Upon further review, I agree that the autopsy report might not be able to accurately ascertain the distance. The people who would nail that down would be the crime scene investigators.
All the report is saying is the minimum possible distance based on the evidence the coroner was presented with, i.e., the body itself sans clothes. The shot must have come from further than 1-2 feet away as there were no powder burns on the corpse nor signs of powder residue, so it could not have been a contact-range execution as some are claiming. The clothing will display evidence of powder burns and other residues if it was within 2 to about 6 feet; if there’s no significant effects displayed, the shooting took place at further range than that.
These are general rules - they can and do vary quite significantly based on a number of variables.
ALL
“At least 1 to 2 feet away” is not the same as “no more than 1 to 2 feet away”.
I think we’re picking the fly sh!t out of the pepper ......