It is not babble and please stop saying I am biased, just because you are incorrect on a point. I seek the truth and that is that and the truth of the matter is that we do not know if draw-back could apply to that weapon/silencer/bullets.
I have pointed out to you that weapons with silencers fitted reduces the gases that cause blow-back. I also provided you with screen shots and video showing this.
Why you wont/can't take that on board is of no interest to me, it just tells me that it is you who is biased and can't take it when you lose a point. If I sad paper was black and I had 10 people who confirmed it was black you would find answers to make out I was either bias or telling an untruth.
More tests are needed to make a definitive conclusion, using the same type of weapon etc. What is also crucial and it is something you have ignored completely is the fact that although it is possible Sheila had a contact shot it was not a contact shot to head and this reduces the blow-back effect even more so.
You lost on the argument long before you intended to destroy my adaptation on it. 
How did I lose the argument?
You misrepresented Holly's opinion as expert opinion and then falsely claimed her conclusions were supported by the evidence she provided.
I have already demonstrated this is untrue.
She had no expert opinion that asserted moderators will prevent drawback from occurring because they reduce the gas output so much that drawback can't occur. She made up that conclusion herself. She took a source that said a WHOLE list of things can affect drawback without explaining how and what the impact would be and then claimed this proves drawback would not have been able to occur. Her source didn't stand for the proposition she asserted.
That you don't like being called biased is too bad the fact of the matter is that you do not objectively and rationally evaluate claims and evidence. Anything favorable to Jeremy you adopt. You do so because you are biased in his favor. There is a giant disconnect between you approach to this case and reality and that is why while people like you are busy saying he should be released the courts won't release him.
Holly hasn't presented anything that could be used to try to free Jeremy. She simply made up the notion that drawback would not have been able to get inside the moderator. There is no expert testimony to provide to the courts saying moderators can't get drawback inside. The truth is that blood has been found in moderators by coroners and thus experts know for a fact blood gets inside.
People who are biased pretend things are how they wish things were and take solace in this. I am a realist I don't care to pretend, I face things as they are and deal with the reality I am faced with.
So even if Jeremy were my brother I would not be busy trying to pretend that moderators can't result in drawback because such pretense AT BEST is propaganda fodder to fool ignorant members of the public it won't fool experts and can't be presented to a court because no expert is going to assert such and even if I found a dishonest one willing to do so the prosecution experts would demolish him.
