The blood was 'discovered' in mid September.
The contact wounds were created by the rifle with no silencer attached.
34. The evidence of Dr Fowler is set out in a more substantial report. That report has been peer reviewed by Dr Dragovich, who is Chief Medical Examiner in Oakland County, Michigan and Dr Marcella Fierro, who is the retired Chief Medical Examiner to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Both have qualifications as forensic pathologists. In his careful report, Dr Fowler makes clear that he has reviewed the evidence, which was available in relation to the wounds. He concluded that the abrasions found were consistent with those of a rifle without a silencer, that there were no distinctive marks on the body which showed that a silencer had been attached, and the residue was consistent with contact wounds.
A couple of things on this David.
For whatever reason these expert opinions weren't considered substantial enough to make the CCRC send the case back to appeal. Getting one expert to trump another on opinion alone doesn't seem to be accepted too often by the CCRC, although I must admit I don't know their views on it as their report dismissing the application has not been made public.
The second point, looking in isolation at the wording of the extract that you posted, it appears that the view is given that there is no evidence suggesting a silencer was fitted. Fine, but it doesn't offer a view that there is evidence that a silencer
wasn't fitted. I think that is an important distinction.