaborate an 8-page long argument on why something in particular is not impossible to happen, regardless of how unlikely it may be, that tells me someone is desesperately trying to justify a made-up story.
But if on top of it there's similar reasoning for debunking election cheating or pandemics psycho wars, that definitely smells to paid con job.
Ockham's razor is true most of the time. The simplest explanation is the right one.
There's is no exit wound on the back of the head because the wound at the front is the exit wound and therefore the shot didn't come from the said roof, or the bullet was not shot from a long distance rifle.
Or that black dot on his neck is CGI and there was no bullet. Why does something in his shirt bulge right before "impact"? Could it be a blood squib?
Lots of questions, and yes 8 page papers about hypotheticals are sus