Theories Discussion > General Discussion
Medical exam
Teddy:
--- Quote from: Почемучка on December 10, 2022, 11:28:14 PM ---Возрожденный Б.А. указывает количество пуговиц, резинки, разрывы одежды, следы обгорания. Но при таких травмах и кровепотере - ни разу не указывает на пятна крови на одежде. С чего бы это?
Vozrozhdenniy indicates the number of buttons, elastic bands, tears in clothing, traces of burning. But with such injuries and blood loss, it never indicates blood stains on clothes. Why did it happen?
--- End quote ---
https://rg.ru/2013/04/16/reg-urfo/pereval.html
Анатолий Гущин:
Казалось бы, не так много фактов сообщила Чуркина в своем рассказе, а на самом деле говорят они о многом. Главное - кто и зачем транспортировал трупы? А что транспортировали, доказывается и другими материалами экспертиз. В уголовном деле не раз указывается, что на телах (почти на всех) были травмы, полученные как при жизни, так и после смерти. Как правило, это царапины. Как они могли появиться на мертвецах? Любопытен и другой момент: царапины были, а крови - нет! Тот же судмедэксперт Возрожденный при вскрытии трупов отмечал, что у некоторых имеются следы запекшейся крови в носу. Но почему только в носу? По мнению Чуркиной, трупы были обмыты, вот почему на них не было следов крови, хотя царапин на теле хватало. Правда, царапины эти уже имели вид корост, то есть начинали заживать. А если так, то есть основание полагать, что люди погибли не сразу, а спустя какое-то время после ЧП. Однако пищу при этом принимали одновременно - за 6-8 часов до смерти. При этом и погибнуть одновременно не могли, так как лишь трое имели серьезные травмы, остальные были целы, а раз так, то могли жить дольше.
Anatoly Gushchin:
It would seem that not many facts were reported by Churkina in her story, but in fact they say a lot. The main thing is who transported the corpses and why? And what was transported is also proved by other materials of examinations. In the criminal case, it is repeatedly indicated that the bodies (almost all of them) had injuries received both during life and after death. As a rule, these are scratches. How could they appear on the dead? Another point is also curious: there were scratches, but no blood! The same forensic expert Vozrozhdenniy, during the autopsy, noted that some had traces of gore in the nose. But why only in the nose? According to Churkina, the corpses were washed, which is why there were no traces of blood on them, although there were enough scratches on the body. True, these scratches already looked like scabs, that is, they began to heal. And if so, then there is reason to believe that people did not die immediately, but some time after the emergency. However, food was taken at the same time - 6-8 hours before death. At the same time, they could not die at the same time, since only three had serious injuries, the rest were intact, and if so, they could live longer.
Manti:
--- Quote from: GlennM on December 09, 2022, 07:55:25 PM ---Teddy, your contention is that when the survivors extracted themselves from the fallen tree, they used themselves up trying to free their trapped companions. I think that is clearly understandable.I can understand 4 of them going to the ravine to make a snow cave. I do not know why the other three surviving hikers started toward where the tent was found on 1079. To you think they wanted to get to the labaz? Why? They had supplies at their tent, although it was under the tree. They would do better by using branches and levering the fallen tree off their tent to get to their food. They probably did just that to free their injured comrades. For Igor to leave the immediate area and proceed uphill in poor conditions is difficult to understand. It seems that if they were going for help, it was not in that direction.
--- End quote ---
Hi GlennM,
It's been a while since I've read Teddy & Igor Pavlov's book but there is an explanation offered there about why Rustem, Zina, and Igor went uphill after the incident. I don't know if I should give spoilers. I remember feeling not entirely convinced at the time, and thinking that I can really only fathom the situation if I visit the Pass and look at the conditions there myself. In winter. Which I still haven't done..
Teddy:
Uphill is the only direction to look for help. They have seen the airplanes in the sky during their trek.
Manti:
Well, I was thinking that it depends on the amount of tree cover. How many evergreen trees there are as opposed to ones that shed all leaves in the winter. Are there any treeless "meadows"?
But even more importantly, maybe going uphill was the only way they could go. I have read that the snow was getting too deep in other directions. But then again, if the tent is in the forest, their skis are there so they could have put them on. But they didn't.. This is why I felt I'd really need to go there and see for myself. Because I have this feeling that it was possible to survive, for some of them, who were not crushed. But maybe I am wrong. Topic for another thread
Почемучка:
--- Quote from: Teddy on December 11, 2022, 02:06:12 AM ---
--- Quote from: Почемучка on December 10, 2022, 11:28:14 PM ---Возрожденный Б.А. указывает количество пуговиц, резинки, разрывы одежды, следы обгорания. Но при таких травмах и кровепотере - ни разу не указывает на пятна крови на одежде. С чего бы это?
Vozrozhdenniy indicates the number of buttons, elastic bands, tears in clothing, traces of burning. But with such injuries and blood loss, it never indicates blood stains on clothes. Why did it happen?
--- End quote ---
https://rg.ru/2013/04/16/reg-urfo/pereval.html
Анатолий Гущин:
Казалось бы, не так много фактов сообщила Чуркина в своем рассказе, а на самом деле говорят они о многом. Главное - кто и зачем транспортировал трупы? А что транспортировали, доказывается и другими материалами экспертиз. В уголовном деле не раз указывается, что на телах (почти на всех) были травмы, полученные как при жизни, так и после смерти. Как правило, это царапины. Как они могли появиться на мертвецах? Любопытен и другой момент: царапины были, а крови - нет! Тот же судмедэксперт Возрожденный при вскрытии трупов отмечал, что у некоторых имеются следы запекшейся крови в носу. Но почему только в носу? По мнению Чуркиной, трупы были обмыты, вот почему на них не было следов крови, хотя царапин на теле хватало. Правда, царапины эти уже имели вид корост, то есть начинали заживать. А если так, то есть основание полагать, что люди погибли не сразу, а спустя какое-то время после ЧП. Однако пищу при этом принимали одновременно - за 6-8 часов до смерти. При этом и погибнуть одновременно не могли, так как лишь трое имели серьезные травмы, остальные были целы, а раз так, то могли жить дольше.
Anatoly Gushchin:
It would seem that not many facts were reported by Churkina in her story, but in fact they say a lot. The main thing is who transported the corpses and why? And what was transported is also proved by other materials of examinations. In the criminal case, it is repeatedly indicated that the bodies (almost all of them) had injuries received both during life and after death. As a rule, these are scratches. How could they appear on the dead? Another point is also curious: there were scratches, but no blood! The same forensic expert Vozrozhdenniy, during the autopsy, noted that some had traces of gore in the nose. But why only in the nose? According to Churkina, the corpses were washed, which is why there were no traces of blood on them, although there were enough scratches on the body. True, these scratches already looked like scabs, that is, they began to heal. And if so, then there is reason to believe that people did not die immediately, but some time after the emergency. However, food was taken at the same time - 6-8 hours before death. At the same time, they could not die at the same time, since only three had serious injuries, the rest were intact, and if so, they could live longer.
--- End quote ---
Теодора, имеет смысл сравнить - что писал А.Гущин при жизни Чуркиной и что стал страшным образом сочинять после её смерти.
При жизни Чуркиной, когда Генриетта Елисеевна читала его писанину, потому что он обязан знакомить с тем как он перенес интервью на бумагу:
А. ГУЩИН О ЧЕМ МОЛЧИТ ОТОРТЕН «Уральский рабочий» 3.03.1999 г.
Вот статья на которую ссылается А.Гущин, повествуя что он с её содержанием знакомил Чуркину.
Анатолий ГУЩИН "ЦЕНА ГОСТАЙНЫ - ДЕВЯТЬ ЖИЗНЕЙ?" глава "Страшная, неодолимая сила"
Екатеринбург, 1999 г. - 143 стр., 3 тыс. экз.
Вот что он уже пишет в 2006 году
https://www.svoboda.org/a/130889.html
А это повествование 2013 года
https://rg.ru/2013/04/16/reg-urfo/pereval.html
Theodora, it makes sense to compare - what A. Gushchin wrote during the life of Churkina and what he began to compose in a terrible way after her death.
During the life of Churkina, when Henrietta Eliseevna read his writings, because he is obliged to acquaint him with how he transferred the interview to paper:
A. GUSCHIN WHAT OTORTEN IS SILENT ABOUT "Ural worker" 03.03.1999
Here is an article to which A. Gushchin refers, telling that he introduced Churkina to its content.
Anatoly GUSHCHIN "PRICE OF GOSTAINE - NINE LIVES?" chapter "Terrible, irresistible force"
Yekaterinburg, 1999 - 143 pages, 3 thousand copies.
Here is what he already writes in 2006
This story is from 2013
As they say - find at least 10 differences...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
И самое главное, на что я хотела обратить внимание этим постом.
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=1185.msg19115#msg19115
Я говорила о загрязнении одежды, в которой были найдены тела. Загрязнения должны быть и от крови/ран, от смолы хвойников.
Но этого - нет ни в одном из Актов СМИ.
And most importantly, what I wanted to draw attention to with this post.
I spoke about the contamination of the clothes in which the bodies were found. Pollution should also be from blood / wounds, from the resin of conifers.
But this is not in any of the Media Acts.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version