The evidence presented by those alleging that the Al Durahs were struck by targeted fire coming from the Israeli position contains multiple logical inconsistencies. Some of the problems are internal – the individuals testifying contradict themselves in significant ways on numerous occasions. Other logical impossibilities are exposed via a comparison of one individual’s “eye-witness” testimony with another’s “eye-witness” account or external sources like material or visual evidence that flatly contradict the testimony.
In this section, we present for your consideration evidence gleaned from interviews with Talal Abu Rahma- France2’s photojournalist and Charles Enderlin – France2’s Jerusalem correspondent, Jamal Al-Durah, and others like the admitting doctor at Shifa Hospital, the pathologist who is alleged to have autopsied Mohammed Al Durah’s body and the Palestinian general in charge of investigating the Al Durah incident.
1) If Mohammed and his father arrived at the Junction in the afternoon and, per Talal Abu Rahma, spent 45 minutes sheltering behind the barrel and then another 17 minutes transpired before Mohammed was transported to Shifa hospital – about an hour’s drive from the Junction – But the admitting doctor at Shifa says definitively that he received Mohammed al Durah’s body at 10:00 that morning.
2) The pathologist who examined Mohammed al Durah’s body specified to Esther Schapira that the body of Mohammed Al Durah evidenced three specific wounds:
- a fatal one from a bullet that entered the body in the abdomen and exited the back
- a second fatal injury from a bullet that entered just beneath the chest and exited the left hip bone, shredding major blood vessels
- a third injury in the left leg that was relatively harmless.
Jamal al Durah also said his son was hit three times. However Jamal definitively stated said his son was hit in the right leg, not the left.
3) The Israeli position was at an angle at least 30 degrees to the al Durahs. A bullet fired at that angle and striking the wall behind the al Durahs would leave an elliptical mark. That’s pure physics, confirmed by the testimony of ballistics experts. However, all the bullet holes in the wall behind the al Durahs as shown in the final frames of the scene shot by Talal Abu Rahma are round, indicating shots fired from head-on. Those holes could not have the result of bullets fired fired from the angle of the Israeli position. The Palestinian position known as “the Pita”, filmed by AP and Reuters on the day of the Al Durah incident was situated directly in front of the wall behind the Al Durahs.
4) The physiognomy of the the boy filmed by Talal Abu Rahma sheltering behind the barrel and that of the boy autopsied and buried as Mohammed al Durah do not match. A facial recognition expert interviewed by Esther Schapira confirmed with computer mapping technology that Talal Abu Rahma’s film features a boy different from the one autopsied and buried as Mohammed al Durah.