Theories Discussion > Murdered
A problem with homicide theories
RMK:
To me, the essential mystery of the Dyatlov Pass Incident (DPI) is the lack of satisfactory answers to 3 crucial Questions:
* Why did the Dyatlov hikers exit their tent, with mostly inadequate clothing and footwear for the Siberian winter?
* Having exited their tent under-dressed, why did the Dyatlov hikers descend the slope, moving away from their tent, and leaving behind useful tools?
* Having descended the slope, why did the Dyatlov hikers not return to their tent?
N.B. all three Questions do not necessarily need to have the same answer! In particular, regardless of what the answer(s) to Questions 1 & 2 might be, the answer to Question 3 could easily be "by the time any of them tried to return to their campsite, they were too cold and fatigued to go uphill, against the wind, without boots."
However, all of the DPI homicide theories I have encountered propose that the answer to Questions 1 & 2 (and usually, 3 as well) is "the threat of lethal force from human assailants." I am currently convinced that IF the DPI was a result of homicide, then the assailants were intelligent, trained, professional killers who knew what they were doing, and wanted to make the Dyatlov team's deaths appear as natural as possible. And that brings me to the problem I have with homicide theories: if the killers were so smart and effective, then why didn't they do something about the "elephant in the room"--the complete lack of any apparent reason why the Dyatlov team left their tent under-dressed and then abandoned it by descending Kholat Syakhl?! In other words, why didn't they stage or plant physical "evidence" that would provide credible answers to Questions 1 & 2 (and maybe even 3 as well)?
For instance, they could have buried the tent and its immediate vicinity in snow. Then, the investigation could have concluded that the Dyatlov company barely escaped a mini-avalanche, which crushed their tent, and then it was only a matter of time before the elements and various misadventures claimed their lives. Or, perhaps more plausibly, the assailants could have set the tent on fire. They could have staged some sort of accident in which, apparently, one of the hikers spilled 100-proof vodka (accelerant) on dry clothes or blankets (fuel); the apparent ignition source could come from a lit flashlight that someone dropped and its bulb shattered, or from a lit cigarette that one of the guys dropped while sneaking a midnight smoke.
In summary, my point here is that, if the DPI was a result of homicide, then why didn't the presumably smart and capable attackers fabricate some explanation for the hikers' near-suicidal collective decision to exit their tent and abandon their campsite without gear necessary for survival? If the attackers HAD done that, maybe we wouldn't be discussing the DPI more than 60 years later.
sarapuk:
--- Quote from: RMK on November 28, 2020, 03:47:56 PM ---To me, the essential mystery of the Dyatlov Pass Incident (DPI) is the lack of satisfactory answers to 3 crucial Questions:
* Why did the Dyatlov hikers exit their tent, with mostly inadequate clothing and footwear for the Siberian winter?
* Having exited their tent under-dressed, why did the Dyatlov hikers descend the slope, moving away from their tent, and leaving behind useful tools?
* Having descended the slope, why did the Dyatlov hikers not return to their tent?
N.B. all three Questions do not necessarily need to have the same answer! In particular, regardless of what the answer(s) to Questions 1 & 2 might be, the answer to Question 3 could easily be "by the time any of them tried to return to their campsite, they were too cold and fatigued to go uphill, against the wind, without boots."
However, all of the DPI homicide theories I have encountered propose that the answer to Questions 1 & 2 (and usually, 3 as well) is "the threat of lethal force from human assailants." I am currently convinced that IF the DPI was a result of homicide, then the assailants were intelligent, trained, professional killers who knew what they were doing, and wanted to make the Dyatlov team's deaths appear as natural as possible. And that brings me to the problem I have with homicide theories: if the killers were so smart and effective, then why didn't they do something about the "elephant in the room"--the complete lack of any apparent reason why the Dyatlov team left their tent under-dressed and then abandoned it by descending Kholat Syakhl?! In other words, why didn't they stage or plant physical "evidence" that would provide credible answers to Questions 1 & 2 (and maybe even 3 as well)?
For instance, they could have buried the tent and its immediate vicinity in snow. Then, the investigation could have concluded that the Dyatlov company barely escaped a mini-avalanche, which crushed their tent, and then it was only a matter of time before the elements and various misadventures claimed their lives. Or, perhaps more plausibly, the assailants could have set the tent on fire. They could have staged some sort of accident in which, apparently, one of the hikers spilled 100-proof vodka (accelerant) on dry clothes or blankets (fuel); the apparent ignition source could come from a lit flashlight that someone dropped and its bulb shattered, or from a lit cigarette that one of the guys dropped while sneaking a midnight smoke.
In summary, my point here is that, if the DPI was a result of homicide, then why didn't the presumably smart and capable attackers fabricate some explanation for the hikers' near-suicidal collective decision to exit their tent and abandon their campsite without gear necessary for survival? If the attackers HAD done that, maybe we wouldn't be discussing the DPI more than 60 years later.
--- End quote ---
Well obviously there is no proof that the Dyatlov Incident was due to homicide. There are no indications of the presence of other people in the area. No footprints. Nothing to really suggest that other people were involved.
Per Inge Oestmoen:
--- Quote from: sarapuk on November 28, 2020, 04:35:16 PM ---Well obviously there is no proof that the Dyatlov Incident was due to homicide. There are no indications of the presence of other people in the area. No footprints. Nothing to really suggest that other people were involved.
--- End quote ---
Everything we know points to homicide. The injuries to the bodies are only explicable by being caused by an attack with lethal intent, by other humans.
The murder of the nine took place on February 1. The bodies were not found by the official search and rescue teams until February 26. Considering the fact that the attackers almost certainly arrived on skis an that the first searchers did not understand that they had arrived at a crime scene, it was a matter of course that no traces of the attackers were found.
There is more to say:
Significantly, the local police in Ivdel and the relatives of the nine students did not realize that something was wrong until February 12. Still, investigative actions had already been made on February 6. These investigative actions would most likely have been preceded by preparatory meetings. Thus, indications are that the authorities knew about the death of the nine long before anyone in Ivdel or Sverdlovsk had any reason to believe that something terrible had happened.
RMK:
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on December 01, 2020, 09:21:02 AM ---Everything we know points to homicide. The injuries to the bodies are only explicable by being caused by an attack with lethal intent, by other humans.
--- End quote ---
That is an overstatement. Homicide theories are certainly worth considering, and I place some of them among the most credible explanations. But most, maybe even all, of the injuries the "Dyatlovites" sustained can be attributed to misadventures, and to "routine wear-and-tear" that people would normally sustain when skiing cross-country, scrounging for firewood in bare hands in the dark, etc.
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on December 01, 2020, 09:21:02 AM ---Considering the fact that the attackers almost certainly arrived on skis an that the first searchers did not understand that they had arrived at a crime scene, it was a matter of course that no traces of the attackers were found.
--- End quote ---
I actually agree with you there. The lack of attackers' traces is to be expected if the attackers are professional assassins. But, it is merely a rebuttal to an objection to homicide theories, and I think we would both have to concede that it is not a very persuasive argument in favor of homicide.
So, to bring this back to the topic of the thread... Per Inge, why was it that the killers didn't fabricate some reason for the Dyatlovites to abandon their tent?
sarapuk:
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on December 01, 2020, 09:21:02 AM ---
--- Quote from: sarapuk on November 28, 2020, 04:35:16 PM ---Well obviously there is no proof that the Dyatlov Incident was due to homicide. There are no indications of the presence of other people in the area. No footprints. Nothing to really suggest that other people were involved.
--- End quote ---
Everything we know points to homicide. The injuries to the bodies are only explicable by being caused by an attack with lethal intent, by other humans.
The murder of the nine took place on February 1. The bodies were not found by the official search and rescue teams until February 26. Considering the fact that the attackers almost certainly arrived on skis an that the first searchers did not understand that they had arrived at a crime scene, it was a matter of course that no traces of the attackers were found.
There is more to say:
Significantly, the local police in Ivdel and the relatives of the nine students did not realize that something was wrong until February 12. Still, investigative actions had already been made on February 6. These investigative actions would most likely have been preceded by preparatory meetings. Thus, indications are that the authorities knew about the death of the nine long before anyone in Ivdel or Sverdlovsk had any reason to believe that something terrible had happened.
--- End quote ---
Other Humans ! ? No proof. No footprints. Also the fact that the Event takes place at several locations, ie. The Tent, The Cedar Tree, The Ravine.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version