this is relating to the catterick female, so I'm not sure if it's the one you're referring to. Anyway, what happened was, the police Wildlife Officer sent the body (pretty well decomposed) to a highly-respected Govt lab for a PM. I'm not going to specify it here as there are security issues. I have been involved with the lab previously, so know the people who did the PM, saw the PM report etc. That same report was sent back to the police, who then released a statement to the media that did not accord with the findings. Two embedded shot mentioned in the report, not considered to be cause of death (which was not determined), all of a sudden became "bird was shot and killed" in the police statement. I asked the guy who did the PM what he thought of the police statement, and he laughed at it: "that's not what I told them".
So in terms of public domain, it all boils down to the police statement, but the police statement was factually (and knowingly) wrong. The cynical may suggest that it's in a Police Wildlife Liaison Officer's interests to suggest that a bird in the media has been shot and killed. Kind of reinforces his role, one may think. Even if they know that it is being deliberately misleading. Go back to the piece of paper that was sent to the police with the facts written on it (which is not in the public domain, but which i have read), and it says nothing of the sort.