Claim: “Sometimes you have internal bleeding. Some-times you have some injuries where a bullet gets in and out sometimes it doesn’t bleed.”
Progenitors of the claim
Charles Enderlin, claiming that there was blood visible (on Muhammad) and disparaging Karsenty’s and Shachaf’s claim that the red is a “handkerchief” tries to explain apparent lack of blood with a possible explanation.
Charles Enderlin says he is not a doctor – and suggests Esther Schapira should speak to doctors to explain the lack of blood, but also offers two alternative explanations of why a bullet wound might not produce bleeding. Even if either of the proposed explanations could account for one or two bloodless wounds (which itself would be a stretch for wounds caused by high velocity – and certainly explosive - rounds) Enderlin himself stressed that at least one of the rounds produced an exit wound in the back. The ambulance driver who allegedly transported Mohammed to the hospital reported that Muhammad’s intestines were outside of his body when the ambulance driver collected him [link]. The pathologist, Dr. El Masry, stated that a second bullet exited the boy’s left hip after shredding major blood vessels. Is it remotely plausible that these injuries and those caused by all the remaining 10-13 shots alleged to have hit Jamal and Muhammad produced no blood to speak of?