November 18, 2018, 07:00:03 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: First results from Zolotaryov's exhumation - Komsomolskaya Pravda  (Read 3383 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

April 30, 2018, 05:46:37 AM
Read 3383 times
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
THE SECRET OF DYATLOV PASS. IT WAS A VERY POWERFUL BLOW.


Expert Sergey Nikitin conducting a skull superimposition

In recollection, nine tourists leaded by Igor Dyatlov went on a trek in the winter of 1959 in the mountains of the Northern Urals. A month later the rescuers discovered their cut tent. And in a radius of one and a half kilometers from it - five frozen bodies. The corpses of the rest were found only in May. Almost all the tourists were stripped and half-dressed. Some had fatal injuries. It is not clear even to these days why the hikers ran away at a severe cold to their demise.

On April 12 at the Ivanovskoe Cemetery in Yekaterinburg, we exhumed the body of one of the most mysterious members of Dyatlov's group - Semyon Zolotaryov. We will talk for the time being with the prefix - presumably - Zolotaryov, because DNA expertise is not yet ready.


The very moment when the skull was found

We are asked: why did you do this?

We answer:

  • Identify who lies in the grave under a tomb sign "Semyon Zolotaryov". There are no documents for this burial either from relatives or from the service of urban cemeteries. And it became absolutely unclear whether someone was buried there.
  • And if we find remains in the grave, then we can evaluate the nature of the injuries of the skeleton.
At our request, exhumation was conducted by forensic expert of the Moscow Bureau of Forensic Expertise Sergey Nikitin. Also at the cemetery was a tragedy researcher, doctor Galina Sazonova. We talked with them on the radio "Komsomolskaya Pravda" (97.2 Moscow), where they commented on the first results of the examinations.
Here is the transcript of the conversation.

WHERE DID THE STONES COME FROM?

Sergey Nikitin (SN): The grave turned out to be very peculiar. There was even a question, whether such burial is typical. It turned out that the grave was covered 90 percent with large pieces of granite and sprinkled with fine granite.
Correspondents (Cor): There is talk that the grave was opened, and then it was simply filled up with stones.
SN: I believe that in Ivanovskoe Cemetery almost all the graves are covered with stones, as it is on the mountain. When all the stones were extracted, we found the skeleton, which lies in the position on the back, legs - to the east. This is Orthodox orientation. They began to extract the bones of the skeleton. Galina and I laid out the bones in anatomical order on the sheets of cardboard. In particular, Galina was laying out his ribs. I was at that time handling the skull. It had to be washed and drained.


Galina Sazonova laying down the ribs

Cor: You took the skull in your hands and immediately said that it was the skull of a man and he was 35-40 years old.
SN: In such studies, the first questions to answer are: gender, age and race type of the person. So this skeleton belongs to a man, the age is within 35-40 years, the racial type is europeoid. Even individual bones can be the object of age determination. But the most informative is the skull, and then - the teeth. More correctly, their degree of deterioration. They allow you to more objectively and accurately determine the age with a special table. The skeleton of this man was within 35-40 years. And Zolotaryov should have turned 38 years old. We also estimate the dental status. We evaluate the traces of dental intervention. Absolutely, the condition of the teeth corresponded to that described at the autopsy in 1959. The same crowns of stainless steel on the same teeth.
Cor: There was one interesting crown.
SN: Yes, a kind of crown of the seventh tooth, the adjacent tooth was on the same root. And this crown is on the second root. These are the particulars of the dentist's approach. Apparently, he decided that it would be most efficient to intervene in this way.
Cor: Can this false crown be a spy tab? Sorry for this question, but it is asked on the forums.
SN: These are just features of the dental work. The doctor decided to preserve the roots as much as possible, so that the person could chew more fully.
Galina Sazonova (GS): Are crowns like this common in places of detention? (There is a version that instead of Semyon is buried a runaway convict - ed. note)
SN: There is nothing unusual in this dental work. Somewhat above average. Nothing remarkable or different. Conventional crowns are made of stainless steel.
GS: I helped only at the first stage, when they were still cleaning the bones from the ground, working with a brush. I did preliminary filtration of the bones. I did not do the expert layout of the skeleton. I have a question: where did the front tooth go?
SN: This loss occurred on April 12 this year, in the process of extracting the skull from the grave. We did not have time to look for it. He remained in the grave.
GS: Were there any other damages to the skull?
SN: The skull was not damaged. All the traumas occurred on the chest.
GS: Why isn't there any hair?
SN: This is a particular phenomenon. In some graves, hair is preserved under certain conditions. Even after hundreds of years, hair is perfectly preserved. And in other graves the hair is gone.

PERFECT MATCH

Cor: Can you tell us more about the this forensic method, superimposition, that you are using?
SN: This method was developed in 1956 by Yuri Mikhailovich Kubitsky, a Soviet military expert. He suggested that you can identify a person by putting a photographic image on the image of the skull. The skull is on the stand in front of the camera. At that time, the negative of the image was superimposed on the frosted glass of the viewfinder. By rotating, moving the skull and moving away, approaching it with respect to the lens, the skull was inscribed along the points, the contours were compared. And then we look at the conjunction of the contours.
Cor: What are the points where the images match?
SN: The main points are the ears, the corners of the eyes, under the nose, the point of the line of closure of the lips, under the chin, the contours of the parietal, the parietal-temporal, the temporal, the lower contour of the face. There are a number of other points. The maximum number of point to match are 24, if we have a high-quality photograph of a bald man and if the skull has no significant losses. But for identification, 12 signs are sufficient provided that we know the sex of the person and his age. In our case, there were 13 points. This indicates those are the remains of Semyon Zolotaryov.


Expert Sergey Nikitin washes the skull for the superimposition forensic method

HE WAS LYING ON SOMETHING SOLID

GS: In 1959, the forensic pathologist described that there were two fracture lines of Zolotaryov ribs. "After the extraction of the organs from the thoracic and abdominal cavities, fractures of the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth ribs on the right along the parasternal line and midaxillary line are determined." How much did it coincide with what we saw?
SN: This coincided almost completely. Except for a small minor amendment. I would define the axillary line not as an average, but as a back axillary line. Some bones were not examined. We looked at the right shoulder blade, there were three fractures. The act of this was not noted. I assumed first that this is a posthumous injury. The whole grave was covered with pieces of granite, the pressure on the bones of the skeleton can't be ignored. But then I reassessed, because the left shoulder was intact. If there were posthumous damages, it is logical to assume that both the left shoulder blade would be broken and in general would be other multiple fractures on the bones of the skeleton.
GS: Yes, we did not see damages like that. We found much more fragile bones. Even thyroid cartilage. And the skull itself is not crushed. It turns out that this weight had no effect on the bones.
SN: During the burial after the funeral the stones were laid to form a vault. They didn't press down. The ribs were broken on the right, and the right shoulder blade. This fits into the mechanism of fracture of the ribs.
GS: Is it correct to say that the chest as a construction can have structural fractures? In other words, one blow could cause several fractures?
SN: This indicates that at the contact zone, the impact exceeded the sizes from the first to the sixth rib. It was a large heavy mass. Most likely, snow.


The portrait of Semyon and the image of his skull coincided in 13 main positions

GS: Can you determine when this injury took place?
SN: The presence of blood in the pleural cavity of Zolotaryov unequivocally indicates that he was alive.
GS: In what position was the person at the time of injury??
SN: It can be undoubtedly said that he was lying on his back. And the traumatic effect occurred from front to back, maybe some what from right to left.
GS: The surface on which the person was lying was relatively firm?
SN: Yes. It is unlikely that he was lying in the snow.
GS: You found that not all ribs are broken equally. Is it possible to say that the force that acted on the thorax in full force acted where the ribs are completely broken? And where they are not broken, it seems like the impact was lower?
SN: At a similar compression and at similar fractures on an axillary line of a rib have broken as a result of excessive bending. This is called the flexural nature of the fractures. In the parasternal line, the character of the fractures was extensor. This suggests that the traumatic event occurred at the time when the person was lying on his back, and suggests the direction where the mass came from.
GS: Like as if squeezed a concrete slab? Or is it from the compression of a blow? There is a version that a lot of snow has fallen.
SN: Was it impact or slow squeezing that took some time? When the corpse is examined not to the extent of decomposition in which the corpse of Zolotaryov was at the time of the autopsy, there are soft tissues, subcutaneous fatty tissue, one can estimate the hemorrhage into the subcutaneous fatty tissue. If it was a blow, we would see hemorrhages in the muscles and subcutaneous fatty tissue. If this mass of the snow layer type squeezed gradually, it is unlikely that we would see hemorrhaging.
GS: Hemorrhages were noted at the autopsy. And on histology, and in the act.
SN: This suggests that it was a sudden pressure, a velocity impact. Not gradual.
Cor: It's like a blow, lets say, by a car?
SN: A car is a comparison. In our case, we can say that this was the impact of a large mass.
GS: Could it be caused by explosive blast?
SN: It can be safely excluded. Injuries would be of a different nature.


Photo of Semyon used by expert Sergey Nikitin for the skull superimposition

WHAT CAUSED THE FRACTURE?

Cor: On the tibia of the foot, a callus was found, which indicates an intravital fracture. But there is an opinion that Semyon never had any injuries.
SN: During the investigation, a trace of a long-term intravital fracture of the right tibia in its middle part was found. It is impossible to judge the limitation period of a fracture.
GS: Can you judge the nature of the healing from such callus?
SN: The two halves were aligned along the axis. There was no dislocation. The banal fracture. Maybe he was formed in his childhood. Zolotarev went through the whole war. A bullet wound is unlikely, but we can't rule it out. If the bullet shoots through the bone, it will be a defect - a shortening of the bone.

From the authors

COULD A TOURIST WITH SUCH TRAUMAS WALK HALF A MILE ALONG THE SLOPE?

We thank Sergey Nikitin and Galina Sazonova for an interesting conversation, and the work done. We want to add that in the certificate of death of Semyon Zolotaryov, issued on May 12, 1959 by the Registry Office of Yekaterinburg, to his mother, it appears that he died from "low temperature." As the results of the examinations show, this is not the whole truth.

After the broadcast, we asked additional questions to expert Nikitin, to clarify the picture of what happened.

  • If we assume that a huge layer of snow came on top of, lets say, Semyon Zolotaryov, when he was in the tent, could he move with injuries of this nature?
  • I think he might some how. But this is unlikely for Lyuda Dubinina. She had a much bigger deformity of the chest and her injuries were worse.
  • When Semyon was found in the stream, there was a camera on his chest. A pretty heavy thing in those times. Could he have gone with such injuries and with a camera around his neck?
  • It is unlikely that the camera prevented him from moving. But we can not say with certainty where he suffered the rib injury. You can speculate this scenario. In the creek were found two people with rib fractures and another with a trauma to the skull. Therefore, we can not exclude the version that they dug out the den in the ravine, but the snow collapsed and covered them.

However, we still have to thoroughly examine the nature of the injuries of Semyon's ribs. We plan to conduct a more thorough examination of the skeleton based on photo and video materials that were shot during the exhumation.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2018, 10:41:19 PM by Teddy »

April 30, 2018, 06:06:54 AM
Reply #1
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
I am in a unique position to ask somebody present at the exhumation questions that will be answered exclusively for DyatlovPass.com. If any of you have question please write them here.

April 30, 2018, 06:59:46 AM
Reply #2
Offline

Armide


Teddy, are you allowed tell us a bit more about this person? Are they a medical expert that helped with the analyses, or did they simply help with the exhumation of the body? I think a bit more detail might help us to narrow down what kind of questions we ask, but obviously it's understandable if they wish to remain anonymous as well.

April 30, 2018, 12:17:55 PM
Reply #3
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen


I am in a unique position to ask somebody present at the exhumation questions that will be answered exclusively for DyatlovPass.com. If any of you have question please write them here.


Can it be established whether the damage to Zolotaryov's rib cage was made by one single impact, or several successive impacts?

April 30, 2018, 12:21:23 PM
Reply #4
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
This is the person. Galina Sazonova has a medical degree. She handled the bones during the exhumination.

« Last Edit: April 30, 2018, 11:14:30 PM by Teddy »

April 30, 2018, 09:08:30 PM
Reply #5
Online

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

May 05, 2018, 08:36:37 PM
Reply #6
Offline

Vietnamka


Teddy, are you allowed tell us a bit more about this person? Are they a medical expert that helped with the analyses, or did they simply help with the exhumation of the body? I think a bit more detail might help us to narrow down what kind of questions we ask, but obviously it's understandable if they wish to remain anonymous as well.
Hi! Let me answer and sorry for my English )
I'm a doctor (gp pediatrician) for 20 yeas already. We moved to veintnam in 2007,  since that time I have been workin in sos international in Saigon  https://www.internationalsos.com/newsroom. I have a privet practice now.
  I'm interesting of this story for 5 years.
   In 2014-2015 one Russian official forensic expert Eduard Tumanov confirmed some my suppositions about traumas. https://m.kp.ru/daily/26311.5/3189866/ but we didn't have enough information about The ribs fractures for understanding how it was possible to get this injury.
 Exhumation gaves  answers for some questions. We saw the ribs and understood  how each rib was fractured. We established 3 fractures  of the R scapula (expert didn't describe this injuries in 1959).
Sergey Nikitin's conclusion is "it was one single impact, Zolotarev was laying on the back at that moment (scapula fractures)"
I don't agree))) I suppose its could be two successive blows. But I'm not expert) 

Sergey Nikitin is one of the famous specialist of scull reconstruction and body identification. Please remember, that the main question of the exhumination was identification of body. Not  assessment of traumas which regulated by different law. We are lucky that soft tissue is not preservated and we could see the bones in excellent condition. If soft tissue has been preserved we didn't have right to clean bones as well.
Chest  injury is a injury of construction, we a looking for a forensic expert specialized  in this type of trauma assesment for second opinion. 

 
« Last Edit: May 05, 2018, 10:35:04 PM by Vietnamka »

May 05, 2018, 11:41:51 PM
Reply #7
Online

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
Teddy, are you allowed tell us a bit more about this person? Are they a medical expert that helped with the analyses, or did they simply help with the exhumation of the body? I think a bit more detail might help us to narrow down what kind of questions we ask, but obviously it's understandable if they wish to remain anonymous as well.
Hi! Let me answer and sorry for my English )
I'm a doctor (gp pediatrician) for 20 yeas already. We moved to veintnam in 2007,  since that time I have been workin in sos international in Saigon  https://www.internationalsos.com/newsroom. I have a privet practice now.
  I'm interesting of this story for 5 years.
   In 2014-2015 one Russian official forensic expert Eduard Tumanov confirmed some my suppositions about traumas. https://m.kp.ru/daily/26311.5/3189866/ but we didn't have enough information about The ribs fractures for understanding how it was possible to get this injury.
 Exhumation gaves  answers for some questions. We saw the ribs and understood  how each rib was fractured. We established 3 fractures  of the R scapula (expert didn't describe this injuries in 1959).
Sergey Nikitin's conclusion is "it was one single impact, Zolotarev was laying on the back at that moment (scapula fractures)"
I don't agree))) I suppose its could be two successive blows. But I'm not expert) 

Sergey Nikitin is one of the famous specialist of scull reconstruction and body identification. Please remember, that the main question of the exhumination was identification of body. Not  assessment of traumas which regulated by different law. We are lucky that soft tissue is not preservated and we could see the bones in excellent condition. If soft tissue has been preserved we didn't have right to clean bones as well.
Chest  injury is a injury of construction, we a looking for a forensic expert specialized  in this type of trauma assesment for second opinion.

Hello and welcome to the forum....  we are glad to have you here!   

All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

May 06, 2018, 02:12:05 AM
Reply #8
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
Galya, welcome to our modest circle.
I am posting below scoops from Russian forums so we can skip through and swim into uncharted territories.
Please do not bore Galya with the same questions unless you need clarification. Lets get it over with and move on.
I am keeping the original text since we do have Russian members and I don't want to lose information in the process of translation.

Q:
Похоже, что время у вас было ограничено и костям не покинули кладбище. Это так?
It appears that you had limited time and the bones did not leave the cemetery. Am I correct?

GS:
Все останки, за исключением небольшой кости для ДНК, были уложены в новый гроб и захоронены обратно. Могила Семена - могила Семена. И мы старались крайне уважительно к ней отнестись и восстановить по максимуму. Вы поймите одну вещь чисто юридическую. Пока подтверждено что это реальное захоронение, а не просто кусок земли с памятником. Теперь пройдёт процедура подтверждения, что это захоронениЕ конкретно Семена (ну или родственника заявившим по ДНК). Потом будет этап оформления всех документов и занесение в реестр и только потом родственники смогут вообще что-то делать, начиная от установки памятника и заканчивая перезахоронением куда угодно, если захотят.

Any remains except a little piece of bone for further DNA tests, were laid back in the new grave. The tomb of Zolotaryov is indeed Zolotaryov's grave. And we tried to make a good job of putting everything back together with great respect. This is purely to straighten the official records. It had to be proven that this is his grave not just a piece of land with tombstone. Now there will be a procedure to confirm that this is Zolotaryov's grave with the DNA comparison with the DNA of family members. Only then, after the paperwork is properly filed in the registry will the family have the right to do anything with the grave or transfer the remains somewhere else, if they want to.

Q:
Можно ли установить, был ли нанесен ущерб реберной клетке Золотарева одним ударом или несколькими ударами?
Can it be established whether the damage to Zolotaryov's rib cage was made by one single impact, or several blows?

GS:
По заключению эксперта Никитина это было однократное резкое воздействие предметом на человека, лежачего на спине. Moё мнение ,что могло быть и два разных сильных удара. Mы собираемся искать вторые мнения других экспертов.

According to expert Nikitin, this was a one-time sudden impact to a person lying on his back. My opinion is that there could be two different strong blows. We are currently seeking second opinions of other experts.



Ребра ломаются конструкционно за счет определенной гибкости. В точке непосредственного удара будет разгибательный перелом, но ребро будет под несколько изгибаться и на определенном расстоянии возникнет удаленный сгибательный перелом. Вторая линия. При сильном ударе может возникнуть две дополнительные линии, как у Золотарева.
Никитин предположил, что раз точка приложения спереди справа от грудины (разгибательные переломы), по подмышечной сформировались конструкционные сгибательные (это точки максимального физиологического изгиба), а лопатка сзади - нет вопросов. Он лежит на спине, что-то давит спереди назад, ломаются кости и спереди и сзади.
И я с этим не согласна. Во первых ни в какой литературе не описывают, что при таком сдавлении лопатка вообще будет ломаться. А во вторых, он не проецировал это на скелет в целом, с учетом взаиморасположения костей относительно друг друга. А у меня получается, то лопатка почему-то ломается там, где ребра не ломаются.
Мое мнение, что у Золотарева было ДВА различных удара. Сначала по спине в область вот этого выступающего гребня. Он крепкий, выдержал, но от него вверх и вниз пошли трещины в виде треугольника (вот такой перелом от удара по лопатке описан много где), а потом был второй удар - уже в область груди.


Ribs break down constructively due to a certain flexibility. At the point of direct impact there will be an extensor fracture, but the rib will be slightly bent and at a certain distance there will be a remote flexural fracture forming a second line. With a strong impact, two additional lines may appear as in this case.
Sergey Nikitin, forensic medical expert, says that that as a result of applying force on the front to the right of the sternum (extensor fractures), there will be structural flexion in the axillary line (these are the points of maximum physiological bending), and no questions about the shoulder blade on the back. His theory is that Zolotaryov lies on his back, something presses from front to back, brakes the bones both in front and back.
And I do not agree with this. Firstly, it is not mentioned in any literature that as a result of such compression the scapula will break at all. And secondly, Sergey Nikitin did not project this onto the skeleton as a whole, taking into account the position of the bones relative to each other. And then the shoulder blade for some reason breaks where the ribs do not break.
My opinion is that Zolotaryov suffered two different blows. First on the back to the area of ​​the protruding ridge. The ridge is strong, withstood, but from it up and down went the cracks in the form of a triangle (this is the break from the blow on the shoulder and it is described a lot in the literature), and then there was a second blow - in the chest area."

Q:
Я нашла ето вы писали в taina.li после эксгумации:
You wrote this in taina.li after the exhumation:

GS:
Действительно ждали цинк. Цинка не было даже следов. Дерева было много, но отдельные щепки размерами до 10-15 см толщиной до 3-5 см, которые сразу рассыпались в труху. Желтоватое оранжевого цвета. Их частично видно на видео, если присматриваться.
Кости располагались не кучей все-таки а соответственно тому, как должны были быть если там нормально лежало тело. Те косточки ног были из одного конца могилы, череп - из противоположного. Последний нашли чуть ли не череп и он был немного в борту. Зуб искали, но он тоже мог остаться в борту. Лунка была совершенно чистая от земли, а вот на неочищенный челюсти не видно даже этой фальш коронки.
Могила. Сначала была земля. Потом камни. Потом опять земля может см 30, очень рыхлая, почти песок. И в ней - кости. Те ощущение что на гроб кидали землю, потом камни и потом опять землю. Да, увидев камни, очень боялись что все раздавлено. Однако все кости на удивление в прекрасном состоянии. Нашли даже присловутый щитовидный хрящ (!) который не изменён.
Пуговицы простые пластмассовые, чёрные. Дешевые. Без ножки.
Верёвка... я бы назвала Ее не веревкой, а узкой лентой. То ли из капрона, то ли из шёлка. Знаете, когда по краям ещё такая более плотная? Кромка плотная. Я доберусь до дома поищу в инете похожую. Она меньше всего похожа на деталь одежды. Могильщики сразу сказали - руки связывали. У них опыт большой именно по эксгумациям. Конечно это работала специальная выделенная бригада, а не какие не энтузиасты, как здесь предполагали.
Подметки. Я затруднюсь сказать даже из какого они материала. То ли кожа, то ли очень плотный постеганный войлок. У меня почему-то сложилось впечатление, что это специальные погребальные тапочки с тканевым верхом, который разложился.


We expected that there would be zink  (galvanized) coffin. No traces of zink what so ever. There was a lot of wood, but individual chips measuring up to 10-15 cm and up to 3-5 cm in thickness, and they crumbled into dust right away. Yellowish orange. It is visible on the video, if you look closely. The bones were not in a pile but the order expected to find a grave if the body was laid normally. The bones of the legs were in one end of the grave, the skull - in the opposite. The skull was almost the last piece we found, slightly on the side. We searched for the tooth, but it can also be fallen into the dirt to the side. The hole had no dirt whatsoever, and yet on the dirty lower jam you can't even see the "false" tooth cap.
The grave. First there was the earth. Then the stones. Then again the earth about 30 cm, very friable, almost sand. And in it - bones. There is the impression that they threw earth on the coffin, then stones and then again earth. When we saw the stones, we were very much afraid that we will find everything crushed. However, all the bones are in surprisingly excellent condition. We even found the notorious thyroid cartilage (!) and it was not damaged.
Buttons are simple plastic, black. Cheap, no studs.
The rope ... I wouldn't call it a rope, but a narrow ribbon. Either from a nylon, or from silk. You know the kind that is denser on the edges? The edge is dense. When I get home I'll look online for something similar. It doesn't look like a piece of clothing. Gravediggers immediately said that his hands were tied together. They have a great experience in exhumations. They are a special dedicated team, not some not enthusiasts.
The shoe soles. I can't say what were they made of. Either skin, or a very dense feathered felt. I somehow got the impression that these are special funerary slippers with a cloth top that decomposed.

Q:
Этот желтый оранжевый цвет, который появляться во всем этом случае, y вас есть объяснение для него? Можно ли теперь рассмотреть, что мы можем получить образец?
What's with the yellow orange color that persists throughout this whole case? Do you have an explanation? Can it be examined now that we can obtain a sample of it

GS:
Ты имеешь в виду тот оранжевый цвет кожи и одежды о котором говорили родственники?
Не может быть ответа на этот вопрос сейчас, потому что совсем не сохранились мягкие ткани,  тем более кожа, чтобы отдать их на экспертизу. От одежды тоже ничего не осталось, хотя наверняка его хоронили в другой одежде, новой.

You mean the orange color of the skin and clothes about which relatives talked about?
There can be no answer to this question now, because soft tissues have not been preserved at all, especially skin to give them for examination. From clothes, too, there was nothing left, although for sure he was buried in other clothes, new.

Q:
I meant in this paragraph you said the trigger word yellow orange color. Nobody ask questions about this color? It's orange again.
Действительно ждали цинк. Цинка не было даже следов. Дерева было много, но отдельные щепки размерами до 10-15 см толщиной до 3-5 см, которые сразу рассыпались в труху. Желтоватое оранжевого цвета. Их частично видно на видео, если присматриваться.
We expected that there would be zink  (galvanized) coffin. No traces of zink what so ever. There was a lot of wood, but individual chips measuring up to 10-15 cm and up to 3-5 cm in thickness, and they crumbled into dust right away. Yellowish orange. It is visible on the video, if you look closely.

GS:
Нет :) это то, как выглядит остаток дерева. Вначале, в первом интервью, Наталья сказала "гроба не было". Она имела в виду, что гроб не сохранился. Тогда я написала, что мы видели остатки гроба в виде желтоватых щепок. Потому что тогда их смогут разглядеть на фотографии на фоне более тёмной земли.
No :) this is what the rest of the tree looks like. In the beginning, in the first interview, Natalya said "there was no coffin." She meant that the coffin was not preserved. Then I wrote that we saw the remains of the coffin in the form of yellowish splinters. Because then they will be able to see in the photo against the background of a darker land.

GS: (posted in taina.li)
Верёвка... я бы назвала eё не веревкой, а узкой лентой. То ли из капрона, то ли из шёлка. Знаете, когда по краям ещё такая более плотная? Кромка плотная. Она меньше всего похожа на деталь одежды. Могильщики сразу сказали - руки связывали.
The rope ... I would not call it a rope, but a narrow ribbon. Either from a nylon, or from silk. Do you know when it's so denser on the edges? The edge is dense. It looks like a piece of clothing. Gravediggers immediately said - they tied their hands together.

Natalya Varsegova: (posted in taina.li)


Q:
Была эта верёвка связанной в петлю и найдена в области груди  (или стоп) или  верёвка  была безо всяких узлов и найдена где-то совсем не на груди.
ну и длина верёвочки -?

Was this rope tied in a knot(s) and found in the chest (or feet) area or was the rope loose in the grave? What was the length of the rope?

Helga (posted in taina.li)
По житейской практике - руки связывают простым бинтиком, и перед закрытием гроба как правило начинают какие-то бабушки суетится и просить родственников развязать руки-ноги, чтобы "покойник на том свете не оказался связаным", поэтому вопрос с верёвочкой (одной, а не двумя: руки и ноги) щепетильный, это значит, что на похоронах не было вообще никого, кто бы подсказал  - развязать.
Но с другой стороны, для чего связывать руки покойнику, которого хоронят в закрытом гробу - ?!

According to common practice - hands are tied with a simple bandage  before closing the coffin, as a rule, some grandmothers start to fuss and ask relatives to untie their hands and feet, so that "the deceased in the next world was not tied up", so the question with a string (one, not two : hands and feet) scrupulous, it means that at the funeral there was no one at all who would prompt - to untie.
But on the other hand, why bind the hands of the deceased, who is buried in a closed coffin -?!

GS: (posted in taina.li)
Веревочка-лента.
Я не видела в какой момент она появилась. Землю выкидывали два рабочих, мы из откиданной земли выбирали кости. Точно не в самом начале, но и гораздо раньше того как появился череп. Начали мы с ног и шли к голове. Ее вытащил из земли кто-то другой.
Подмётках была первой находкой.
Лента не шире 1 см. Она узкая. На мой взгляд имеет определённую жёсткость. Был ли блеск? Скорее да. Но она грязная. Сколько длиной? Хрен знает, я не мерила и не видела что бы кто-то мерил.
Выглядело все так. Кто-тотсказал "о, верёвка". Рабочие тут же ответили "ей руки связывали". Больше веревкой не интересовались и поймите, там было чем заниматься другим. Каких-то конспирологическ вопросов она вообще не вызвала.
Более того добавлю. Когда я просеивала землю, то мне показалось что были фрагменты сильно истлевшей чёрной плотной ткани. Не знаю как обьяснить. Это пока комок земли ещё не измельчен ты видишь какую-то структуру. Когда берёшь его в руки все превращается в пыль.
Я лично ждала, что он будет похоронен в военном кителе, с погонами. Те и настрой у меня был в эту сторону. Ничего чтобы подтвердило мои надежды.
Ребята, есть картинка которую ты рисуешь и что ожидаешь. Мы ожидали цинк. Мы ожидали совершенно другое состояние останков, типо варианта  генерала из Турции. Мы обсуждали что будем делать, если сохранились мумифицированные мягкие ткани. Это был худший вариант, потому что мы не смогли бы посмотреть переломы. И, извините, разводить костерок и вываривать кости в котелке тоже никто не собирался. Кто смотрел сериал кости - поймёт о чем я.
Когда пошли кости да ещё в том состоянии в котором пошли, лично я вздохнула с облегчением, потому что такой расклад был наиболее информативен. В отличии от других вариантов.
Если бы на черепе сохранились хоть чуть чуть мягкие ткани то под вопросом был бы и метод Фотоналожения.
То что произошло было самым идеальным вариантом в плане оценки  травм. А не верёвочек. Извините, на травмах мы и концентрировались.
Не обращай внимания. Это какой-то элемент одежды или обивки гроба. Не знаю чего к ней там привязались на форуме.


Rope-ribbon. I didn't notice when did it appeared. The land was thrown by two workers, we chose bones from the land that had been dumped. Precisely not at the very beginning, but also much earlier than the appearance of the skull. We started from the feet and walked to the head. It was taken out of the earth by someone else.
Shoe soles were the first find.
The tape is not wider than 1 cm. It is narrow. In my opinion has a certain stiffness. Was there brilliance? Rather yes. But it's dirty. How long is it? Who knows, I did not measure and did not see that someone would measure.
It looked all right. Someone said "look, a rope." The workers immediately answered "his hands were tied". The rope was not interesting to investigate, there was much more at stake. It did not cause any conspiracy questions.
Moreover, I will add. When I sifted the earth, it seemed to me that there were fragments of strongly decayed black dense tissue. I do not know how to explain. This is until the clump of land is not shredded, you see some structure. When you take it in your hands everything turns into dust.
I personally expected that he would be buried in a military tunic, with shoulder straps. Those and the mood I had in this direction. Nothing to confirm my hopes.
Guys, there is a picture you draw and what you expect. We were expecting zinc. We expected a completely different state of the remains, the type of the general's version from Turkey. We discussed what we would do if we preserved the mummified soft tissues. This was the worst option, because we could not see the fractures. And, excuse me, no one was going to build a fire and boil the bones in a bowler hat. Who watched the series of dice - will understand what I mean.
When the bones went, and even in the state in which they went, I personally sighed with relief, because this arrangement was the most informative. Unlike other options.
If only a little soft cloth were preserved on the skull, the superimposition method would be in question. What happened was the most ideal option in terms of assessing injuries. And not rope. Sorry, we concentrated on injuries.
The rope is not important. It's part of the clothes or a burying accessory. I don't know why did they ga-ga about this in the forum.

Q:
There are a lot of discussions how come Zolotaryov's teeth were stained as a smoker but he is not smoking on the photographs we have of him. Although Valentin Degterev (Валентин Дегтерёв) claims Zolotaryov is pulling a cigarette in this photo.




GS (posted in taina.li)
Если честно, не вижу проблемы. Даже если он не курил в 1959 году, совершенно не факт, что он неикурил во время ВОВ. Там действительно был очень специфический налёт с внутренней стороны зубов, причём не уверена что были бы десна - его было бы видно. Прямо по шейке зуба.
Про курение сразу сказал эксперт. Надо отметить, что он "не фанат " темы Дятлова, практически не знает истории Семена и оценивал очень непредвзято и профессионально. Я вообще восхищена экспертом! Мне не доводилось общаться с тумановым и личного ощущения нет.

To be honest, I do not see a problem. Even if he did not smoke in 1959, it is not at all a fact that he did not smoke during the Second World War. There really was a very specific plaque from the inside of the teeth, and I'm not sure that it would have been visible if there was gum. Straight on the neck of the tooth.
Тhe expert mentioned the smoking right away. We need to know that Nikitin doesn't follow Dyatlov case, he does not know anything about Semyon and evaluated him very impartially and professionally. I generally admire the expert! I have not been able to communicate with Tumanov (modern times forensic pathologist in Russia who revised the post mortem analyses of the last four bodies found) and there is no personal feeling.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 02:06:24 AM by Teddy »

May 06, 2018, 02:23:02 AM
Reply #9
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
Galya, you said this yellowish orange color can be seen in the video if you look closely. is it visible on any of these two photos or else can you give me the time (seconds) what to look at in the video?
I have the video embedded as well as the article translated http://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation






May 06, 2018, 02:59:18 AM
Reply #10
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen


Quote
GS:
По заключению эксперта Никитина это было однократное резкое воздействие предметом на человека, лежачего на спине. Moё мнение, что могло быть и два разных сильных удара. Mы собираемся искать вторые мнения других экспертов.

According to expert Nikitin, this was a one-time sudden impact to a person lying on his back. My opinion is that there could be two different strong blows. We are currently seeking second opinions of other experts.

Ребра ломаются конструкционно за счет определенной гибкости. В точке непосредственного удара будет разгибательный перелом, но ребро будет под несколько изгибаться и на определенном расстоянии возникнет удаленный сгибательный перелом. Вторая линия. При сильном ударе может возникнуть две дополнительные линии, как у Золотарева. Никитин предположил, что раз точка приложения спереди справа от грудины (разгибательные переломы), по подмышечной сформировались конструкционные сгибательные (это точки максимального физиологического изгиба), а лопатка сзади - нет вопросов. Он лежит на спине, что-то давит спереди назад, ломаются кости и спереди и сзади.

И я с этим не согласна. Во первых ни в какой литературе не описывают, что при таком сдавлении лопатка вообще будет ломаться. А во вторых, он не проецировал это на скелет в целом, с учетом взаиморасположения костей относительно друг друга. А у меня получается, то лопатка почему-то ломается там, где ребра не ломаются. Мое мнение, что у Золотарева было ДВА различных удара. Сначала по спине в область вот этого выступающего гребня. Он крепкий, выдержал, но от него вверх и вниз пошли трещины в виде треугольника (вот такой перелом от удара по лопатке описан много где), а потом был второй удар - уже в область груди.


Ribs break down constructively due to a certain flexibility. At the point of direct impact there will be an extensor fracture, but the rib will be slightly bent and at a certain distance there will be a remote flexural fracture forming a second line. With a strong impact, two additional lines may appear as in this case.

Sergey Nikitin, forensic medical expert, says that that as a result of applying force on the front to the right of the sternum (extensor fractures), there will be structural flexion in the axillary line (these are the points of maximum physiological bending), and no questions about the shoulder blade on the back. His theory is that Zolotaryov lies on his back, something presses from front to back, brakes the bones both in front and back. And I do not agree with this. Firstly, it is not mentioned in any literature that as a result of such compression the scapula will break at all. And secondly, Sergey Nikitin did not project this onto the skeleton as a whole, taking into account the position of the bones relative to each other. And then the shoulder blade for some reason breaks where the ribs do not break.

My opinion is that Zolotaryov suffered two different blows. First on the back to the area of ​​the protruding ridge. The ridge is strong, withstood, but from it up and down went the cracks in the form of a triangle (this is the break from the blow on the shoulder and it is described a lot in the literature), and then there was a second blow - in the chest area."


Dear Galya/Дорогая Галя,

The above statement, and the general way you put your words demonstrates that you are a highly skilled and also very conscientious person. You seriously do your best, and it is clear to all that you work with true competence - as well as a good heart.

The significance of your findings, and the importance of your above opinion, simply cannot be overestimated.

Your statement about how the different structures of the scapula and the ribs likely were broken as a result of separate blows, is a major step forward.

A great thank you!/Большое спасибо!

May 06, 2018, 06:16:05 AM
Reply #11
Online

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
Lets all remember not to put the carriage in front of the horse.  I just read that there are two opinions and this is why additional opinions are being seeked.  thumb1
All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

May 06, 2018, 08:32:02 AM
Reply #12
Offline

Vietnamka


To be honest, for understanding what happened in 1959 - tragic accident or murder - not Zolotarev should be exhumed. But we could find the "hole" in the civil law in his case only. We hoped to find anything (the best option could be absence the body in the grave or not his body) for transferring this case under the criminal law regulation and reopen the old case.
But...
any way, looking forward )

May 06, 2018, 10:38:21 AM
Reply #13
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
I want to copy/paste something Loose}{Cannon said to me.

Quote
Welp....  I'm guessing two impacts would be a big deal if true. It's like telling all the people in the non-murder camp that their baby is ugly.

I find this very funny  lol2
« Last Edit: May 06, 2018, 11:16:20 AM by Loose}{Cannon »

May 06, 2018, 12:08:38 PM
Reply #14
Offline

Armide


To be honest, for understanding what happened in 1959 - tragic accident or murder - not Zolotarev should be exhumed. But we could find the "hole" in the civil law in his case only. We hoped to find anything (the best option could be absence the body in the grave or not his body) for transferring this case under the criminal law regulation and reopen the old case.
But...
any way, looking forward )

Hi! First of all, thank you so much for all of your work so far on the case, it's amazing to finally get another more modern opinion on the case!

I know you mentioned that his grave seems to be in order, and that it's not likely that the case will be reopened, but do you think that if the experts deduce any sort of new evidence pointing to foul play that the Russian government may reopen it? Or do you think that this is simply unlikely due to the advance stage of decay in the body?

May 06, 2018, 08:45:28 PM
Reply #15
Offline

Vietnamka




Hi! First of all, thank you so much for all of your work so far on the case, it's amazing to finally get another more modern opinion on the case!

I know you mentioned that his grave seems to be in order, and that it's not likely that the case will be reopened, but do you think that if the experts deduce any sort of new evidence pointing to foul play that the Russian government may reopen it? Or do you think that this is simply unlikely due to the advance stage of decay in the body?
I don't think the grave was reopened. I don't see the reasons for reopening. Everything was done in 1959.
1) government didn't allow us to do exhumation if it was possible to point new endance. Even the grave was opened previously it could happened long time ago only, until the body still preserved. Impossible to put bones back to the grave in the position bones were found.
2) 1959
I was pretty sure we can not find the ribs.
You can see "autopsy report of Zolotarev". His chest is not deformated. But on this picture has been done after the autopsy his chest deformated a lot.
 




But Luda's chest looks normal even she had more fractures.






It looked like Vozrogdenniy took away rib's complex for additional investigation or tests. I was surprised  to see all the ribs in the grave without and traces of sergical manipulation. Expert could do it but didn't. 

May 06, 2018, 09:39:48 PM
Reply #16
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
Galya, pls give me a time from KP video where you see the yellowish color of the grave so I can stop pestering you with this question.  embarrassed
« Last Edit: May 06, 2018, 10:42:37 PM by Teddy »

May 06, 2018, 11:40:36 PM
Reply #17
Offline

Vietnamka


I dont see any more)))
 Special for your forum from Natalya.



May 06, 2018, 11:56:37 PM
Reply #18
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
I know you mentioned that his grave seems to be in order, and that it's not likely that the case will be reopened, but do you think that if the experts deduce any sort of new evidence pointing to foul play that the Russian government may reopen it? Or do you think that this is simply unlikely due to the advance stage of decay in the body?

Galya, what Armide means is that if there is a suspicion of Zolotaryov being murdered (two blows, not one) wouldn't the government consider reopening the case?

May 06, 2018, 11:59:36 PM
Reply #19
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
I dont see any more)))
Special for your forum from Natalya.

Very thankful to both of you.

May 07, 2018, 12:24:02 AM
Reply #20
Offline

Vietnamka



Galya, what Armide means is that if there is a suspicion of Zolotaryov being murdered (two blows, not one) wouldn't the government consider reopening the case?
Of course - no. Even no body at all in the grave, or 3 bodies.
Government made the decision to close the case in 1959 and keeping the secret till now.
What do u know about Okishev? do u know about Shkrybich?

May 07, 2018, 12:48:50 AM
Reply #21
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
What do u know about Okishev?

Lev Ivanov’s boss during the investigation. In 2013 he was 94 years old and gave an interview to two journalists from the Komsomolskaya Pravda.
He remembered the case very well and he found it quite mysterious. In 1959, Evgeny Fyodorovich Okishev was Deputy Head of the Investigative Department of the Sverdlovsk Oblast Prosecution Office and was directly responsible for the supervision of the case including Lev Ivanov’s handling of it (Ivanov was subordinate to Evgeny Okishev and had replaced Vasily Tempalov, the Ivdel Prosecutor, very early in the investigation). His interview was as follows:

EO - When it became clear that the tourists had died, we organised an investigation team under the direction of criminal prosecutor Lev Ivanov, and I was appointed to supervise their work. The impression of the examination of the tent, with its cuts and remains of food inside, was that the tourists had just sat down to supper and suddenly felt panic that made them all rush out. We tried to collect more facts about the Pass. We learned that the location was a sacred site of the Mansi, and that women were not allowed to go there. Since the tourists’ group included two girls, the Mansi were the first we suspected. However this version was soon discarded.

– How did you check it out? What made you discard it?

EO – I called the Ivdel district prosecutor and asked him to find a literate Mansi, an activist with whom I could talk. So, when I came to Ivdel, there were already three Mansi men coming there at the prosecutor’s request, one of them a quite literate person, People’s Deputy to the Regional Council. I had booked a room for the three of them at an Ivdel hotel. But they refused to stay in it. They preferred to sleep outside, in the snow, with their dogs. This is how the Deputy (Mansi) explained it to me: “I ride my sledge dogs even
when I go to attend a session of the Regional Council, and I always sleep with them because I feel it hard to stay indoors”. We talked with him about the Mansi and their traditions. He asserted that the place where the tourists died was in no way sacred. On the contrary, any Russian appearing among them would be looked upon as something divine. People would try to touch such a person, make him their guest, as this holds good promise to all. It was absolutely clear from his behaviour that the man was telling the truth. After this talk the Mansi assassination theory became irrelevant. But the question of panic remained. It is worth noting that, for some reason or other, the two men that were found in the forest under the cedar tree had been trying to make a fire for quite a long time: the proof to that was a great number of dead matches were found scattered around.

– Do you remember this for sure, had there really been dead matches?

EO – Absolutely, matches were also mentioned in the on-site inspection report.

– But in a month’s time matches must have become covered up with snow?

EO – I believe the inspection report. (It is worthy of note that the copy of criminal case kept in the Sverdlovsk Oblast archives bears no notice of matches. So, this is one more mystery of the Dyatlov Pass.
(Interviewing Journalist written comment to Okishev’s comment “I believe the Inspection Report”)

- Why had the military become involved in the search?

EO - To say the truth, this was done on our request. And there were reasons for that. Shortly before that we met with a worker of one of the prison camps in the North Urals. He described strange flashes of light which he and his wife saw late that evening on their way home from the cinema. The light came from the direction of the supposed accident with the tourists. We also received evidence from other local residents, and all of them spoke about a similar phenomenon, all testimonies were entered on our records of interrogation. We got a suspicion of existence of a military test field somewhere around, could that be true? Could flashes be caused by a failed rocket launch that had killed the tourists?

- But, again, there is no such record in the criminal case! So, what happened then?

EO - A group of the military under the command, if I am not mistaken, of Colonel Artyukov, arrived. I talked to him, and he convinced me that no such facilities were nearby and no possibility of missile launches. But, there was one instance that put us on the alert. When the last bodies were found later in May, an order came to collect all items found at the pass and send them for radiological examination. Also, all people who had been in contact with the things found in the tent and nearby were ordered to undergo body counting.
So it was done, but neither a reassuring, nor any other results were made known to us. And again, the fact of some secret military tests being held was coming to mind. We applied with a letter signed by the Oblast Prosecutor to either the Prosecutor General of the USSR or the Federal – I don’t remember exactly now – asking to explain what really we were investigating into? And how it was related to radiation? Could it be so that even the top commandant of the Urals Military District knew nothing of any tests of armaments held there? In response to our letter, Deputy Prosecutor General, comrade Urakov came to meet with us and gave orders that we were to all tell anyone who asked that the tourists’ death was an accident. Urakov evaded all our direct questions about tests of armaments. I mean, he did not deny this version, but simply avoided direct answers. What’s more, Urakov took absolutely no interest in the course of our investigation, as if the picture of the scene was absolutely clear to him already. He, however, took the case away with him. With that, our investigation came to an end. Just imagine: at the very height of the investigation, when dead bodies with strange injuries have just been found, the case is being taken away! And I clearly remember when we were signing our letter in the office of Oblast Prosecutor Klinov, he himself asked in doubt whether we had omitted something and had not fully checked one or the other evidence? We told him that if the top officials discard the military incident version, then all is left to us is to consider other possible versions. He found our considerations convincing, and signed the letter. But, again, the reaction from Moscow was such that our suppositions of a military involvement had been neither confirmed nor disproved...

- What’s your idea, why Urakov ordered everybody to say that was an accident?

EO - Evidently, such was an order from the CPSU Central Committee.

- Do you admit that other structures could have been involved in investigations into this case:, the KGB, for example, or some other agency?

EO - I think they had been involved, really, only I was not let in on that. The KGB investigators must have been attracted. Such was the usual practice then. I can even suppose that while we sweated over fact-finding they had already known more – with their powers.

- We have recently got through to the then head of the KGB Investigative department for Sverdlovsk Oblast. The officer’s answer was “we were not engaged in that case, definitely”. He, however, refused to meet with us in person.

EO - So much for their involvement: why did he refuse to meet with you if the KGB had reportedly not been involved? Why then should he fear to repeat that to you openly? It may well be that his department had really had a hand in the investigation. This is the function of investigators of the Committee (KGB – transl.). Such was their top secret activity. And your interlocutor had simply no right to discuss their work with you.

- We may suppose that the tragedy was caused by some tests. From the very beginning the KGB performed their own investigation into the case. They quickly find out that, say, the plane had dropped the bomb in a wrong place. A disgrace at government level that must be concealed by all means. It may well be that it was decided to bury the worst injured bodies in four meters deep snow in hope to find some better solution before they are found. Meanwhile the case was assigned to a civilian investigating office, which, on Urakov’s instruction, would file the case away in storage as an accident …

EO - We can suppose many things here, but I prefer not to, in the absence of facts.

- According to eyewitnesses, when the last bodies were found, prosecutor Ivanov’s behaviour changed abruptly. He looked depressed and in despair. Could this change be related to Urakov’s order to write it all off to an accident?

EO - I don’t know what to relate it to. We, Ivanov and I, were in a very difficult situation then. Parents of the young people came to my office, some of them cried and called us fascists trying to hide the truth from them. I lost sleep after such charges. But could tell them nothing beside what I was instructed to tell by my superiors. Just imagine the situation; mother or father of a student in my office. They come crying, saying they had lost their only son, or daughter. Like you want to ignore it altogether, don’t do any real
investigation, allude to an accident. We told them it might be an earthquake, a storm or anything like that … But look, what else could we tell them? We knew absolutely nothing ourselves. Parents wrote letters to the authorities at all levels, I think, to Khrushchev too, asking for investigation to be continued. The investigation was nevertheless closed – not on our initiative.

- Many people mentioned the unusual red color of skin of the deceased.

EO - Yes, the skin color was really unusual. Ivanov mentioned this in his report to me. Who else would have known such things if not him, a war veteran and a criminal investigator, he had seen many people frozen to death before. But nothing like this, ever.

- So what could have happened to them?

EO - I have a strong suspicion, after all those expert examinations (particularly after the radiation analysis made by some order from the top authorities), that there had been tests of some secret weapon or a launch failure. By that time the USSR and the USA had signed the test-ban and nuclear weapons production cut-back treaty. New extra-power devices needed to be created. It may well be that due to special secrecy, tests were conducted at locations unknown to the enemy. The students might have walked into a test area and got injured by fragments of a missile or something of the kind.

- Right, and forensic expert Vozrozhdenny, too, described heavy injuries as if bodies had been hit by an automobile. So, talking of rocket fragments, where could they have disappeared?

EO - The military might have collected them.

- And where could the notebooks of some of the tourists have gone? Also the film strips from the tourists’ cameras?

EO - You are putting me in an awkward position. I would then have to disclose our work methods. There could be anything; withdrawal of documents, other material evidence. Anything that might expose, unfavorably, the involvement of the top authorities had to be destroyed.

- But, at the same time, a few undeveloped films were found left in the tent, and you took them. The military, or whoever else, could not have left a film so you could find it; it could carry shots of armament tests.

EO - It may well be that no orders to withdraw films were given. The thought is important to take away fragments as the most evidential items. I also admit those people had been in a big hurry and overlooked some details.

- And could it be this way; the KGB officers develop a film and understand there is nothing special on it. Then they superimpose the developed film on the undeveloped one and after exposure obtain a “negative-positive”, develop the second film and again superimpose it on the third one. After exposure the third film presents an exact copy of the original film. This last copy may be loaded back into the camera, and now let the investigator develop it...

EO - I don’t know how much technically feasible this could be, but it is a fact that the KGB could work miracles in those years. Let me tell you one story. In summer of the same year 1959 Richard Nixon comes to the USSR and visits Sverdlovsk. And there, in Sverdlovsk he asks: May I visit the Beloyarskaya nuclear station construction site. The people who escort him are at a loss; not just myself, but even much higher authorities did not know anything about construction of a nuclear power station in Beloyarka. How could Nixon know about that? And what to do? At last, after consultations with Moscow, the permit is given. So he goes there with a crowd of his journalists. The KGB people somehow manage to arrange it so that not one of them photographs anything. God knows how they did it, closed the lens with their bodies, or what. Nixon photographed too, and who would dare to obstruct the lens for him? He took quite a few shots of different secret facilities. However on the same night his escort persuades Nixon to visit the Russian steam baths, where, needless to say, all steam room attendants happen to undercover KGB officers. So while some attended to him in the steam bath, others spoiled all his films. I heard that later he felt much upset.

- In some sources we read that in the fifties, after Beria’s old guard people were dissolved, the KGB men were no good at all: mostly green and cowed.

EO - Right, different people could be met in this service then: Baboons after hardly six classes at school, and true professionals as well.

- It is said that had there been any cover-up of the events at the Pass it must have involved many people, and later someone would inevitably have spoken up. But no such testimonies have been made so far …

EO - But who knows the destinies of, for example, the military men who participated in the search? You don’t? I don’t know either. What has happened to colonel Artyukov, do you know?

- As far as we know, he soon died of cancer.

EO - There now, make your own conclusions …

May 07, 2018, 12:50:25 AM
Reply #22
Offline

Teddy

Administrator

May 07, 2018, 12:57:16 AM
Reply #23
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
Galya tells me we need to watch "The end of the story"


and read about Shkrybach's conclusion https://m.kp.ru/daily/26637/3656345/

This all started the conditioning for exhumation. This is a very long history of the modern attempt to make a documentary about this case.

May 07, 2018, 05:12:47 AM
Reply #24
Offline

WAB


do u know about Shkrybich?

I don't know who he is.

Sergey Shkarabich is veteran of the State Office of Public Prosecutor of the USSR and the Russian Federation. It has some climbing experience and experience of other travel. However if to judge under its statements it does not know many details of this case, conditions on a place of events and is under the influence of Evgene Buyanov's book about an avalanche on a place of events.
We, with my friend Alexander Alekseenkov, in a current of several travel to the place of events investigated conditions with snow and possibility of occurrence of an avalanche in the winter. I can result only my opinion: into installation site of tent is not present what (even very small) conditions for occurrence even a small motion of snow. Otherwise all slope of mountain would be covered by results of an avalanching. As on an installation site of tent the corner of a bias of a slope makes 12 … 14 degrees, and on a grief there is a set of biases of a slope 40 … 45 degrees.
Local conditions are that that occurrence of motions of snow is excluded basically.
The statistics is that that for the past of 60 years any group (from several honeycombs of groups) did not observe any (even very small) signs of a motion of snow. In any places of this mountain it is no possible.

May 07, 2018, 07:32:25 AM
Reply #25
Online

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
I only wish I can understand Russian language!    cry2


To Vietnamka

Is possible that Zolotaryov's injuries could have resulted from 2 almost simultaneous impacts of natural origin?  For example, if Zolotaryov and the others were standing on the rocky bottom of a ravine,  and the side of the ravine had tall/deep pack snow that collapsed......   Is it possible that impact #1 happened while standing when the 'wall' of ice hit him, and impact #2 resulted from his body being thrown against the rocks caused by impact #1.

Im trying to simplify my text due to language difficultly, please let me know if I need to clarify further, and thank you again!   

All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

May 07, 2018, 08:04:47 AM
Reply #26
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen



and read about Shkrybach's conclusion https://m.kp.ru/daily/26637/3656345/

This all started the conditioning for exhumation. This is a very long history of the modern attempt to make a documentary about this case.


Shkrybach's conclusion is what can be expected, given the conclusions that were drawn in 1959. He strongly insists that it is not necessary to re-open the case, and he seems to be of the opinion that every answer has been found. Being a high-ranking state official, he is more or less bound to stick to the official version which was evidently desired. We do not need to assume that he is dishonest. It is fully possible that this is his sincere opinion, and we do not know how much he actually knows apart from what he says. The question of whether or not he tells us everything he knows is not the most important. Whether or not he tells what he sees as the truth, and he may well do, the point is that we do not have to agree with his conclusions, because there are a lot of reasons to doubt the official versions of what happened.

His statements and the grounds he gives for them fail to back up his conclusion, and there are many details which simply do not fit in. Also, there are many pieces of evidence that he does not mention.

1. The fact that the official papers state that the first steps of the investigation were taken on February 6 is worth noting. If this date is not mistaken, it means that the authorities were aware of what had happened and prepared for an investigation long before anyone else knew that the nine students were missing. But, even if we must note this detail, it is not conclusive because it is possible that the date was written by a mistake. It may not have been a mistake, but it cannot be excluded either.

2. Shkrybach and the official version insists that the nine students fled their tent voluntarily and without pressure from any attackers. It means that nine young and bright persons fled out in the winter and moved up to a mile away from the tent without proper clothing and with no gloves. That is the official version. We might recall that the official version also states that the nine cut their way out from the tent. One additional point here, is that it is not documented who made the cuts. The knives belonging to the nine students were found in the tent - and these knives were all in their sheaths. This is one of many details that cast serious doubt on the official version - there is no evidence at all that the students cut through the tent and also no evidence that the students left the tent through the cuts. In spite of this, it has been stated as if it was a fact. An analytic read of the material available from the first investigation combined with modern material gives a strong impression that from the start, it seems to have been important for someone in high positions to make the final conclusion that the deaths of the nine was the result of a series of accidents and not murder.

3. It wouid seem that the best approach to try to find out whether the tragedy was an accident or a planned, intelligent murder committed by humans who knew how to arrange an "accident" is to take a close and unprejudiced look at the information we have. The examination and analysis of the evidence should be done without interpreting the available evidence from the premise that the Dyatlov pass tragedy was an accident. First and foremost, there are the bodies and their injuries. That is why the exhumation of Zolotarev is so valuable if it can give us new information that we did not have before.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 09:10:28 AM by Per Inge Oestmoen »

May 07, 2018, 12:54:46 PM
Reply #27
Offline

WAB



and read about Shkrybach's conclusion https://m.kp.ru/daily/26637/3656345/

This all started the conditioning for exhumation. This is a very long history of the modern attempt to make a documentary about this case.


Shkrybach's conclusion is what can be expected, given the conclusions that were drawn in 1959. He strongly insists that it is not necessary to re-open the case, and he seems to be of the opinion that every answer has been found. Being a high-ranking state official, he is more or less bound to stick to the official version which was evidently desired. We do not need to assume that he is dishonest. It is fully possible that this is his sincere opinion, and we do not know how much he actually knows apart from what he says. The question of whether or not he tells us everything he knows is not the most important. Whether or not he tells what he sees as the truth, and he may well do, the point is that we do not have to agree with his conclusions, because there are a lot of reasons to doubt the official versions of what happened.

His statements and the grounds he gives for them fail to back up his conclusion, and there are many details which simply do not fit in. Also, there are many pieces of evidence that he does not mention.

1. The fact that the official papers state that the first steps of the investigation were taken on February 6 is worth noting. If this date is not mistaken, it means that the authorities were aware of what had happened and prepared for an investigation long before anyone else knew that the nine students were missing. But, even if we must note this detail, it is not conclusive because it is possible that the date was written by a mistake. It may not have been a mistake, but it cannot be excluded either.

2. Shkrybach and the official version insists that the nine students fled their tent voluntarily and without pressure from any attackers. It means that nine young and bright persons fled out in the winter and moved up to a mile away from the tent without proper clothing and with no gloves. That is the official version. We might recall that the official version also states that the nine cut their way out from the tent. One additional point here, is that it is not documented who made the cuts. The knives belonging to the nine students were found in the tent - and these knives were all in their sheaths. This is one of many details that cast serious doubt on the official version - there is no evidence at all that the students cut through the tent and also no evidence that the students left the tent through the cuts. In spite of this, it has been stated as if it was a fact. An analytic read of the material available from the first investigation combined with modern material gives a strong impression that from the start, it seems to have been important for someone in high positions to make the final conclusion that the deaths of the nine was the result of a series of accidents and not murder.

3. It wouid seem that the best approach to try to find out whether the tragedy was an accident or a planned, intelligent murder committed by humans who knew how to arrange an "accident" is to take a close and unprejudiced look at the information we have. The examination and analysis of the evidence should be done without interpreting the available evidence from the premise that the Dyatlov pass tragedy was an accident. First and foremost, there are the bodies and their injuries. That is why the exhumation of Zolotarev is so valuable if it can give us new information that we did not have before.


1.   Official version no exists. The formulation in case precisely reproduce that has been defined as a result of fulfilment of this preliminary investigation, but it is absolutely not concrete. Because then there was no accurate understanding of the reasons escap from tent of. This understanding is not present and now. Everyone thinks out this reason how it wishes that more. Also it is necessary to understand that all occurred 60 years ago when level of criminal investigation and a science was absolutely another. To take for a basis how it becomes now is big error.
2.   Date on February, 6th, is specified in case it is double error occurring from requirements of carrying out of criminal cases and archival documents. In criminal case all papers are attached in the order of their receipt in case. The report where this date is specified is between date March, 7th 1959 (sheet #46) and date February, 7th 1959 (sheet #49) inside the middle of them. The report with date  is on February, 6th 1959 on sheet # 48 and the sheet #49 has been attached after sheet #46, but earlier because it has been written by other official who has brought it from other (more remote) point, but simultaneously with the others with similar dates.
At transferring of structure of criminal case to archive, the clerk of archive has place dated in the beginning of case which is most the first. So it is required under the instruction.
From here all incorrect judgements about the case beginning follow.
The official who made it the report was mistaken and has written instead of March, 6th 1959, erroneous date February, 6th 1959. Month March only has begun also it wrote by inertia erroneous date.

May 12, 2018, 03:08:33 AM
Reply #28
Offline

Vietnamka






Is possible that Zolotaryov's injuries could have resulted from 2 almost simultaneous impacts of natural origin?  For example, if Zolotaryov and the others were standing on the rocky bottom of a ravine,  and the side of the ravine had tall/deep pack snow that collapsed......   Is it possible that impact #1 happened while standing when the 'wall' of ice hit him, and impact #2 resulted from his body being thrown against the rocks caused by impact #1.

Im trying to simplify my text due to language difficultly, please let me know if I need to clarify further, and thank you again!
I'm sorry for the late response.
If we are talking about "impact of natural origin" we mean 1) avalanche 2) fall of large masses of snow down а) accomulated on the tent b) in the ravine.
 
Look at the injuries:




factores responsible of this injuries are
- force
- area over  wich it acts
- time taken over with the energy is transferred

1) FORCE
In our case it was  chest trauma caused by blunt object.

Can we characterize snow as a blunt object? No ice there.

2) AREA
We have localized injury with a point of force application "right side of the sternum, distance between 2nd and 5-6th ribs". Additional signs of localizes area are not injured collarbone, sternum, protruding parts of the scapula.


Can snow cause the local damage?

3) TIME
Forensic medical characterictic of a blow - <0,1 sec, compression >0,1 sec
  Can snow dissapier immideatly (<0,1 sec)  from the body?  If can not...
The total impact energy =   energy of primery blow (depends of mass, height in case of snowfall or speed of object in case of avalanche) + weight gravitational force wich depends of mass.
  4 bodies were fully covered by old havy 2,5m plast of snow for months, but it not enough to cause even dislocation of broken ribs or secondary fractures. Lung is not damaged (no pneumothorax).
 What was the mass of the snow, from what height did it fall or what speed did it move for causing this local traum?








May 12, 2018, 03:58:48 AM
Reply #29
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen



If we are talking about "impact of natural origin" we mean 1) avalanche 2) fall of large masses of snow down а) accomulated on the tent b) in the ravine. 

Look at the injuries:



factores responsible of this injuries are

- force
- area over  wich it acts
- time taken over with the energy is transferred

1) FORCE

In our case it was chest trauma caused by blunt object.

Can we characterize snow as a blunt object? No ice there.

2) AREA
We have localized injury with a point of force application "right side of the sternum, distance between 2nd and 5-6th ribs". Additional signs of localizes area are not injured collarbone, sternum, protruding parts of the scapula.


Can snow cause the local damage?

3) TIME

Forensic medical characterictic of a blow - <0,1 sec, compression >0,1 sec

  Can snow dissapier immideatly (<0,1 sec)  from the body?  If can not...

The total impact energy =   energy of primery blow (depends of mass, height in case of snowfall or speed of object in case of avalanche) + weight gravitational force wich depends of mass.

4 bodies were fully covered by old havy 2,5m plast of snow for months, but it not enough to cause even dislocation of broken ribs or secondary fractures. Lung is not damaged (no pneumothorax).

What was the mass of the snow, from what height did it fall or what speed did it move for causing this local traum?


Thank you very much, Vietnamka. This is extremely good work.

It is clearly a very localized injury.

If there was no ice, it means there were no hard elements in the snow.

There was no avalanche any place in the area either.

It is not possible that such a localized injury with breakage of strong bones can be caused by soft snow.

Now the evidence shows that it was caused by blow (Question: could it even be several blows?) from a hard object.

Then the truly important question arises: What scenario is likely to have caused the localized damage which has now been proven to be a fact?

Modern skill and competence, through the courageous mind of Vietnamka, has now provided us with critically important information.

Keep up the good work! More answers must be found.