I can't say what they saw, nor attest to the accuracy thereof. AP is not necessarily known for being scrupulously accurate, especially when it comes to anything technical.
I have seen someone reach over someone's shoulder and cut someone in front of them, but that was closer than even 1 foot. An attacker would perform such a maneuver to get closer to their victim (contact distance).
While the size of the wound may be important, there is swelling of the tissue at the wound site, skin elasticity varies, and the angle of the wound, as well as whether it is an entry or exit wound all matter in determining the size of the wound.
Intervening materials which may cause partial expansion or deformation of the projectile can also affect wound size.
Simply put, the way to determine the caliber of the bullet (and often the weapon it was fired from) causing injury or death is to recover the bullet, weigh and measure it, and determine if all of the bullet was recovered. Patterns (and number) of markings from lands and grooves in the barrel can rule out or sometimes help identify the type of weapon it was fired from.
That is ballistics information, not included in the autopsy reports, and definitely not in the AP video.
If I'm standing behind someone and shooting over their shoulder by definition I am further away. How does standing further away from a target get closer to it?
As for the AP review of the Twin Peaks video, they have nothing to gain and a lot to lose by misrepresenting what it shows. Likewise the district attorney's office would face serious sanctions for misrepresenting the evidence in court...ymmv.
I agree about ballistics being the determining factor but no one should expect the autopsies to contain them. My guess is the ballistics reports wont become available until after the Waco shooting grand jury is seated sometime in October.