Is it Small, medium, or large? or is it small, small/medium, medium, medium/large, large?
The more splits go in there, the more useless the terms.
If the coroner was using just three, then there should be some delineation as to where the cutoff points are.
"Small", "Medium", and "large" should have some specific designation as to size range.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, just to establish some meaning in the terms. Otherwise, it is a wait for the ballistics report, and anything short of that only means more speculation as to who shot whom, not facts.
“If the coroner was using just three, then there should be some delineation as to where the cutoff points are.”
The coroner also used ‘medium/large’. His notations are descriptive but not exact, particularly as many bullets are deformed or have lost their jackets.
“Small”, “Medium”, and “large” should have some specific designation as to size range.
There was a whole thread on this when the autopsies came out. I posted a reference to the source earlier today. You can google it if you like. forensic autopsy
Small: .22 or similar
Medium: .38 or similar
Large: .44/.45 or similar
Your guess is as good as mine, although it seems logical that small caliber bullets make small entry wounds not big ones.
Agree about waiting for ballistics but I do think the autopsies have some compelling evidence in them