We won't ever agree on this because it's not your clarification that's required - it's Venezis's.
You are the one who has to try to get him to CHANGE his claims and clarify he was wrong in his report in writing the inside of her hands were free of blood. You are the one trying to say he wrote 2 contradictory things in his written report but failed to realize i.
Your theory is little better than Mike deciding to interpret Davidson's COLP statement as saying he labeled the moderator SJ/1 though the import of his words make it obvious he was saying he wrote SBJ/1 on the label and HOLAB documents.
You are the one who wants to change things so you bear the burden of proving the changes are warranted. Anyone who possesses reasonable intelligence and logic understands that Vanezis was drawing a distinction between the blood that ringed the sides and outside of the hand from the inside by noting they were free of blood and that the wrist transferred the blood to her gown. You don't want to understand his words because they refute your claims.
For the same reason you totally ignore the statements of all the other witnesses who saw the inside of her hands who say they were clean of blood; all those who saw the photo of the insides of her hands showing her hands to be clean of blood; the evidence that blood was underneath the top of the Bible and thus a portion of the top of the left and right hand pages were sitting in that blood and both happened to have blood exactly where the pages were touching the ground that was covered in such blood; the experts who fingerprinted the Bible decided it was not a palm print they decided the only prints on the Bible were not in the blood and they saw it up close and it was their job to do it; and finally you the practical reasons why the whole suggestion is not credible:
It is not credible that Sheila was holding the Bible as she was shot, then moved her wrist to her wound, then closed the bible, then moved the inside of her hand to her wound getting the entire inside of her hand covered in blood, reopened it to the same exact page to read it again as Jeremy was busy jamming the rifle into her chin to match up his second shot so this time it would go into her brain.
Such is no more credible than Reader's wild tales about the phone call. Sheila didn't get shot, covered in blood then reopen the Bible and grab the top of the right hand side with her hand to stop from dropping it (you would not grab the top to try to read it you hold the side or bottom).
Nothing at all is in your favor. You have to go against a great deal of evidence but have nothing at all to do it with beyond speculation upon speculation.
If Vanezis told COLP that the insides of her hands did have blood then the defense and Jeremy supporters would have shouted it from the rooftops. He said nothing useful for their propaganda thus nothing he said to COLP has been released. Mike said he would produce notes taken from Vanezis' COLP interview but all he ended up posting was the handwritten draft of Vanezis' 1986 report for into the mistakes and his recommendations for the future.
