Clarke: There's something unusual about autopsy reports, some traces of gunshot injuries are irrational.

The hearing of forensics, John Clarke, has said in The Hague today that in the autopsy report on some of the victims he has issued the findings there was something unusual.

The Witness claimed that some of the traces of gunshot injuries against victims are irrational and there is something unusual. He also confirmed that he did not have and does not have a diagram or supporting photograph on which to rely on his conclusions, reports the “Act on Justice“.

The “looks irrational because the entry and exit wound is very close. The entry and exit wound is very unusual. This may happen sometimes - not that it doesn't happen, but it is surprising why no pathologist comment has been made. If I were to see a case like this and I would say that this is where it came in and there's a bullet coming out, I thought to myself that this is weird and I would make an explanation for it. The pathologist may have been right in his findings, but I'm surprised why he's not highlighted, and why isn't it said to be unusual? Why is there no explanation for this?!

He said it is possible that these findings are correct, though they may seem unusual, but he added that the opposite could happen for them to be wrong.

While in part of the report involving the timing of autopsy's implementation, the witness confirmed that gun shooting must be traced and that this was not a simple process.

This is a very difficult process”, Clarke said.

As a result, he confirmed that many investigations and much evidence must be made to ascertain that the entrances are correct.

He claimed that in his opinion it is unusual that the doctor who carried out the autopsy of these five bodies, as a process has been completed in half a day.

I personally thought that in these cases at least for one body, it would take a few hours and I would say the right to make the assessment of these bodies one at a time maybe someone could have the chance to do great things. However, the question is that when you examine more than two or three bodies then you start forgetting things. So it seems more difficult to make the right projections. Apparently, he made it. But I am personally impressed, I have to accept”, he said.

However, he added, it is surprising how the pathologist has completed the autopsy of these people so quickly. And he also claimed that seeing such a large number of bullets that were supposedly fired on the bodies would expect his pathologist who did the autopsy to find one of them in the body.

He claimed to be surprised that no bullet has been found or any remnant of them.

Yeah, it's surprising and I can say that today. It's very strange because it doesn't seem like he's even made an effort to search for bullets. It's weird and I have to say it again. Looking at the considerable number in the person I've seen firing weapons and taking into account my experience, the bullets are gunpowder that describes the body at an extraordinary speed, so it's strange such a find”, Clarke said.

Clarke said that he also bases this on his experience in examining many troops who have been shot at with firearms.

According to Wessel's lawyer, Ann Rowan, the witness had said that there should be doubts as to alleged bruises and interpretations because of these bruises.

The Witness claimed that his suspicion is whether the Magi's findings are true.

While answering the attorney's questions, the witness confirmed that as a result of what he saw in the autopsy report, he wonders whether these bodies had bruises or not.

On the other hand, the witness confirmed that his other concern is with his interpretation of the pathologist's findings for the bruise.

Although the report did not describe the time the bruises might have occurred, the witness stated that it is unusual that the character of the bruises is very similar from one body to another.

The Witness stated the distance to use weapons cannot be found because he felt that there is no burning described in wounds that could indicate distance to less than three feet [1 m].

However, the lawyer told the witness that according to the report there is a presence of unknown powder chips in the victims' bodies.

“If the gunshot were done from a distance there would be no powder residue found in the person”, the witness said.