Court backs claim that al-Dura killing was staged

The second French channel lost its case against Philippe Karsenty, who accused the station of staging its report on the death of Mohammad al-Dura.

Click here for article in Hebrew

The eleventh chamber of the Paris appeals court discharged today Philippe Karsenty in a libel suit launched by French TV after Karsenty claimed the station and its correspondent in the Middle-East Charles Enderlin broadcasted a staged report on the death of Mohammad Al-Dura on September 30, 2000.

The disturbing images of the al-Dura incident were shown around the world, raising a storm of controversy. In the France-2 report, the boy and his father were crouching in front of a wall amid an exchange of fire between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants at the Netzarim junction in Gaza. The report shows the father Jamal al-Dura gesturing to try to stop the shooting - then cuts to a shot of the boy lying on his father's lap, with Enderlin saying he was killed by Israeli fire.

In November 2004, Phillipe Karsenty wrote on his website Media Ratings that al-Dura's death had been staged, accusing Charles Enderlin - who was not on location during the clashes - of using images doctored by his Palestinian cameraman Talal Abu Rahma for propaganda purposes.
The French station sued Karsenty and won a first trial in 2006. But Karsenty appealed the decision and the second trial turned to his advantage when the judge asked to view the rushes.

Karsenty defended his case in a February 2008 hearing, saying the footage doesn’t show the boy getting killed. He provided a bullet report from a French ballistics expert, indicating the shots fired over the al-Duras came from the Palestinian position and he pointed out that several scenes before the al-Dura incident appeared staged.
The judge agreed in that hearing that some scenes did not seem genuine.

However, Enderlin insisted that the images were no different from the clashes he had witnessed repeatedly and the prosecution reminded the court that a dead Palestinian boy had been buried after the Netzarim junction incident and that Jamal al-Dura gave his consent for DNA tests that could prove the boy was his son.

No official from France 2 or Charles Enderlin appeared in court on Wednesday. The station announced it will apeal the ruling.

“This is the victory of truth against the lies broadcasted by France 2. The honour of France has been saved,” Karsenty told me.
Speaking to reporters in the courthouse, Karsenty called on France 2 to apologise officially and on the evening news. “This is a victory French society over lies,” he added.

“France 2 must recognise its mistake! If it does not do so, it will bear responsibility for the hatred and incitement launched by this report.”

“Incitement against Israel, Jews and the West in the Muslim world must stop! This hatred led to violence and the death of Daniel Pearl.”

Karsenty told me that the fact that Israel kept its distances and did not support his position complicated his defense strategy.

French court examines Al Dura footage

15/11/2007



PARIS - A French appeals court screened footage Wednesday of the September 2000 television report on the death of Mohammad al-Dura, in a case of defamation brought against French television and its correspondent in the Middle East, Charles Enderlin.


The veteran journalist was accused in 2004 by Philippe Karsenty, the owner of an internet site, of broadcasting a staged report on the al-Dura killing, and of instigating hate against Israel and Jews throughout the world.

Karsenty was convicted in the original defamation trial, but a second trial ended with the judge demanding to examine the full footage of the al-Dura report before deciding whether Karsenty was guilty of defamation or not.


Enderlin explained in court each segment of the 18-minute footage- filmed on September 30, 2000 by his cameraman Talal Abu Rahma at Netzarim junction while Enderlin was in Ramallah- the street battles with dozens of people throwing stones and Molotov cocktails at an IDF outpost, an interview with a Fatah official, and the incident involving Mohammed al-Dura and his father in the last minute of the video.


Karsenty challenged Enderlin's explanations. "The boy moved his head after we heard the cameraman say he was dead. How do you explain this?" asked Karsenty. "Why is there no blood on their shirts although they had bullet wounds?"


Enderlin said that Talal Abu Rahma did not say that the boy had died, but that he was dying. The journalist maintained that only the Israelis shot at the al-Duras, explaining that he could hear the difference between the shooting of the Israeli rubber bullets and Palestinian regular ones.


Karsenty repeated several troubling details already pointed out in an article by senior journalists Denis Jeambar and Daniel Leconte in 2004, noting some staged scenes filmed by Abu Rahma in the first part of the footage, which they had examined at French TV studios with former le Monde journalist Luc Rosenzweig. Jeambar and Leconte called on French TV to launch its own internal inquiry, citing a possible lack of journalistic standards, but did not not share the theory of a possible staging of al-Dura's death.


"The al-Dura report has had terrible consequences, causing hate against Israel and Jews," Karsenty told Haaretz. "We have to repair the damage now, before it's too late."


Tension was high in the courtroom Wednesday, and some pro and anti-Enderlin militants were arguing loudly, causing some commotion. Dozens of Jewish bloggers were present at the courthouse.

Serge Kovacs, a friend and co-worker of Enderlin, said Enderlin was falsely accused and has become a "new Dreyfuss." Enderlin told journalists that there was no new "affair," and suggested they come to the next hearing on February 28.


Karsenty said that he intends to counter-attack French TV by pointing out that they only presented 18 minutes out of the 27 minutes Abu Rahma originally claimed to have shot.