What forensic findings would definitively show whether Pretti was shot in the back?
Executive summary
A definitive forensic determination that Alex Pretti was shot in the back would rest on concordant external, internal and ballistic evidence: clear entrance-wound morphology on the posterior body, an intracorporeal bullet track visualized from posterior to anterior on imaging or dissection, and recovery or radiographic localization of projectiles consistent with that trajectory, all interpreted in the context of residue, clothing and scene evidence [1] [2] [3]. Early witness statements and sworn affidavits say the victim had multiple wounds in his back, but those accounts alone require corroboration by autopsy and imaging to be conclusive [4] [5].
1. What an “entrance wound in the back” would look like on external exam and why that matters
An entrance wound on the posterior torso typically shows an abrasion rim or “abrasion collar,” relatively regular margins and, depending on range, soot or stippling on the surrounding skin — features that help distinguish entry from exit wounds and can localize the point of penetration to the back when documented in situ [1] [6] [7]. Forensic texts emphasize careful photographic and diagrammatic recording of these external features at autopsy because they are foundational to assigning whether a shot entered from the back rather than elsewhere [8].
2. Internal trajectory and imaging: the definitive smoking gun
Visualization of the projectile path through tissues — either by postmortem CT (PMCT) or by direct inspection during autopsy — is central: a wound tract that enters posterior soft tissues and proceeds anteriorly with associated organ and tissue disruption provides the clearest evidence that the shot came from the back [2] [9]. PMCT excels at localizing bullets and fragment clouds and can produce three‑dimensional reconstructions to show whether the bullet path was posterior-to-anterior; when PMCT and autopsy agree on trajectory, the conclusion is robust [2] [10].
3. Bone and skull beveling, and what they indicate about direction
When bone is traversed, microscopic and macroscopic beveling is directionally informative — inward beveling at entry and outward beveling at exit on flat bones or skull help forensic pathologists infer the path through skeletal elements and thus the direction of fire [11] [1]. Applied to vertebral or rib entry/exit points, beveling or fracture patterns consistent with a posterior-to-anterior path would corroborate a back-entry finding [11].
4. Projectile recovery, radiographs and wound counting as cross-checks
Radiography and PMCT that show the location and number of projectiles, matched to the number and distribution of wounds, create a concordant picture: the number of wounds plus bullets found should generally be an even-count check unless there are re‑entries or retained fragments, so finding bullets lodged anterior to posterior wounds or along a posterior‑to‑anterior axis is powerful corroboration [3] [10]. Conversely, bullets lodged posterior to a purported posterior entrance or missing altogether complicate that inference [3].
5. Gunshot residue, range indicators and clothing as contextual evidence
Gunshot residue on posterior skin or inner clothing layers, soot or stippling patterns consistent with a particular range, and absence/presence of muzzle effects on posterior garments support or weaken a back-shot finding; PMCT can sometimes visualize residue beneath skin and autopsy can sample it for analysis, but range estimation and residue interpretation are nuanced and must be integrated with trajectory data [1] [10] [6].
6. Complicating factors and alternative explanations investigators must exclude
Decomposition, multiple bullets, re‑entry paths, ricochet, clothing displacement, surgical manipulation and fragmenting projectiles can obscure entrance‑exit morphology and even mislead radiographic counts, so experts caution that PMCT and autopsy are complementary — autopsy may better document surface detail while PMCT is superior for fragments — and both must be reconciled to reach a definitive directional conclusion [12] [3] [10]. Independent trajectory reconstructions and 3D forensic animation are often used when witness statements and scene evidence conflict [9].
Conclusion: what would definitively show Pretti was shot in the back
Definitive proof would be a concordant set of findings: posterior-located entrance wounds with characteristic abrasion rims and any range-related deposition on posterior clothing or skin; a posterior‑to‑anterior intracorporeal track visualized on PMCT and confirmed at autopsy with matching tissue disruption and bone beveling where applicable; radiographic or recovered projectiles positioned along that posterior‑to‑anterior path; and forensic residue/clothing analysis consistent with posterior discharge — with alternative explanations such as re‑entry, ricochet or decomposition explicitly excluded by the investigative record [1] [2] [3] [10]. Public reporting notes witnesses describing multiple back wounds, but those statements require the forensic concordance above to be definitive [4] [5].