Millons have been arguing about it for 40 years, citing the available evidence; -- thus, it is ludicrous to insist it is "consistent" with all evidence. See my #213.
Dr. Wecht is the major critic of this theory. I'm sure that Dr. Wecht is a wonderful pathologist (as he seems to be always letting us know). And yes, the autopsy team did not do as thorough a job as they should have. I'm sure Dr. Wecht would have done a better job (again, as he always seems to be letting us know). But I think Dr. Wecht has way too much of an "emotional tie" to this case - plus books and multiple media appearances - to ever trust his opinion as unbiased or objective.
Why is it you think I should care what Wecht says?