[OldMarksman]

Posted by JayCee: Admissibility of evidence is one of the main reasons trial court decisions are appealed.

It is one reason, certainly.

However, it is extremely doubtful that any competent attorney would recommend appealing an admissibility ruling that had been made in accordance with decisions regarding court cases that had already been appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

I would bet on a different horse.

I see no reason why the rules of evidence would preclude the introduction of the foregoing types of evidence, since none of it is speculative in nature.

Well, many of us do see a very cogent reason.

So the question is, are you unable to comprehend the several explanations provided in above posts. or are you unwilling to accept that those explanations accurately reflect the rules for admissibility of scientific forensic trace evidence?

Since there’s no appellate guidance on the subject, admissibility is up to the court, but a judge is more likely to admit handload exemplar evidence that is supported by detailed records.

You have apparently missed something. The judge must and will base his or her determination on the basis of the appellate guidance that exists for this subject. See Post #71.

The judges' rulings are governed by the rules of evidence for the admissibility for scientific forensic trace evidence in the jurisdictions at hand. In some states, those rules are based on the SCOTUS ruling in Frye vs. United States; others, the rules stem from the SCOTUS rulings in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals; some states use their own rules. Notwithstanding the rather minor differences among the rulesets, it is most unlikely that any judge would admit evidence based on testing of ammunition other than factory loads; it is almost certain that no judge would ever admit evidence based on testing of ammunition loaded by the defendant; and under the rules in effect at this time, there no reason to assume that a judge would have any basis for not admitting evidence based on testing factory ammunition.

It is a matter of established legal precedent based on things that extend far beyond the realm of ammunition.