The defence in the Duncan Hoorn murder trial is aggressively challenging the testimony of the forensic pathologist who examined Chantel Pasqualle-Hoorn. Lawyers are focusing on the extent of Pasqualle-Hoorn’s injuries and whether they were the direct cause of her death. The defence aims to cast doubt on the prosecution’s claim that the injuries were inflicted during a violent assault. This line of questioning suggests the defence may be building a case arguing for a different cause of death or a lesser charge. The trial continues as both sides present their arguments regarding the forensic evidence. The pathologist’s findings are central to determining the circumstances surrounding Pasqualle-Hoorn’s death and Hoorn’s culpability.