August 26, 2019, 02:51:24 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Latest development on the attempts to reopen the case  (Read 1371 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

November 08, 2018, 03:09:30 PM
Read 1371 times
Online

Teddy

Administrator
From Russia with Doubt

There is a book about art called that but I like the title all the same.
The sources for this article are Galina Sazonova and Komsomolskaya Pravda documentary "Dyatlov Pass. End of Story?"



Leonid Georgievich Proshkin

In 2014 Komsomolskaya Pravda (KP) (big Russian periodical) signed an agreement with Leonid Proshkin, a former investigator of the Russian Federation Investigative Committee (IC), and now a lawyer, to file a claim the case to be reopened. In order to make a decision whether there are grounds for reopening, the IC began a preliminary inquiry. Preliminary inquiry is when a decision has to be made if there is reason - new information, to open the case. Investigation is when the case is open. For the preliminary inquiry was appointed one of the leading investigators of Russia - Vladimir Nikolaevich Solovyev. This preliminary inquiry lasted almost 3 years.


Vladislav Ivanovich Tuykov

The storage policy of the closed case files is that the documents can be disposed of 25 years after the case is closed. According to the memoirs of the former criminalist and judge Vladimir Ankudinov, the prosecutor of the Sverdlovsk region Vladislav Ivanovich Tuykov decided the case files not to be destroyed as “socially significant”. Not all physical evidence had the same good fortune. Head of Sverdlovsk Forensic Science Laboratory K. P. Kretov kept the tent. After Kretov died in the 80s the tent was taken to the garbage container, apparently water pipe burst back in the late 70s and the tent collected mold. The storage policy for evidence as well as case files is that they can be destroyed 25 years after the case is closed. We owe it to prosecutor Tuykov that we can actually leaf through the case files today. Tuykov is now passed away, lets hope the case files don't have same fate as the tent.


Vladimir Nikolaevich Solovyev

Senior investigator and forensic expert at the General Directorate for Criminalistics (Forensic Center) of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation. In the period of 1991-2015 headed the investigation of the murder of the royal family.
As a result new archived documents came to light and were published by KP.
Two documents stand out - the telegram from Kolevatov sister Rimma addressed to Khrushchev and a special message from the Minister of the Interior Ministry. He also found in the classified archive some documents on this case from Central Committee of the CPSU. KP began the process of declassifying these documents and the bureaucratic procedure took took about a year. Some of these documents were published.
In principle, there is nothing particularly new there, except for the memorandum of one of the party workers. There is also nothing special in it except for one - it contains document numbers (everything is numbered in the Central Committee, each page) that were used in this note. According to Natalya Varsegova in her speech at the Yekaterinburg conference in 2017 "some of these numbers were scratched with a razor" when declassified. We also clearly see by the pagination that not all is declassified. Some of the documents still remain classified.
The IC is not obliged to report what they are is doing, but they are by law required to issue a final conclusion. We don't know all the actions of Solovyev during the preliminary inquiry. From the movie “Dyatlov Pass. End of History?” one document gets into the frame 1:22:33 indicative that Solovyev conducted an officially recorded conversation with Okishev as part of the preliminary inquiry. He analyzed the criminal case for procedural violations. The conduct of a criminal case is regulated by law. This is part of the explanation given by Okishev to investigator Solovyov. You can see it in frame 1:22:40  that the criminal case was closed under pressure from above, and this confession on its own could have been the grounds to reopen the case. After filing an application, the Investigation Committee initiated their own preliminary inquiry of the case materials in order to make a decision on its results - whether to open the case or not.


Evgeniy Fyodorovich Okishev

KP was able to find Okishev, who oversaw Lev Ivanov. The interview taken in 2013 addresses the same questions to the investigator Solovyev asked Okishev as part of the preliminary inquiry. Okishev states for the protocol that they were pressured, they were not allowed to investigate, and at the end they were removed from the case. This fact only should be enough enough for the Investigative Committee to admit the violations and reopen the case.
Evgeniy Fyodorovich was 94 at the time of the interviews. Despite his advanced age, Evgeniy Fyodorovich remembers those events very well, because in his prosecutor’s practice the case of the death of Dyatlov group became the most mysterious. In 1959, Evgeniy Okishev was the Deputy Chief of the Investigation Department of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Sverdlovsk Region. This is what he remembers:

Interview with Okishev 2013

Interview with Okishev 2014


Sergey Yakovlevich Shkryabach

Interview with Shkryabach 2017

According to KP journalist Natalya Varsegova, Solovyov was at some point removed from the case. “Last year, his official representative Vladimir Markin resigned from the Investigative Committee - thanks to him, Komsomolskaya Pravda gets the conclusion [on the death of Dyatlov Group], which was written by another person - former investigator of the Investigation Committee Sergey Yakovlevich Shkryabach. We invited him to the editorial office - the conversation turned out to be difficult, because, as it seemed to me, he was not very familiar with the material. He is a mountaineer himself, with great experience, he has many ascents, and he is of the opinion that it was a snow slab (the main ambassador of this theory is St. Petersburg scientist and mountaineer Evgeniy Buyanov). ” “The conclusion is absurd and puts us at a dead end - says Natalya. - The IC would have made it public on television if Markin hadn’t resigned.” After that, the IC summoned all interested parties and said that the case would not be reopened and because they are officially bound to give an answer why - they base their answer on Shkryabach’s conclusion that main role in the death of Dyatlov Pass played an avalanche."
In the interview is mentioned avalanche, bad weather, panic, disorientation and hypothermia. The injuries of Dubinina, Tibo and Zolotaryov are explained with the choice of a bad spot for the den - on top of a grotto carved by the river which at some point collapsed underneath them and huge amount of snow fell on top of them.
Natalya Varsegova - "The fact that Shkryabach was retired from the IC at the time he wrote his conclusion hence didn't have the right to give an opinion was overlooked. Shkryabach's opinion could not be the official response of the IC. In theory, lawyer Proshkin, had all the opportunities at that time to demand an official response. For some reason he didn't act on it. Having assessed the whole situation, the KP came to the conclusion that it is impossible to achieve the truth in this way, the IC simply does not want to answer questions, even though it is obligated. So we did the documentary "Dyatlov Pass. The End of History?"

What happened next and why is everything so secretive?

Fruitless and unnecessary application repeating same path, getting same answer

In 2018 Dyatlov foundation hires the same lawyer, who has been working on this case with Komsomolskaya Pravda for almost 3 years. The fact that he didn't bring any results doesn't seem to matter. Attorney Proshkin files an application with the same Investigative Committee as in 2014. We don't know the text of the first request in 2014.
For the request in 2018 we can judge from the fund raising page for the balance of his payment.
"A loophole... in the regulations concerning reopening closed cases and with the aid of the descendants of Rustem Slobodin and Yuri Doroshenko... The path that will be taken to reopen the case is the rights of the victims to a comprehensive and objective investigation of the case for which there is no legal obstacle."
This is not what the Investigative Committee thinks about that. Here is the official response to that. Shkryabach all over again.
This is a text from the explanation given by Okishev to investigator Solovyov. You can see it in frame 1:22:40. Okishev clearly states that the investigation was pressured and they closed the case under duress from above. In principle, this only would be enough to reopen the criminal case. The Investigative Committee not only doesn't take this in consideration, but judging by the latest official response from 31 of August 2018 that lists at the bottom all previous unsuccessful claims to reopen the case: "Your complaints dated 21st November 2014 and 18th February 2015 were not officially registered or considered by the Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation", no such application was ever received hence no conversation between Solovyov and Okishev ever took place? We do not know whether Proshkin referred to Okishev in his appeal to the IC. There is a one document gets into the frame direct connection between Okishev and Solovyev, but it is no proof if Proshkin used Okishev testimony for grounds of his claim.
***
I have been rooting through Russians forums and there are many claims for the case to be reopened, usually in the form of collective letters sent through Kremlin site. To name a few:
– Request or open letter to the President of the RF (link to Russian forum) and the answer
– After the movie came out an official document shows in frame 1:22:33, a member of a Russian forum wrote a request to the IC for explaination on the basis was this official document created? As part of what is the official preliminary inquiry? And he received this answer - within the framework of the appeal of Komsomolskaya Pravda chief editor Sungorkin. This doesn't explain anything.
The point is that the answers always repeat Shkryabach.

Exhumation, the media charade

Something really sensational needs to happen in order for the claim to stand a chance. When the exhumation of the remains of Zolotaryov took place on 12 of April, 2018 I don't think anybody expected the media charade that followed, but at least something was happening. Komsomolskaya Pravda is on the look for a reason to reopen the case. From the interview with Shkryabach:
– In your opinion, should the case be reopened?
– No. To reopen a case one needs newly discovered specific circumstances. And we do not have that.
– What about exhumation?
– In this case, we can only see the nature of the fractures. And that's all. This procedure will lead to nothing more.
And it didn't, but we were put on a roller coaster to believe that this is not Zolotaryov. The bomb shell of the first DNA analysis was not overwritten by the second DNA showing a match. As of today, 7 of November 2018 Wikipedia still says "the DNA analysis did not reveal any similarity to the DNA of living relatives". No update on the second DNA analysis.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2018, 08:16:09 AM by Teddy »

November 08, 2018, 05:21:17 PM
Reply #1
Offline

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
Who needs an old moldy tent anyhow.....   yuck!    whacky1

All I have to say is.....  holy clusterfook.  These people can screw up an anvil with a rubber hammer.   
All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

November 09, 2018, 08:19:13 AM
Reply #2
Online

Teddy

Administrator
The rescuers drank the alcohol that was found in the tent before the investigator and prosecutor showed up. They toasted the welfare of their missing friends.
Not professional. We don't even know how much was this alcohol.

November 09, 2018, 01:59:22 PM
Reply #3
Offline

WAB


Teddy, I do not have time completely now, but the wrong information here contains.

The storage policy of the closed case files is that the documents can be disposed of 25 years after the case is closed. According to the memoirs of the former criminalist and judge Vladimir Ankudinov, the prosecutor of the Sverdlovsk region Vladislav Ivanovich Tuykov decided the case files not to be destroyed as “socially significant”.

Here there are 2 facts which are stated absolutely incorrectly. Only one small piece of the text which was brightly showed.
1.This file never was closed. At first it contained in the closed archive. When has passed time and excitements at people have calmed down, it have shifted in usual archive. For this purpose that the file would be closed, they should make the special decision and establish there a special signature stamp (mark). Such action was not accepted, therefore this file was not closed. In some years it have moved to usual archive. It is usual file of criminal case which was much.
2. Vladislav Tuykov has allowed the order to keep this file in 2010 Evgenie Buyanov who then has achieved the permission to work in archive has informed and has copied this business completely. Mr. Ankudinov to it has no relation because has appeared in discussion of this theme only in 2016. It speculates on the information which contains round these events much, but can tell nothing to the point. For example, when the rests have been found in flight expedition 2016 about a cedar from lighting (alarm) rockets which I launch it in the winter 2014, he in a current of half a year tried to prove to me that it is rockets of times WW II. I know it absolutely precisely because in 2010 was in Ekaterinburg when Evgenie Buyanov worked in archive, and have received the information on the decision of Tuykov from the manager of archive. Ankudinov has learnt about it only in 2016 at forum https://taina.li/ .

If it is information which has come to you from Galina Sazonova I to it will tell about it as soon as we can communicate. My E-mail on one of servers qip.ru where I had his address now does not work completely, therefore I cannot immediately inform she.

November 09, 2018, 02:09:43 PM
Reply #4
Online

Teddy

Administrator
The information about Tuykov is from the KP movie "Dyatlov Pass. End of story?"
If Galina wishes to comment she may do this, but please don't start a deep conversation on this particular detail.

November 09, 2018, 02:13:48 PM
Reply #5
Online

Teddy

Administrator
Also I don't know why are you saying that the case was never closed since it was. This is well known fact. If we start arguing even on this I am gonna hang myself. Can we agree on a single fact, any fact?

November 09, 2018, 04:10:16 PM
Reply #6
Offline

Vietnamka


WAB
Quote
.If it is information which has come to you from Galina Sazonova 
No. i know anything about Tuykov and never saw any evidence  of this story. It was the reasons why I recommend Teddy to add: "According to the memoirs of the former criminalist and judge Vladimir Ankudinov"

WAB
Quote
. file never was closed.
Teddy
Quote
.Also I don't know why are you saying that the case was never closed since it was. This is well known fact 
May by  "never closed" means "doesn't have stamp SECRET"?

November 10, 2018, 01:32:50 AM
Reply #7
Offline

WAB


Also I don't know why are you saying that the case was never closed since it was. This is well known fact.

It not is the fact, these are conversations that it would want that it there was a fact.

If we start arguing even on this I am gonna hang myself. Can we agree on a single fact, any fact?

We can argue. But only when it will be the fact, instead of is simple conversations about it

November 10, 2018, 01:38:38 AM
Reply #8
Offline

WAB


WAB
Quote
.If it is information which has come to you from Galina Sazonova 
No. i know anything about Tuykov and never saw any evidence  of this story.

It is strange reasoning. If business has remained, but under its law could destroy, it means has been kept specially. The surname of the one who has made it could to be known. If to you about it can tell a minimum 2 witnesses, as it is necessary to concern it?

It was the reasons why I recommend Teddy to add: "According to the memoirs of the former criminalist and judge Vladimir Ankudinov"

But same there is a lies. In this studying and so it is a lot of lies, on it also cannot understand it. Say lies not primary sources and researchers and witnesses in many years. Who that it who does specially, and that because of bad or disorder memory in many years.
When you start to understand with this information, awful absurd starts to appear. If not to penetrate into depth of thoughts that so it is possible to behave as an ostrich at a fright. Нead hide to sand.
You want to add here new lies, having confirmed next, as the fact.
Ankudinov has appeared in a theme only in 2016, and it events were in 2010. You read a forum pereval1959.forum24. There it has been written about it still in 2010. After we have arrived from conference. Evgenie Buyanov was wrote. If you did not read it, it is very sad.
I at all do not know as me to perceive Ankudinov after it inspired to me (парил мозги) about my rockets, declaring that it not I, but used them on searches.
Or you did not read it too?

WAB
Quote
. file never was closed.
-----------------------------
Teddy
Quote
.Also I don't know why are you saying that the case was never closed since it was. This is well known fact 
.....................................
May by  "never closed" means "doesn't have stamp SECRET"?

I can add: storage in confidential archive does not mean to be confidential. This restriction of access to the text. In the USA too it is impossible so simply receive criminal case within current of certain term. Let it is made by other methods, but the essence of the matter does not change it.

November 10, 2018, 01:21:57 PM
Reply #9
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Riddles and enigmas, thats what this Dyatlov Case as become. Iam sure that in many discussion groups around the World people are arguing this that and the other in an attempt to get at the truth of the matter.  Our task is made even harder because of the reluctance of the authorities to reopen this Dyatlov Case. And now we hear that the TENT, a crucial piece of evidence has been DUMPED IN A GARBAGE CONTAINER in the 1980's. What more incredulous stories await us. So the authorities kept the TENT all that time but because there was a water leak and it got mouldy they decided to DUMP it.  If this Dyatlov Case was under British Jurisdiction then I would like to think that it would have been reopened a very long time ago.
DB

November 10, 2018, 06:09:00 PM
Reply #10
Offline

Vietnamka


WAB
Quote
I can add: storage in confidential archive does not mean to be confidential. This restriction of access to the text. In the USA too it is impossible so simply receive criminal case within current of certain term. Let it is made by other methods, but the essence of the matter does not change it..

Ok, looks like we are talking about archive case, not criminal case. About conditions of storage and transferring documents from one archive to another one. Correct?
And this is very interesting and unclear questions till now.

November 12, 2018, 01:15:58 PM
Reply #11
Online

Teddy

Administrator
« Last Edit: November 12, 2018, 01:20:36 PM by Teddy »

November 13, 2018, 05:22:27 AM
Reply #12
Offline

WAB


WAB
Quote
I can add: storage in confidential archive does not mean to be confidential. This restriction of access to the text. In the USA too it is impossible so simply receive criminal case within current of certain term. Let it is made by other methods, but the essence of the matter does not change it..
=================================
Ok, looks like we are talking about archive case, not criminal case. About conditions of storage and transferring documents from one archive to another one. Correct?
And this is very interesting and unclear questions till now.

What & whom it is not clear in this process? It is possible to ask directly archive Sverdlovsk region. All data is at Evgeny Buyanov. It is possible ask hi directly.
I have such information:
1.Till certain time (audit in the closed archive) it lay there.
2.After that, it have sent in usual archive
3.When there was time of audit of all cases about storage continuation, Tuykov has allowed a command to keep this case as it represents public interest.
4.This case is stored in the state archive Sverdlovsk region. For acquaintance there give out a copy of case on demand of someone and with the permission of a management of Office Public Prosecutor region Sverdlovsk.
I in the separate periods received the information (separate fragments) from those who read and removed copies in this archive (Buyanov, special messenger (засланец) from Kuntsevich, according Koskin about early period of work with documents of this archive). As a result I had such history.

November 13, 2018, 05:24:23 AM
Reply #13
Offline

WAB


Sergey Shkryabach conclusion

I read it.
There it is a lot of discrepancies and copying of wrong statements of Evgenie Bujanova about avalanches which on correspond to that exists on a place of events. But access to it for discussion of these questions is in every possible way limited. Including from correspondents of the newspaper "Komsomolskaya Pravda". I addressed to Natalia Varsegova twice, but it has refused to me as different pretexts. Probably she considers that it is its exclusive possibility and she does not want to suppose other people there.
Probably I can be understood she as the journalist, who does not want share possibility to extract the information, but I cannot be approved she, because this is restriction of an easy approach to the information in general.

November 13, 2018, 05:45:55 PM
Reply #14
Offline

Vietnamka


WAB

Quote
What & whom it is not clear in this process?. 
For me. A lot of things. For example:
1) when did Ivanov write the Index (pp 1-3)? Before sending the case to Moscow or after that, but before sending it to archive?
2) for how many parts Ivanov divided the case, before sending to Archive? At least for  3 parts for different departments with different levels of security
3) each part was held in the 1st archive separately, that means at least 3 separate archiv's folders were formed.
Not by Ivanov, by archive's staff. Who had his own duty and responsibility, distinct from Ivanov's, for dozens of years. Even as Ivanov, Klimov and others left Prosecutors office.
4) the main part of case was transfered from 1st archive to the 2nd ( From archive of Prosecutors office to State Archive of Sverdlovskay oblast) and contains 387 pages.
 When have been added 5 more pages? If in 80xx  we can see that case start to contain 392 pages?
 When have been added 10 more pages??? If the case contains 402 pages finally?
Its mean that after transferring main part,  someone, time to time, found somewhere some pages, belonged  to our case, and added it to the "main part".
I have very simple questions. "Somewhere " - where? And are we sure that all "some pages" are found and added to the case? If "somewhere" means 1st Archive, it also means that different parts had different level of holding in accordance with the archive's Law. Not Ivanov's wishes. And the main reasons of differences - stamp of "secret". On the folder, not pages. We don't see any folders from the 1st archive.
Its where "official" questions.

I have "unofficial" questions too. And I know exactly nobody answer for its, neither you or Buyanov.
Do you want me to ask its too?

November 16, 2018, 12:04:20 PM
Reply #15
Offline

WAB


WAB

Quote
What & whom it is not clear in this process?. 
For me. A lot of things. For example:
1) when did Ivanov write the Index (pp 1-3)? Before sending the case to Moscow or after that, but before sending it to archive?

It be overlook now. I be say later.

2) for how many parts Ivanov divided the case, before sending to Archive? At least for  3 parts for different departments with different levels of security

It already work not to Ivanov. Clerks in corresponding archive are engaged in it. Division of parts of case occurs on degree of their privacy: standard files, files for office use, confidential files, top confidential files, top confidential files of special importance.
Other division in the Soviet closed office-work was not.
On files of radiological examination there was a signature stamp "confidentially". On what else other files there was any other signature stamp? + to that, there are instructions of chief-public prosecutor Klinov what files where it is necessary to place. What action still can be? Only it is not necessary to think out that is conspyrology. These are fiction, or no be instead of a reality.

3) each part was held in the 1st archive separately, that means at least 3 separate archiv's folders were formed.


What could it mean? If there is maintenance of the registration of documents, it should be observed. Exceptions from these rules were very seldom.

Not by Ivanov, by archive's staff. Who had his own duty and responsibility, distinct from Ivanov's, for dozens of years.
Even as Ivanov, Klimov and others left Prosecutors office.

I will repeat once again: Ivanov  do`t  things it , it made other people, which was engaged in these affairs:
a. Store documents in archive
And still absolutely other people, which:
b. Watch observance of norms of storage of confidential documents.
Change of degree privacy, and then and transfer to other archive depends on people.

4) the main part of case was transfered from 1st archive to the 2nd ( From archive of Prosecutors office to State Archive of Sverdlovskay oblast) and contains 387 pages.
 When have been added 5 more pages? If in 80xx  we can see that case start to contain 392 pages?

Here it should be found out in concrete archive. Because the business structure could include documents which concern only the storage, but are not structure of the case. Therefore can be both a decrease of such documents, and joining new in a new place of storage.

When have been added 10 more pages??? If the case contains 402 pages finally?

The answer contains in question. The answer: it was then when there were changes in storage. It is necessary understand subtleties of archival process.
But to that what has occurred to Dyatlov group, it has no relation.
You can long suspect archival clerks of murder of J. F.  Kennedy, they have crucified Jesus Christ, have arranged incident  with Dyatlov group, but all it here there is nothing.
It is necessary to be engaged in conditions on a place of the occurred incident. Only in it there is a key to answer.

Its mean that after transferring main part,  someone, time to time, found somewhere some pages, belonged  to our case, and added it to the "main part".
I have very simple questions. "Somewhere " - where? And are we sure that all "some pages" are found and added to the case? If "somewhere" means 1st Archive, it also means that different parts had different level of holding in accordance with the archive's Law. Not Ivanov's wishes. And the main reasons of differences - stamp of "secret". On the folder, not pages. We don't see any folders from the 1st archive.
 

What means “We don't see …”? Kuntsevich has get digital copies from originals of the case. You them saw and studied. If you personally did not see case (original) it does not mean that there that not as should be. On meeting of the government you too cannot go at own will but only if to you will resolve. Achieve the permission for original text in Office of Public Prosecutor or administration Sverdlovsk region and look at it how many want.
By the way, you do not suppose, what in the course of storage and use of this business as archival case single sheets can be lost, come to full worthlessness and etc.? And at transformation of separate parts of case from "closed" to "opened" there can be documents which it testify. Or you consider that all is eternally and has hardened?

Its where "official" questions.
I have "unofficial" questions too. And I know exactly nobody answer for its, neither you or Buyanov.

Some people have such questions that 100 wise men cannot answer them for 100 years. To you it is clear, on what I hint? grin1

Do you want me to ask its too?

And who to you disturbs? It does not allow you your religion?  grin1
If you no be assured that anybody never will answer the asked question it is a separate theme for psychology (not for psychiatry!).
What for you are engaged in this case if are assured, what to you anybody and never will answer the necessary question?

November 17, 2018, 06:22:54 PM
Reply #16
Offline

Vietnamka


WAB
Quote
.It already work not to Ivanov. Clerks in corresponding archive are engaged in it. 
And you can repeat it again
Quote
.I will repeat once again: Ivanov  do`t  things it , it made other people, which was engaged in these affairs:
a. Store documents in archive   
But for me more important to see documents which  contain Ivanov's resolution with clear recommendation how to storage different parts of case.
1) (Resolution)
comrade Y. I. Rogovoy
per directions from N.I. Klinov
the request to be kept in a secret archive,
keep the package in top secret proceedings.
11.VII.59 Ivanov (signature)
2)



hope is the thing with feathers analysis

"Clerks in corresponding archive" are NOT engaged in decision which pages are related to Dyatlov's case.

Quote
On files of radiological examination there was a signature stamp "confidentially". .
Can you show this stamp ?

Quote
.What means “We don't see …”? Kuntsevich has get digital copies from originals of the case.
He did the copies of the main part's  cover in the 2nd archive (State archive of Sverdlovsksy oblast), but he never saw the folders (contained another parts of case) in the 1st archive. Because (at least) this part were transferred long time before he start investigate Dyatlov's story at all.

Finally you are telling
Quote
. Change of degree privacy, and then and transfer to other archive 
But it mean what some parts of case have had "degree of privacy" should be changed. What about your earlier pronousment "case never been closed?" . Main part of the case may be not, but some parts of the case were.
The problem is that we don't know how many parts and which parts. It's exactly clear, that radiological expertise was in the "main part" at the moment of transferring from one archive to another. But 2 more parts were added much more later.

Quote
.What for you are engaged in this case if are assured, what to you anybody and never will answer the necessary question? 
Ok, 2 simple questions
1) WHO and WHEN has get the accesses to case in 1990xx and did the first copies ?
2) where the pp. 370, 375 now and how it happened that this pages are not in archive at least since 1996, but Fond shared copies of its?  twitch7



November 18, 2018, 05:32:01 AM
Reply #17
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
So we have it on RECORD that some if not all of the DOCUMENTS were CLASSIFIED as TOP SECRET  !  ?  How many criminal cases are ever CLASSIED as TOP SECRET  ! ?  Something is clearly not normal about the DYATLOV CASE.
DB

November 18, 2018, 07:51:27 PM
Reply #18
Offline

Vietnamka


So we have it on RECORD that some if not all of the DOCUMENTS were CLASSIFIED as TOP SECRET  !  ?  How many criminal cases are ever CLASSIED as TOP SECRET  ! ?  Something is clearly not normal about the DYATLOV CASE.
Yes, we have resolution to (at least) keep some documents in the "TOP SECRET" department.
Why Am i talking here about so boring things as stamps, resolution and archives? Because you can forget about any non criminal reasons. Even you can forget about some regular criminal Reasones.
"Top secret" level  can be provided in cases prosecuted for subversive activities against the security of the State.
Monopoly on violence. Max Weber.
And... follow the topic..." latest development " show us that may be this monopoly still present)))
We discussed with Teddy about possibilities to find some information not only in Russian archives.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2018, 07:57:38 PM by Vietnamka »

November 19, 2018, 06:31:45 PM
Reply #19
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
So there is plenty of work for us investigators to get on with. Searching new avenues of possibilities. Spreading the word and keeping this subject alive. And I suppose Russia is still capable of yielding some secrets.
DB

December 03, 2018, 02:04:35 AM
Reply #20
Offline

WAB



I have lost sight of this part of a forum and only today have seen it.

WAB
Quote
.It already work not to Ivanov. Clerks in corresponding archive are engaged in it. 
And you can repeat it again

Here that is not clear?  shock1
Ivanov has finished criminal case and has transferred it in the closed archive as it has been written. After that storage and moving of papers other people are engaged. If it store in confidential archive (only store but without a mark!) that on it does not operate a mode for work with confidential documents. But get it is possible only with permission of the big chief.


Quote
.I will repeat once again: Ivanov  do`t  things it , it made other people, which was engaged in these affairs:
a. Store documents in archive   
But for me more important to see documents which  contain Ivanov's resolution with clear recommendation how to storage different parts of case.
1) (Resolution)
comrade Y. I. Rogovoy
per directions from N.I. Klinov
the request to be kept in a secret archive,
keep the package in top secret proceedings.
11.VII.59 Ivanov (signature)
2)



hope is the thing with feathers analysis

"Clerks in corresponding archive" are NOT engaged in decision which pages are related to Dyatlov's case.

Galina, and here graceful literature Emily Dikinson? It how tell about galoshes of father?  grin1

Quote
On files of radiological examination there was a signature stamp "confidentially". .
Can you show this stamp ?

With pleasure!  grin1 Guess from three times: why in scans affairs are not present sheet # 370? This that sheet where there should be a mark about statement on privacy and down statement on privacy. It is not present not because wants that hide, most likely because after long moving on instances it have simply lost after mark removal. After … Because to lose sheet with mark it is possible to receive very big troubles. Even, if it is empty sheet with mark.
Even in the central libraries are lost (or them steal) sheets of rare books of world level. If exclude usual circumstances and before the world plot of green little men it is possible as far as reach.

Quote
.What means “We don't see …”? Kuntsevich has get digital copies from originals of the case.
He did the copies of the main part's  cover in the 2nd archive (State archive of Sverdlovsksy oblast), but he never saw the folders (contained another parts of case) in the 1st archive. Because (at least) this part were transferred long time before he start investigate Dyatlov's story at all.

If papers have transferred in other archive them transfer completely, except for those papers where there is a mark, which else operates at that time.
By the way, about what "cover" here there is a speech?

Finally you are telling
Quote
. Change of degree privacy, and then and transfer to other archive 
But it mean what some parts of case have had "degree of privacy" should be changed. What about your earlier pronousment "case never been closed?" . Main part of the case may be not, but some parts of the case were.

It is naturally. In the general case there can be separate parts which have mark. But, all case is not confidential.

The problem is that we don't know how many parts and which parts. It's exactly clear, that radiological expertise was in the "main part" at the moment of transferring from one archive to another. But 2 more parts were added much more later.

What these are 2 parts? I have not understood it.

Quote
.What for you are engaged in this case if are assured, what to you anybody and never will answer the necessary question? 
Ok, 2 simple questions
1) WHO and WHEN has get the accesses to case in 1990xx and did the first copies ?

As far as I know, the former wife Alex Koskin (Elena) worked in archive in the late eighties. There it has made some copies illegally. At me where that exists CD disk with set of the first copies of this documents. It copy exists very much not the full. On these copies Anna Matveeva write the book in 1999. There she mentions about Elena, only under other name.

2) where the pp. 370, 375 now and how it happened that this pages are not in archive at least since 1996, but Fond shared copies of its?  twitch7

I already wrote that most likely they are lost on usual circumstances (разгильдяйство).
You attentively looked material, which fund has received and has laid out at itself "library"?
In copies from fund of these sheets is not present. It is necessary look, whether there are they in those copies which have been received illegally in 80 and 90th years.

December 03, 2018, 06:59:52 AM
Reply #21
Offline

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
The entire case was secret from the start, and thats no secret. The case was eventually released, and we have what we have today.  I see no evidence an entirely different case or parts of the case were squirreled away separately, and if there were....  you wouldn't know about it to begin with. 
All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

December 03, 2018, 11:58:14 AM
Reply #22
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Exactly.  The Dyatlov Case was  CLOSED  soon after the last 4 bodies were found.  I dont think that there are many CRIMINAL CASES that would be CLOSED so soon  !  ?  And if there are SECRETS locked away somewhere then we are not being told about that. We have been fed some information in recent times but that doesnt mean that there isnt any more information somewhere.
DB