An e-mail making an evidentiary/ballistics point:

I agree with regard to his guilt and self-serving behavior. However, perhaps you’re not aware that the probative value of “shells from the 7-Eleven were consistent with Williams’s gun” is almost zero? The FBI and local police have used this canard without objection for decades despite the fact that “consistent” simply means, generally, “the weapon in question could have fired the shells” (as opposed to “could not”). If the weapon was, for example, a Remington 870 12 gauge pump shotgun (probably the most popular with both criminals and law enforcement, over 7,000,000 were sold), all would cause similar firing pin indents, chamber scratches and ejector scars…