Dyatlov Pass Forum

Theories Discussion => Murdered => Topic started by: RMK on November 28, 2020, 03:47:56 PM

Title: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: 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:

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.
Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: sarapuk on November 28, 2020, 04:35:16 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.

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.
Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on December 01, 2020, 09:21:02 AM
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.


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.
Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: RMK on December 01, 2020, 04:48:40 PM
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.
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.

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.
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?

Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: sarapuk on December 02, 2020, 12:59:47 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.


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.

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.
Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: sarapuk on December 02, 2020, 01:01:48 PM
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.
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.

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.
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?

No proof that any other Humans arrived at The Tent by Skis or walking.
Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: RMK on December 02, 2020, 02:27:23 PM
No proof that any other Humans arrived at The Tent by Skis or walking.
Well, true, there's no "smoking gun".  But that's a problem with homicide theories different from the one this thread is about.
Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: mk on December 03, 2020, 06:34:13 PM
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)?...

I dunno-- it seems like the most obvious way to make it look like a natural death in siberia would be to make sure they died of hypothermia.  Force the poorly-dressed campers into the forest and douse them in water. All this talk of highly-trained killing men with their specialized techniques seems so... Hollywood. 

For example, if the theoretical killers had simply suffocated the hikers and left their bodies in the woods, how would that have played out differently?  Frozen bodies would have been found and the assumption would have been death of hypothermia--just like now.  Autopsies would have been done and some anomalies found that indicated foul play--just like now.  And people would have shrugged and said something like, "Well, they were probably near-unconscious from the cold and fell into the snow and suffocated as they froze." 

If their injuries were the result of malevolent humans, it strikes me that the killers were rather unconcerned about making things look natural.  Flail chests aren't exactly natural.

Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
Post by: Jean Daniel Reuss on December 04, 2020, 07:50:43 AM

Reply #5........
........................
No proof that any other Humans arrived at The Tent by Skis or walking.

   Of course there is no proof ! And there will probably never be any.
To solve an enigma, whatever its playful or police nature, it is necessary to call on all human mental faculties to imagine one or more solutions that are capable of explaining all the known facts.

And it is likely that the state secret about DPI will last a very long time, because according to French political experts (but they are often wrong), currently in 2020, President Putin is determined not to reveal anything that could alter the reputation of previous regimes of the USSR (Stalin, Khrushchev ...) and even the reputation of the tsarist regime (Nicolas II ...) !!

...At least 4 questions arise  :  WHY...

    • 1..hikers exit their tent....?
    • 2..hikers descend the slope....?
    • 3..hikers do not return to their tent....?
    • 4..the cause of death of the hikers does not seem natural....?
    ...............................................

         
    - 1 - Why did the Dyatlov hikers exit their tent, with mostly inadequate clothing and footwear for the Siberian winter?

      •  Which is the most difficult to reconstruct is the sudden and hurried exit from the tent without the short-handled axes that were inside.
    Threats, e.g. with a firearm, would have warned the hikers of a danger and they would not have left the tent with their bare hands in order to defend themselves and eventually counterattack.
    This is a remark first raised by alecsandros : Altercation on the pass > Altercation on the pass  -->Reply #32
    https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=411.msg9765#msg9765


      • Hypothesis N°1 :   By surprise the attackers made the atmosphere inside the tent unbreathable in a few tens of seconds.
    It should be noted that the volume of air inside the tent is small, less than 5 m³, which makes this hypothesis N°1 particularly efficient.
    The attackers (perhaps only three) triggered their first offensive just after the stove assembly was completed and the "battle sheet" "Evening otorten No. 1" was written, but before the hikers had time to fire the wood in the stove. Several possibilities :

       a) The attackers put a tear gas or a suffocating gas hand grenedade coming from the stocks of the army, the police, the guarding of the Gulag camps or bought illegally on the black market.

       b) The attackers used an Improvised Suffocating Device, for instance :  2.KNO³ + 4.S --> 3.SO² + N² + K²S or 2.KClO³ + 3.S --> 3.SO² + 2.KCl
    KNO³, KClO³ and S are very common products that could easily be bought in the Ivdel drugstore.

      c) According to the more enigmatic of Anatoly Stepochkin the attackers launched "some kind of dope inside" the tent.   See :
    https://dyatlovpass.com/dmitriy-borisov-2019-02-12


      • Hypothesis N°2 : The exit of the tent without the axes can be explained by cunning (trickery, deception, false flag...).
    The attackers won the hikers' trust and recognition (during the first few minutes) with many kind and compassionate words.

    A famous example of a ruse to succeed in killing a victim on his guard is the murder of Leon Trotsky by Ramon mercader, who for several months managed to convince Trosky of his  deep friendship (in order to be in a position to hit him mortally with a short-handled ice axe).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ram%C3%B3n_Mercader

     To render this hypothesis N°2  more concretely here is an additional imaginary short tale whose spirit must be retained and not the letter.

    In the tent on the slope of the Kholat Syakl, in the darkness, on February 1, 1959, around 8 pm, unexpectedly the 9 hikers heard... the leader of the (probably only 3) attackers - who was a good comedian - who shouted in a firm but almost panicky voice :

     - Sorry to bother you here.
     - You do not know me, but I am the general in charge of missile tests in the Sverdlovsk region...
    ( or Ivdel ...or xxx base ...there, to be more credible, the false and misleading speech can add some details about the current state of Soviet military technology in 1959. These are precisions or details which are certainly known by any student of the UPI.


    ( It is the "art" of deception (cheating) to incorporate exact details known to the person you want to fool (deceive) into the main important lie).

     - The place where you set up your tent three hours ago must be cleared immediately.

     - We have lost control of an experimental missile (here indication of a model that might be known to hikers) and I personally rush to warn you :

     - I have just learned that the latest prediction calculations indicate that the mad explosive projectile will fall exactly where your tent is. Luckily we succeeded in finding you so that we could warn you in time!

     - Hurry! Hurry! We  must all leave immediately, otherwise death is assured. Let us all go down quickly in the taiga where there is almost no wind. It is very close.
    (close ! : a little lie that goes unnoticed despite the fact that Dyatlov knew his position on the slope).

    After hearing these friendly words, the hikers feel grateful to these new friends who come running in the bad weather and the darkness to save their lives.

    So the 9 hickers leaved the tent immediately, (so to speak instinctively, because in case of unforeseen danger we have to react quickly), thinking that they will be able to go back in a few minutes.

    It is here that it is useful to read Vietnamka   : General Discussion / Clothes => « on: March 26, 2019, 09:35:48 AM »
        https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=396.msg4583#msg4583

        "...Acute phase of stress.
        At this moment, in the cerebral cortex is formed a center of dominant arousal, all human mental activity is directed towards one thing - to get out from under the influence, to weaken its effect, to cope.
        If the house is on fire - people jump out in shorts and do not think that they will be cold. If there is a child in the house, the mother in the nightgown will run around the house and scream, not realizing how she looks and that she is cold.
        This is always accompanied by changes in the endocrine function (adrenaline is released) and the autonomic nervous system (the pupils dilate or contract, the heart begins to beat, the pressure rises, etc.).
             It is a fact that all these reactions are also protective against cold - heat production increases and a person not only may not feel cold, but may be feel hot.
        ............"


    And thus all the 12 (3 attackers + 9 hikers) people started to descend along the line of greatest slope without undue haste (a military expression indicating that awareness of danger does not imply panic).


       
    - 2 -   Having exited their tent under-dressed, why did the Dyatlov hikers descend the slope, moving away from their tent...

      • The snow-covered ground was slippery but quite hard. There was a slight downhill slope without deep holes.
    For the first few minutes the hikers were not weakened by the intense cold. The hikers were sporty, young, agile and trained.
    They had an excellent sense of balance and even if they stumbled on a slippery obstacle they got up immediately.
    So I think the trip from the cedar tent (1500m) in complete darkness took less than 10 minutes (contrary to recent other opinions, look at GKM, WAB....).
           During this time the hikers could not calmly think about their strange situation.

      •  The attackers accompanied the hikers towards the cedar by making them believe that they were going to help them, or,

      •  on the contrary,  threatening them and starting to hit them.
        The attackers compelled the hikers to go down the slope by hitting them with blunt wooden objects judiciously carved (length=110 cm and weight=4 kg being held with two hand.
        If the attackers were strong it is probably enough to use 70 cm and 1.5 kg being held with one hands.
        In each case the energy of a blow can reach several hundred joules.

      • 300 m before reaching the cedar, the attackers disappeared in the night and the hikers found themselves alone.



       
    - 3 - Having descended the slope, why did the Dyatlov hikers not return to their tent ?

      • It is there at the foot of the cedar that the hikers were fully aware that they had been fooled by the attackers
    So a discussion begins and the separation of the 9 hikers into 2 groups occurs.
    ( Another senario is possible in which Kolmogorova, then Slobodin, have already been put out of action on the slope and lie unconscious in the 2 places where their bodies were found. In this case there are only 7 hikers remaining at the foot of the cedar).

      • Climbing up to find the tent was difficult in complete darkness: there was a great risk of passing within a few meters (e.g. 10 meters) of the tent without seeing it. And then there were no landmarks afterwards.
             You do not know where to search anymore: Where to go ? climbing up ? Going down ? Going left ? Going right ?

      • Zolotaryov (the oldest ...), Kolevatov (sojourn at Moscow ...), Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle (repression of his father Vladimir Iosifovich ...) are the most aware of the internal political situation of the USSR and think that the mysterious attackers are determined and really dangerous for their live .
     Zolotaryov, Kolevatov and Thibeaux-Brignolle therefore decide to go into hiding as best they can a little further away by building the Den and also persuade Dubinina to accompany them (for a reason which remains to be clarified).
     
      • On the contrary, Dyatlov, Doroshenko and Krivonishenko (the least politically aware) believed that the strange attackers were simply thieves who would leave after taking away the contents of the tent.
    It was useless to try to go back up and risk receiving a knife wound.
    So much for the hike, which was ruined. It would be relatively easy to go back through the nearby Labaz (full of food) and afterwards return safely to the Settlement 41.
    The most important thing to do immediatly is not to freeze to death and they choose in priority to light a fire.

      • But when the attackers resumed their offensive around midnight at the foot of the cedar ................
          ...............to be continued at : Altercation on the pass > Altercation on the pass.



    - 4 - the assailants were intelligent ...... and wanted to make the Dyatlov team's deaths appear as natural as possible

     • Deaths appear as natural as possible ==> On the contrary, the aim of the assailants was to make Khrushchev's government in Moscow understand perfectly that the massacre of the 9 hikers was a ferocious terrorist attack.

      • Assailants ==> Not necessarily very intelligent. The assailants knew above all how to hit hard with blunt objects (possibly wrapped in cloths) and judiciously adapted to be effectively grasped by the hands (important practical detail to use blunt objects as weapons).

     •   It should also be understood that the attackers were armed with rudimentary blunt objects and were also few in number. Probably only 3 mercenaries had been sent to the slope of the Kholat Syakhl by a rich commander, client, boss, sponsor... who had remained in Vizhay, (See also Aleks Kandr).

    That is why I should logically write my posts in the Topic : Altercation on the pass and not in the Topic : Murdered.

    So to speak, the movements of the Stalinists opposed to the Khrushchev Thaw were in the throes of a rout in 1959. (The Stalinist opposition of the former NKVD officer regained strength only with the coming to power of Brezhnev in 1964).

      • Look also at : Infra-sound/Gravity fluctuation/Teleportation => Infrasound? Most unlikely -> December 02,2020, 02:13:51 PM : Reply #105
    https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=116.msg11320#msg11320[/list]
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: sarapuk on December 04, 2020, 01:41:42 PM
    Jean Daniel Reuss, you keep constantly reminding us of your theory. But you have provided no evidence or a realistic scenario. The injuries are of an unknown origin. A person dropped from an height could suffer such injuries. But that still wouldnt explain the missing eyes and tongue. No footprints other than those of the Dyatlov Group.  You state and I quote ;
       ''Of course there is no proof ! And there will probably never be any.
    To solve an enigma, whatever its playful or police nature, it is necessary to call on all human mental faculties to imagine one or more solutions that are capable of explaining all the known facts.''
    Isnt that a contradiction to say that there will probably never be any proof when you are trying to conjure up some proof with your theory. Also the way Detectives go about their work is not by imagining things its by constructing a case from material and facts.
     
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: RMK on December 10, 2020, 04:20:43 PM
    Let me try to get this thread back to its topic.  If the DPI was really homicide, but the killers wanted to make it not look like homicide, why didn't they stage or fabricate some non-homicide reason why the hikers exited their tent and subsequently abandoned it?  For example, why didn't the killers manipulate the campsite to make it look like a tent fire or a small avalanche had occurred?
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Star man on December 11, 2020, 07:21:32 AM
    Good point.  I would like to know the answer to that question.

    Regards

    Star man
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: mk on December 11, 2020, 07:29:30 AM
    Lets take it back a step.  Why do we think the murderers wanted to make it look "natural"?  As far as I can tell, we get that because there seem to be many easier & quicker ways of killing people.  (They weren't shot or stabbed, for example.)  But there is very little about their actual injuries that looks natural. Additionally, as you point out, no effort was made to provide an excuse for their injuries, or for their leaving the tent.  According to this theory, someone went to great trouble to cover up their own presence at the site, but no trouble at all to provide plausible excuses for the hikers leaving the tent or sustaining such injuries.

    It looks to me, then, if this was the case, that the killers were only concerned with a very superficial "fooling" of the public.  KGB killers had to have known that autopsies would be done--and that the injuries of the hikers would be suspicious.  This implies that the killers felt responsible for not leaving any screamingly obvious signs of their own presence, but were relying on officials to make sure everything was properly swept under the rug in the end.

    And, perhaps, that was done.

    Personally, I am unconvinced by this theory.  Partly because of what I posted earlier about simpler ways of killing people, but also because of the responses of the families at the time.

    I feel that the families' responses are usually a good guess when it comes to things like this.  Guesses, yes.  But they have intimate knowledge of the personalities of the hikers, as well as what to expect from the culture and the government. KGB Killers were quite well known to exist.  It was known that the government could make people disappear.  But the families seem much more concerned with the possibility of weapons testing.  While not a definitive answer, in my opinion, this lends a bit of weight to that theory.

    While the families didn't have access to the specifications of the tragedy in the same way we do, they had the advantage of living at the same time, in the same place, and knowing the people involved.  This can be very important when it comes to understanding why people behave in curious ways.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: sarapuk on December 11, 2020, 11:51:48 AM
    Let me try to get this thread back to its topic.  If the DPI was really homicide, but the killers wanted to make it not look like homicide, why didn't they stage or fabricate some non-homicide reason why the hikers exited their tent and subsequently abandoned it?  For example, why didn't the killers manipulate the campsite to make it look like a tent fire or a small avalanche had occurred?

    Yes thats what has been put a few times in this Forum. Why didnt any alleged killers do more to make it look like an accident. For the same reason that they left no footprints, or other traces. There were no human killers.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: sarapuk on December 11, 2020, 11:53:10 AM
    Good point.  I would like to know the answer to that question.

    Regards

    Star man

    The answer is simple. There were no human killers. No footprints. No traces of any kind.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: sarapuk on December 11, 2020, 11:58:23 AM
    Lets take it back a step.  Why do we think the murderers wanted to make it look "natural"?  As far as I can tell, we get that because there seem to be many easier & quicker ways of killing people.  (They weren't shot or stabbed, for example.)  But there is very little about their actual injuries that looks natural. Additionally, as you point out, no effort was made to provide an excuse for their injuries, or for their leaving the tent.  According to this theory, someone went to great trouble to cover up their own presence at the site, but no trouble at all to provide plausible excuses for the hikers leaving the tent or sustaining such injuries.

    It looks to me, then, if this was the case, that the killers were only concerned with a very superficial "fooling" of the public.  KGB killers had to have known that autopsies would be done--and that the injuries of the hikers would be suspicious.  This implies that the killers felt responsible for not leaving any screamingly obvious signs of their own presence, but were relying on officials to make sure everything was properly swept under the rug in the end.

    And, perhaps, that was done.

    Personally, I am unconvinced by this theory.  Partly because of what I posted earlier about simpler ways of killing people, but also because of the responses of the families at the time.

    I feel that the families' responses are usually a good guess when it comes to things like this.  Guesses, yes.  But they have intimate knowledge of the personalities of the hikers, as well as what to expect from the culture and the government. KGB Killers were quite well known to exist.  It was known that the government could make people disappear.  But the families seem much more concerned with the possibility of weapons testing.  While not a definitive answer, in my opinion, this lends a bit of weight to that theory.

    While the families didn't have access to the specifications of the tragedy in the same way we do, they had the advantage of living at the same time, in the same place, and knowing the people involved.  This can be very important when it comes to understanding why people behave in curious ways.

    KGB  !  ?  The KGB did not have anything to do with the demise of the Dyatlov Group. Of course the KGB were good but not perfect, no one is. Not even they could cover their tracks and leave no traces in the conditions that existed on that Mountainside. And of course why would they want to kill all of the Dyatlov Group, it doesnt make sense. The Dyatlov Group were all good Communists.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Star man on December 11, 2020, 03:14:54 PM
    Lets take it back a step.  Why do we think the murderers wanted to make it look "natural"?  As far as I can tell, we get that because there seem to be many easier & quicker ways of killing people.  (They weren't shot or stabbed, for example.)  But there is very little about their actual injuries that looks natural. Additionally, as you point out, no effort was made to provide an excuse for their injuries, or for their leaving the tent.  According to this theory, someone went to great trouble to cover up their own presence at the site, but no trouble at all to provide plausible excuses for the hikers leaving the tent or sustaining such injuries.

    It looks to me, then, if this was the case, that the killers were only concerned with a very superficial "fooling" of the public.  KGB killers had to have known that autopsies would be done--and that the injuries of the hikers would be suspicious.  This implies that the killers felt responsible for not leaving any screamingly obvious signs of their own presence, but were relying on officials to make sure everything was properly swept under the rug in the end.

    And, perhaps, that was done.

    Personally, I am unconvinced by this theory.  Partly because of what I posted earlier about simpler ways of killing people, but also because of the responses of the families at the time.

    I feel that the families' responses are usually a good guess when it comes to things like this.  Guesses, yes.  But they have intimate knowledge of the personalities of the hikers, as well as what to expect from the culture and the government. KGB Killers were quite well known to exist.  It was known that the government could make people disappear.  But the families seem much more concerned with the possibility of weapons testing.  While not a definitive answer, in my opinion, this lends a bit of weight to that theory.

    While the families didn't have access to the specifications of the tragedy in the same way we do, they had the advantage of living at the same time, in the same place, and knowing the people involved.  This can be very important when it comes to understanding why people behave in curious ways.

    A weapon test is a good candidate I think.  Particularly a low yield neutron device.  This was one of my first thoughts after reading the case files.  I have considered most of the theories and this scores highly I think.  At the time a moratorium on testing had been signed (1958).  The East was lagging behind in the development of these weapons, so secret tests, away from the usual test sites would provide an opportunity to close the gap.  Select an isolated location, where nobody goes and where there is little game or livestock to raise suspicion.  "Dead Mountain" sounds ideal?  Undertake the test at night so nobody  can see the mushroom cloud before it disperses.

    If the hikers were exposed to the deadly radiation they would have deteriorated fast,  within an hour or two, their bodies would begin to shut down, including their cognitive ability.  It would explain alot about the tent and its condition and why they left poorly dressed.  They may have felt like they were burning up.  The strange skin tone can be caused by exposure.  Traces of radiation on the clothes.  If you are interested in this idea, look up acute radiation exposure on Wikipedia.  Its interesting.

    Regards

    Star man
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: mk on December 12, 2020, 06:17:48 PM
    KGB  !  ?  The KGB did not have anything to do with the demise of the Dyatlov Group. Of course the KGB were good but not perfect, no one is. Not even they could cover their tracks and leave no traces in the conditions that existed on that Mountainside. And of course why would they want to kill all of the Dyatlov Group, it doesnt make sense. The Dyatlov Group were all good Communists.

    Sorry--I wasn't clear.  I was speaking in scare quotes; I ought to have used them in the text.  By "KGB Killers" I intended a sort of catch-all category for the stereotypical Jason Bourne (movie reference) type killers.  Not necessarily the literal KGB, but any government-sanctioned or high-up-authorized uber-trained assassins or what have you. 

    I agree with you, actually.  I don't think it was an intentional massacre supported or facilitated by any government authorities.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: ninja on December 15, 2020, 06:04:24 AM

    Your data is not entirely correct from the point of view, if the data does not allow you to answer the question "what happened there?" - then the initial data are not correct, which ones?
    we think that the group voluntarily went to sleep on the mountainside
    we think the group died 1 to 2
    we think it happened at night
    why? because the killer wants us to think so
    are you surprised at the absence of traces of strangers? but you are not looking for them ther
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: RMK on December 15, 2020, 11:54:48 AM

    Your data is not entirely correct from the point of view, if the data does not allow you to answer the question "what happened there?" - then the initial data are not correct, which ones?
    we think that the group voluntarily went to sleep on the mountainside
    we think the group died 1 to 2
    we think it happened at night
    why? because the killer wants us to think so
    are you surprised at the absence of traces of strangers? but you are not looking for them ther
    ninja, I'm not sure I understand your point.  You claim that the group was murdered, sometime before February 1st?
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: GKM on December 15, 2020, 12:23:50 PM
    Please make your point clear, just for the sake of argument. Are you suggesting the hikers died or were killed before February 1st, 1959?
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: ninja on December 16, 2020, 02:18:07 AM
    Please make your point clear, just for the sake of argument. Are you suggesting the hikers died or were killed before February 1st, 1959?
    да, именно это я утверждаю, группа совершенно точно не пережила 31 января
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: ninja on December 16, 2020, 04:14:46 AM
    я так же проделал небольшую работу по поводу времени их гибели, известно, что студенты погибли спустя 6-8 часов с момента последнего принятия пищи, исходя из состояния их желудков, с огромной вероятностью можно заключить, что умирать они начали после завтрака утра 31 января, очевидно, что то, что они съели невозможно приготовить на склоне холат-чахля, ввиду отсутствия условий,для этого нужен костер, следы которого не были обнаружены на склоне, так же эти 6-8 часов доказывают, что они не были в локации, где была оставлена яма с "лишними вещами", они бы просто не успели проделать весь путь, все действия, которые им приписывают и замерзнуть, у меня есть раскладка по времени от "ямы", примерно 2 часа от неё до горы, около 30-60 минут для установки палатки и разбору вещей, около часа на спуск, в итоге к моменту, когда потух костер,который горел 2 часа и обжег ногу Юрия Кривонищенко, абсолютно все должны быть мертвы, но тогда кто срезал с него одежду ? и переносил её в овраг
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: sarapuk on December 16, 2020, 11:56:20 AM
    я так же проделал небольшую работу по поводу времени их гибели, известно, что студенты погибли спустя 6-8 часов с момента последнего принятия пищи, исходя из состояния их желудков, с огромной вероятностью можно заключить, что умирать они начали после завтрака утра 31 января, очевидно, что то, что они съели невозможно приготовить на склоне холат-чахля, ввиду отсутствия условий,для этого нужен костер, следы которого не были обнаружены на склоне, так же эти 6-8 часов доказывают, что они не были в локации, где была оставлена яма с "лишними вещами", они бы просто не успели проделать весь путь, все действия, которые им приписывают и замерзнуть, у меня есть раскладка по времени от "ямы", примерно 2 часа от неё до горы, около 30-60 минут для установки палатки и разбору вещей, около часа на спуск, в итоге к моменту, когда потух костер,который горел 2 часа и обжег ногу Юрия Кривонищенко, абсолютно все должны быть мертвы, но тогда кто срезал с него одежду ? и переносил её в овраг

    Could you put this in English please
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Jean Daniel Reuss on December 16, 2020, 02:28:53 PM


    This topic=744.0 is a continuation of the first posts sent by ninja, unfortunately in Russian, which makes these posts difficult to understand for the ignorant like me (I use Russian -> French machine translation software. I hope ninja will be able to use English -> Russian software). So preferably start by reading the topic=753.0 :
       
        Dyatlov Pass Forum > Theories Discussion > General Discussion > real timeline  (реальная хронология)
    https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=753.0
               
    Reply #4
    Ninja. What is that you are actually trying to say  !  ? 

    Nevertheless, I think that I have understood the most important thing. ninja explains to us that the hikers were slowed down by the deep soft snow in the Auspiya valley. That is why, during the last 2 days (January 31 and February 1), the hikers were only able to progress over a very short distance and also why the hikers did not have time to write in their diary.
         ninja will also soon explain why he suspects that Zolotaryov is playing a disastrous role...(I may be mistaken).

    °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

    I agree, the photos " N°11 and N°12, Loose photos, https://dyatlovpass.com/loose-photos ", of the intallation of a tent were taken on the evening of January 30 and NOT on the evening of February 1.

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Unknown-origin-Dyatlov-photos-11.jpg)

    It does not matter where the tent is exactly located on the night of January 30 to January 31.
    ninja  indicates this location by the red cross with the indication "30.01" on the map below.
    In my opinion the location of the tent could also be two kilometres further south, at the end of the purple line.

    (https://i.ibb.co/K2mDXQx/image.jpg)

    The hikers found themselves in a very soft snow, which made the progression difficult and slow even with skis.
    It was this kind of soft snow, but it is not the same place :

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-327.jpg)

    See also :
    Manti :  Theories Discussion > General Discussion > Walking a km in deep snow
       https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=740.0

    Remark N°1 : The Mansis seem to be better equipped for winter than the hikers --> wider skis, thicker clothes....

    Remark N°2
     • While approaching the summits of the Kholat Syakhl (1079) and Otorten by the Auspiya valley the hikers probably followed a short itinerary in distances but longer in time because they had to cross deep and soft snow areas.
    It is a "slow" itinerary but sheltered from the wind, which I will henceforth call "the Auspiya Valley itinerary".

     • On the contrary, the hikers would probably have been faster  (would have taken less time)  if they had skied on the hard snow, above the taiga, on the hillsides, following the crest line defined by the peaks :
         706 - 833 - 813 - 968 -937 - 1034 - 1051 - 994 - 1079(Kholat Syakhl)
     
    These peaks are visible on the above good map sent by ninja

    This route may start with the dotted line (east to west) at the bottom right of the map.
    This is a "fast"route on hard snow but exposed to cold wind, which I will henceforth call "the ridge itinerary".


    °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

    The arguments of ninja - if I have understood correctly - are based on the fact that we probably do not have any photos or writing on diaries made after January 30, since the "Leaflet Evening Otorten N°1" was recopied and so the date could have been easily changed.

    However I think that the details, certainly interesting, which are brought by ninja do not prove that the hikers were not killed during the night of February 1 to February 2.

    On the contrary, I think that the hikers were very much alive on January 31 and February 1. After the 30th of January the hikers peacefully went on their way and set up the tent where the rescuers found it on the Kholat Syakhl slope on the evening of the 1st of February.

      • Because how else to explain this picture of the tent :

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-009.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-008.jpg) 
    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-005.jpg)

      • And also how to explain the presence of the Labaz containing 50 kg of food, which took several hours to install on the evening of January 31 or on the morning of February 1.

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-1959-labaz-01.jpg)

      • And also how to explain the location of the corpses of Kolgomora, Slobodin and Dyatlov on the slope of the Kholat Syakhl (because according to my hypothesis N°3 nobody made the effort to move the bodies away from the place where they fell, stunned or mortally wounded, and never stood up again).


    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: RMK on December 16, 2020, 03:02:55 PM
         ninja will also soon explain why he suspects that Zolotaryov is playing a disastrous role...(I may be mistaken).
    Dear Jean Daniel Reuss: you are referring to this post by ninja, https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=753.msg11502#msg11502 , correct?  I cannot tell if (1) ninja means that Zolotaryov betrayed the other Dyatlov hikers, or (2) if ninja merely means that the Semyon "Sasha" Zolotaryov that joined the Dyatlov expedition was not who he claimed to be.  Come to think of it, he could mean both of those things.

    я так же проделал небольшую работу по поводу времени их гибели, известно, что студенты погибли спустя 6-8 часов с момента последнего принятия пищи, исходя из состояния их желудков, с огромной вероятностью можно заключить, что умирать они начали после завтрака утра 31 января, очевидно, что то, что они съели невозможно приготовить на склоне холат-чахля, ввиду отсутствия условий,для этого нужен костер, следы которого не были обнаружены на склоне, так же эти 6-8 часов доказывают, что они не были в локации, где была оставлена яма с "лишними вещами", они бы просто не успели проделать весь путь, все действия, которые им приписывают и замерзнуть, у меня есть раскладка по времени от "ямы", примерно 2 часа от неё до горы, около 30-60 минут для установки палатки и разбору вещей, около часа на спуск, в итоге к моменту, когда потух костер,который горел 2 часа и обжег ногу Юрия Кривонищенко, абсолютно все должны быть мертвы, но тогда кто срезал с него одежду ? и переносил её в овраг

    Could you put this in English please
    Yes, ninja, as the original poster of this thread, I must ask that you post in my thread in English.  Posting in English is the norm in this community.  On this forum, the burden of machine-translation is on the author of the post, not the reader of the post.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on December 19, 2020, 11:03:53 AM
    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.


    If the attackers had dug down the tent in order to make it look like an avalanche, that not-so-smart cover up would have been too obvious since it would be easily documented afterwards that there had been no avalanches in the area. The orchestrators of the Dyatlov pass tragedy were way too smart for that.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on December 19, 2020, 11:12:35 AM
    No proof that any other Humans arrived at The Tent by Skis or walking.


    The nine students died during the night of February 1-2. No other tracks than the tracks of the nine were found, and that is to be expected. Their killers could not have arrived by foot. It can be taken for granted that the attacking group used wide mountain skis, which would leave only superficial tracks in the snow.

    The first search and rescue team did not arrive until February 26. This long interval ensured that any tracks from mountain skis were completely erased. Small wonder then, when no tracks from the killers were found.

    Again; The injuries of the nine were not only strongly indicative of human attack. They can in addition only be explained by a determined attack from other humans, an attack with lethal intent and result.

    The corpses did not lie. They were all murdered.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: sarapuk on December 19, 2020, 02:18:27 PM
    No proof that any other Humans arrived at The Tent by Skis or walking.


    The nine students died during the night of February 1-2. No other tracks than the tracks of the nine were found, and that is to be expected. Their killers could not have arrived by foot. It can be taken for granted that the attacking group used wide mountain skis, which would leave only superficial tracks in the snow.

    The first search and rescue team did not arrive until February 26. This long interval ensured that any tracks from mountain skis were completely erased. Small wonder then, when no tracks from the killers were found.

    Again; The injuries of the nine were not only strongly indicative of human attack. They can in addition only be explained by a determined attack from other humans, an attack with lethal intent and result.

    The corpses did not lie. They were all murdered.

    The exact time and date of death of the Dyatlov Group is not known.
    It would be extremely difficult for someone or some persons on Ski's to kill all of the Dyatlov Group. The several Events ie at The Tent, The Cedar Tree, The Ravine, seem to rule out attack by anyone on Ski's.
    In fact its highly unlikely that any other person or persons were involved in the demise of the Dyatlov Group.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: armyeng on March 19, 2021, 12:22:47 AM
    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.

    I dont think it was this smart or replanned - I believe it was a haphazard occurrence, angry retaliation, or confusing in the moment. I don’t believe it was the intention of the attackers to kill, but to beat and retrieve information/investigate/force out of the area etc I believe after the initial attack there was a standoff and shouting back and forth, maybe some skirmishing and hand to hand fighting, both parties adrenaline was pumping and the attackers told the hikers to leave and not to return. This could easily line up with a military unit securing a perimeter or area, or a team suspicious the hikers (gulag prison guards of others) were an enemy political/military unit (they look like one age/equipment). Perhaps this also implies that they were not trained and eager killers but just suspicious and angry locals, situation got out of hand. But this would have to line up with my tent ambush theory and explain the slow departure from site.   
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Manti on March 19, 2021, 05:18:18 AM
    enemy political/military unit (they look like one age/equipment).
    Wouldn't this suspicion immediately be dispelled though when the Dyatlov Group start talking in the local Russian accent, and they see there are women in the group ?
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: ninja on April 02, 2021, 07:59:21 PM


    This topic=744.0 is a continuation of the first posts sent by ninja, unfortunately in Russian, which makes these posts difficult to understand for the ignorant like me (I use Russian -> French machine translation software. I hope ninja will be able to use English -> Russian software). So preferably start by reading the topic=753.0 :
       
        Dyatlov Pass Forum > Theories Discussion > General Discussion > real timeline  (реальная хронология)
    https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=753.0
               
    Reply #4
    Ninja. What is that you are actually trying to say  !  ? 

    Nevertheless, I think that I have understood the most important thing. ninja explains to us that the hikers were slowed down by the deep soft snow in the Auspiya valley. That is why, during the last 2 days (January 31 and February 1), the hikers were only able to progress over a very short distance and also why the hikers did not have time to write in their diary.
         ninja will also soon explain why he suspects that Zolotaryov is playing a disastrous role...(I may be mistaken).

    °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

    I agree, the photos " N°11 and N°12, Loose photos, https://dyatlovpass.com/loose-photos ", of the intallation of a tent were taken on the evening of January 30 and NOT on the evening of February 1.

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Unknown-origin-Dyatlov-photos-11.jpg)

    It does not matter where the tent is exactly located on the night of January 30 to January 31.
    ninja  indicates this location by the red cross with the indication "30.01" on the map below.
    In my opinion the location of the tent could also be two kilometres further south, at the end of the purple line.

    (https://i.ibb.co/K2mDXQx/image.jpg)

    The hikers found themselves in a very soft snow, which made the progression difficult and slow even with skis.
    It was this kind of soft snow, but it is not the same place :

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-327.jpg)

    See also :
    Manti :  Theories Discussion > General Discussion > Walking a km in deep snow
       https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=740.0

    Remark N°1 : The Mansis seem to be better equipped for winter than the hikers --> wider skis, thicker clothes....

    Remark N°2
     • While approaching the summits of the Kholat Syakhl (1079) and Otorten by the Auspiya valley the hikers probably followed a short itinerary in distances but longer in time because they had to cross deep and soft snow areas.
    It is a "slow" itinerary but sheltered from the wind, which I will henceforth call "the Auspiya Valley itinerary".

     • On the contrary, the hikers would probably have been faster  (would have taken less time)  if they had skied on the hard snow, above the taiga, on the hillsides, following the crest line defined by the peaks :
         706 - 833 - 813 - 968 -937 - 1034 - 1051 - 994 - 1079(Kholat Syakhl)
     
    These peaks are visible on the above good map sent by ninja

    This route may start with the dotted line (east to west) at the bottom right of the map.
    This is a "fast"route on hard snow but exposed to cold wind, which I will henceforth call "the ridge itinerary".


    °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

    The arguments of ninja - if I have understood correctly - are based on the fact that we probably do not have any photos or writing on diaries made after January 30, since the "Leaflet Evening Otorten N°1" was recopied and so the date could have been easily changed.

    However I think that the details, certainly interesting, which are brought by ninja do not prove that the hikers were not killed during the night of February 1 to February 2.

    On the contrary, I think that the hikers were very much alive on January 31 and February 1. After the 30th of January the hikers peacefully went on their way and set up the tent where the rescuers found it on the Kholat Syakhl slope on the evening of the 1st of February.

      • Because how else to explain this picture of the tent :

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-009.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-008.jpg) 
    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-005.jpg)

      • And also how to explain the presence of the Labaz containing 50 kg of food, which took several hours to install on the evening of January 31 or on the morning of February 1.

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-1959-labaz-01.jpg)

      • And also how to explain the location of the corpses of Kolgomora, Slobodin and Dyatlov on the slope of the Kholat Syakhl (because according to my hypothesis N°3 nobody made the effort to move the bodies away from the place where they fell, stunned or mortally wounded, and never stood up again).



    Lets take it back a step.  Why do we think the murderers wanted to make it look "natural"?  As far as I can tell, we get that because there seem to be many easier & quicker ways of killing people.  (They weren't shot or stabbed, for example.)  But there is very little about their actual injuries that looks natural. Additionally, as you point out, no effort was made to provide an excuse for their injuries, or for their leaving the tent.  According to this theory, someone went to great trouble to cover up their own presence at the site, but no trouble at all to provide plausible excuses for the hikers leaving the tent or sustaining such injuries.

    It looks to me, then, if this was the case, that the killers were only concerned with a very superficial "fooling" of the public.  KGB killers had to have known that autopsies would be done--and that the injuries of the hikers would be suspicious.  This implies that the killers felt responsible for not leaving any screamingly obvious signs of their own presence, but were relying on officials to make sure everything was properly swept under the rug in the end.

    And, perhaps, that was done.

    Personally, I am unconvinced by this theory.  Partly because of what I posted earlier about simpler ways of killing people, but also because of the responses of the families at the time.

    I feel that the families' responses are usually a good guess when it comes to things like this.  Guesses, yes.  But they have intimate knowledge of the personalities of the hikers, as well as what to expect from the culture and the government. KGB Killers were quite well known to exist.  It was known that the government could make people disappear.  But the families seem much more concerned with the possibility of weapons testing.  While not a definitive answer, in my opinion, this lends a bit of weight to that theory.

    While the families didn't have access to the specifications of the tragedy in the same way we do, they had the advantage of living at the same time, in the same place, and knowing the people involved.  This can be very important when it comes to understanding why people behave in curious ways.
    you did not quite understand my thoughts correctly, I will try to master the translator better, I did not claim that something slowed down the tourists, I prove the opposite, the tourists were ahead of schedule, at the expense of the car to the 41st block, the horse to the 2nd north, the trail almost to the mountain, there can be no question of any delays, photos, tracks, diaries prove where and when the group was, in order to confuse these facts and adjust everything to the 1-2 number, an unknown diary was written, a warehouse with food was created, the evening was torn off, irrefutable evidence, I will try to bring them all in a convenient form
    not made where you are, as well as the Dyatlov group, and this again can be proved, a group of 9 people will definitely leave traces of their arrival and vital activity, for example, a bonfire, a trampled area, felled branches, none of this is in the location "warehouse", there are just personal belongings of the group, far from the most voluminous and heavy, and which could well be useful if the group thought to make a warehouse, besides, they will not have time to die in time, starting from the expected you positions, 6-8 hours to get ready, get up, decompose, go down, make a fire, make a deck and eventually freeze ? strives for the impossible
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Dona on May 03, 2021, 02:31:51 PM
    The murder theory is easy, really. Of all the theories proposed, which of them would 9 people commit suicide over..

    None. They were being forced..
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 30, 2021, 11:51:12 AM

    I dunno-- it seems like the most obvious way to make it look like a natural death in siberia would be to make sure they died of hypothermia.  Force the poorly-dressed campers into the forest and douse them in water. All this talk of highly-trained killing men with their specialized techniques seems so... Hollywood. 


    You are correct. The most obvious way to make it look like a natural death was to make it look like death by hypothermia.

    That was also intended. That is why the nine students were chased out from their tent without proper winter clothing, in the expectation that they would freeze to death within a very short time.

    However, there evidently was a sudden and unexpected rise in temperature which spoiled the attackers' plan. That rise in temperature is documented by data from the weather stations closest to the area. Because of that, the resourceful students did not die as expected, and had to be hunted down. Hence all the injuries. These injuries are consistent with human attack - and can be explained by human attack only.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 30, 2021, 11:53:14 AM
    Let me try to get this thread back to its topic.  If the DPI was really homicide, but the killers wanted to make it not look like homicide, why didn't they stage or fabricate some non-homicide reason why the hikers exited their tent and subsequently abandoned it?  For example, why didn't the killers manipulate the campsite to make it look like a tent fire or a small avalanche had occurred?


    Because it would be too obvious that there had been no avalanche and no fire there. You cannot just make up an avalanche.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 30, 2021, 11:58:45 AM

    The exact time and date of death of the Dyatlov Group is not known.
    It would be extremely difficult for someone or some persons on Ski's to kill all of the Dyatlov Group. The several Events ie at The Tent, The Cedar Tree, The Ravine, seem to rule out attack by anyone on Ski's.
    In fact its highly unlikely that any other person or persons were involved in the demise of the Dyatlov Group.


    - It is known from the last writings of the members of the group that their deaths occurred during the night between February 1 and February 2.

    - The several events are all consistent with an attack by trained killers who had to hunt down several groups of people who had fled from their attackers.

    - The injuries can only be explained by lethal attack.

    - The absence of tracks is what would be expected from the long period between the murder to the arrival at the scene of the first search and rescue team. In fact, most of the tracks of the students were eradicated - and they moved by foot whereas the attackers must have had skies. Ski tracks disappear much faster than deep footprints. Thus, it is a matter of course that no traces of the attackers would be found.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: RMK on May 30, 2021, 07:18:37 PM
    Let me try to get this thread back to its topic.  If the DPI was really homicide, but the killers wanted to make it not look like homicide, why didn't they stage or fabricate some non-homicide reason why the hikers exited their tent and subsequently abandoned it?  For example, why didn't the killers manipulate the campsite to make it look like a tent fire or a small avalanche had occurred?


    Because it would be too obvious that there had been no avalanche and no fire there. You cannot just make up an avalanche.

    Well, OK, I'll acknowledge that it's not necessarily easy to fabricate an avalanche situation at the campsite.

    But people have been "making up avalanches" all the time in the case of the Dyatlov Pass for a while!  grin1
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: ElizabethHarris on January 03, 2022, 08:22:10 AM
    Misadventure doesn't account for Ludmilla's tongue being torn from her mouth. Autopsy reports said she had blood in her stomach which means she was alive when it was removed
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: RMK on January 03, 2022, 09:35:31 AM
    Misadventure doesn't account for Ludmilla's tongue being torn from her mouth. Autopsy reports said she had blood in her stomach which means she was alive when it was removed
    She could have swallowed blood from merely biting her tongue, or from her broken nose.  Also, we don't know that her tongue was torn from her mouth.  The autopsy report merely says "The tongue in the oral cavity is absent."  We can only guess as to why it's absent.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: ElizabethHarris on January 04, 2022, 08:15:03 AM
    Slow departure from the scene is IMO a good case for homicide as they were being controlled and told what to do/where to go. The neat line of footprints doesn't add up with a frenzied escape from the tent. For me, the injuries tell us everything we need to know and again, IMO, they are saying first degree murder.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: ElizabethHarris on January 07, 2022, 05:27:23 AM
    Autopsy said she had copious amounts of blood in her lungs and stomach, in fact the stomach was filled with blood. I think it's a fair assumption that since her tongue is missing it's safe to conclude the blood came from the removal of the tongue. Even the worst bloody nose probably wouldn't drown a person in their own blood but I could be wrong.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on February 11, 2022, 02:41:37 AM
    Hello,
    There are no indications of the presence of other people in the area.
    According to the diaries, there was a Mansi hunter in front of them and the Russian and Mansi workers in their back at District 41.

    No footprints.
    But no photo of immaculate snow with a clear and unique track of footprints descending from the tent to the forest. Or is there one ?

    Nothing to really suggest that other people were involved.
    The nature of the threat that made them all get out of the tent and run to the forest. If they were alone with the laws of physics, there was no reason to leave the tent in such a hurry without shoes and equipment. If they were alone with animals such as bear or wolves, why stop a the the border of the forest (and no marks of bites) ? And they had knives, ski poles and axes which were of no use against the threat (which give a reasonable chance to repel animals but not firearms). If it is neither physical, nor animal... then it is human. It's like if the threat claimed the tent and the hikers knew their only chance was to stay away but not so far from the tent in the hope that the threat would finally leave it. If it's physical, no reason to leave the tent whatsoever, if it's animal, no reason not to fight back with cold steel... so, leaving the tent without fighting back means attacker with firepower and interested with the tent... human. Maybe the attackers stayed in the tent for a while, waiting for the cold to kill the hikers, and cut the tissue when leaving to check and finish off the hikers...

    Greetings
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: sarapuk on February 13, 2022, 02:16:41 PM
    Hello,
    There are no indications of the presence of other people in the area.
    According to the diaries, they had a "team" of Mansi deer hunters in front of them and the Russian and Mansi workers in their back at District 41.  [[ But no record of other people in the area where they met their demise ]]

    No footprints.
    But no photo of immaculate snow with a clear and unique track of footprints descending from the tent to the forest. Or is there one ?  [[ But there is a photo of tracks descending from the tent to the forest and it seems to suggest that it was only the Dyatlov Group ]]

    Nothing to really suggest that other people were involved.
    The nature of the threat that made them all get out of the tent and run to the forest. If they were alone with the laws of physics, there was no reason to leave the tent in such a hurry without shoes and equipment. If they were alone with animals such as bear or wolves, why stop a the the border of the forest (and no marks of bites) ? And they had knives, ski poles and axes which were of no use against the threat (which give a reasonable chance to repel animals but not firearms). If it is neither physical, nor animal... then it is human. It's like if the threat claimed the tent and the hikers knew their only chance was to stay away but not so far from the tent in the hope that the threat would finally leave it. If it's physical, no reason to leave the tent whatsoever, if it's animal, no reason not to fight back with cold steel... so, leaving the tent without fighting back means attacker with firepower and interested with the tent... human. Maybe the attackers stayed in the tent for a while, waiting for the cold to kill the hikers, and cut the tissue when leaving to check and finish off the hikers...  [[  May be other people or animals werent involved  ]]

    Greetings
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on February 22, 2022, 11:59:36 AM
    Hello Sarapuk,

    Couldn't understand your reply !

    But there is a very decisive pattern in the injuries received by the hikers. Whatever injured them did not strike at random. The strongest blows  could have hit any part of the bodies - arms, hips, legs, feet - but they did not, all these blows were in vital areas - head (twice: Thibeaux-Brignolle and Slobodin) and chest (twice: Dubinina and Zolotaryov). Four hikers had bone fractures and all the fractures were in areas where they could threaten life.

    Why would a random non human force aim at vital organs? Brain, heart and lungs? While ignoring foot and forearm ?

    About the minor injuries at their hands, very few were at the palm but : "bruise with bleeding into the underlying soft tissue on the back of the right hand corresponding to the second metacarpal bone" (Doroschenko), "back of the right hand is swollen and in the middle phalanx of the fingers 4-5 cutaneous wound with hard edges and charred surface" (Krivonischenko), "metacarpophalangeal joints on the right hand had brown red bruises" (Dyatlov), "abrasion on the back of both hands in the area of metacarpal phalangeal and inter-phalangeal joints and wound with jagged edges and missing skin on the back of the right hand at the base of the third finger" (Kolmogorova), "bruises in the metacarpophalangeal joints on both hands (bruised knuckles)" (Slobodin)... When working without gloves, injuries occurs mainly at the palm, but here injuries are at the back of the hand when hand is closed forming a fist, as when fighting.

    And here also there is a pattern. Thibeaux-Brignolle, Dubinina and Zolotaryov had life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area but no minor wounds at the back of the hands, Doroschenko, Krivonischenko, Dyatlov and Kolmogorova had minor wounds at the back of the hands but no life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area.

    Slobodin having both life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area and minor wounds at the back of the hands. Kolevatov having neither life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area nor minor wounds at the back of the hands. But if we consider Kolevatov broken nose as "fracture injury in the chest-head area" and deformation of cartilage in the neck, he could join the list with Thibeaux-Brignolle, Dubinina and Zolotaryov.

    So, we have Thibeaux-Brignolle, Dubinina, Kolevatov and Zolotaryov with serious fracture injuries in the chest-head area but no minor wounds at the back of the hands, Slobodin with both life serious fracture injuries in the chest-head area and minor wounds at the back of the hands and Doroschenko, Krivonischenko, Dyatlov and Kolmogorova with minor wounds at the back of the hands but no serious fracture injuries in the chest-head area.

    Some were brutally hit and couldn't fight back, the ones who had stigmata of fist fight slowly died of hypothermia. Slobodin being at the intersection of the two sets.

    So none of the 36 legs and arms (9 hikers x 4 body members) sustained any bone fracture injury: 0/36! But 4 upper bodies had bone fractures: 4/9 ! 5/9 if we include Kolevatov broken nose! The "natural force" managed to avoid the 36 body members and randomly targeted brain, heart and lungs? Who can buy that fairytale?

    The statistics of injuries point at  homicide. Homicide committed by the Mansi, by the loggers, whatever, because of an attack from the outside or because of internal dissension, but homicide for sure.

    Greetings

    PS: You give me the opportunity to correct my statement about "indications of the presence of other people in the area": according to the diaries, there was one Mansi hunter close beyond the group (they did not write about some hunters).
     
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on February 22, 2022, 03:01:59 PM
    Hi Charles,


    You mention Slobodin had chest injuries?

    "Slobodin having both life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area and minor wounds at the back of the hands"

    I am not aware of Slobodin having having fractures in the chest area. ( it is possible that I missed this).It has been suggested that his skull fracture was down to freezing and I believe this has been recorded in other cases. Due to Slobodin wearing a hat and having been found with ice under his body there is the possibility that it was freezing that caused the fracture of the skull.

    It is interesting that the ravine four have no marks on the backs of their hands. This could support the theory that they died instantly from a snow collapse at the location of the ravine, from above .

    I also understand that some of the marks are consistent with victims of hyperthermia  or freezing.

    Just my penny's worth.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on February 23, 2022, 02:36:36 AM
    Hello Ziljoe

    You mention Slobodin had chest injuries?

    "Slobodin having both life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area and minor wounds at the back of the hands"

    I am not aware of Slobodin having having fractures in the chest area. ( it is possible that I missed this). It has been suggested that his skull fracture was down to freezing and I believe this has been recorded in other cases. Due to Slobodin wearing a hat and having been found with ice under his body there is the possibility that it was freezing that caused the fracture of the skull.

    I wrote "life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area" as you correctly quoted. Chest and head, or upper body, or upper torso and head. Injuries resulting from the most violent impact are all limited to this small area. Whatever the nature of the force, it never severely impacted lower parts of the body, never broke a leg or an arm... But aimed at brain, heart and lungs. As you have 9 hikers and 36 body members (legs and arms), how could a deadly random force have avoided these 36 members and selected 4 times the small area where brain, heart and lungs are located ?

    And how could a natural and blind force target so many times the metacarpophalangeal joint ? This force went 4 times to chest and head with enough violence to break many bones (29 bone fractures on 4 hikers: 2 fractures of skull, 3 of scapula, 24 of rib) and kill, then changed its mind, and went after metacarpophalangeal joint but gently this time, restraining from breaking bones, just inflicting bruises and scratches (28 metacarpophalangeal joints injured but not a single broken phalanx) ?

    I made a diagram of a Vitruvian skeleton with red dots markings all 29 broken bones... So we can estimate the grouping of the bone breaking blows...

    (https://i.ibb.co/pKn1Yf9/Grouping-of-bone-breaking-blows.png) (https://ibb.co/VC3LfgP)

    They said "unknown compelling force", "unknown" but not blind... and even looking for the kill.

    Greetings
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on February 23, 2022, 05:49:40 AM
    Hi Charles,

    Hello Ziljoe

    You mention Slobodin had chest injuries?

    "Slobodin having both life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area and minor wounds at the back of the hands"

    I am not aware of Slobodin having having fractures in the chest area. ( it is possible that I missed this). It has been suggested that his skull fracture was down to freezing and I believe this has been recorded in other cases. Due to Slobodin wearing a hat and having been found with ice under his body there is the possibility that it was freezing that caused the fracture of the skull.

    I wrote "life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area" as you correctly quoted. Chest and head, or upper body, or upper torso and head. Injuries resulting from the most violent impact are all limited to this small area. Whatever the nature of the force, it never severely impacted lower parts of the body, never broke a leg or an arm... But aimed at brain, heart and lungs. As you have 9 hikers and 36 body members (legs and arms), how could a deadly random force have avoided these 36 members and selected 4 times the small area where brain, heart and lungs are located ?

    And how could a natural and blind force target so many times the metacarpophalangeal joint ? This force went 4 times to chest and head with enough violence to break many bones (29 bone fractures on 4 hikers: 2 fractures of skull, 3 of scapula, 24 of rib) and kill, then changed its mind, and went after metacarpophalangeal joint but gently this time, restraining from breaking bones, just inflicting bruises and scratches (28 metacarpophalangeal joints injured but not a single broken phalanx) ?

    I made a diagram of a Vitruvian skeleton with red dots markings all 29 broken bones... So we can estimate the grouping of the bone breaking blows...

    (https://i.ibb.co/pKn1Yf9/Grouping-of-bone-breaking-blows.png) (https://ibb.co/VC3LfgP)

    They said "unknown compelling force", "unknown" but not blind... and even looking for the kill.

    Greetings


    A natural and blind force could have come as several events, maybe not all happening at the same time or not in the way we perceive it to be.

     If we believe the tent was located where it was found and the group exited the tent for one of the many reasons suggested, earth tremor, snow slab , wolverine or crashing rocket for example. It does not mean the injuries happened at the tent ,which I'm sure you'll agree.

    Of the 29 bone fractures on 4 hikers: 2 fractures of skull, 3 of scapula, 24 of rib. 27 of these fractures are on 2 hikers and 1 each for a skull fracture on the other 2 hikers. 

    3 of these hikers with 28 fractures between them , were found in the ravine under several feet of snow. The snow was reported as being more difficult to dig , which could suggest a snow collapse at some point. I would argue that this is the "unknown compelling force" in this instance . It is reported that only an impact like a car crash could cause such injuries to the chest. This may be the cause of the blunt force trauma and the lack of other injuries for survival.

    The other single head fracture was to Slobodin which may have been caused by the slow freezing and the nature of his clothing . His neck is exposed but he is wearing a hat.  I did find a study about fractures of the skull found in deaths of hypothermia and frozen victims, so it can occur under certain circumstances.

    Those with the fractures and lack of frostbite are found under a  deep layer of compact snow. Two are found by the large ceder, they show signs of undressing  and minor burns next to a fire. The 3 on the slope are found to have died by hypothermia/freezing. 

    They could have left the tent for a number of reasons but the injuries/deaths seem to look like they happened where the bodies were found.

    Perhaps the "deadly random force"  was just that, random ....









    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on February 23, 2022, 08:08:49 AM
    Acnatural and blind force could have come as several events, maybe not all happening at the same time or not in the way we perceive it to be.

    If coming as several events and each time hurting the hikers... then it was not a blind force. And the cuts and destructions on the trees are said to be man made, with a knife. Why no marks of "natural and blind force" on the surrounding trees ? No broken rocks, no broken trees.. nothing.

    If we believe the tent was located where it was found and the group exited the tent for one of the many reasons suggested, earth tremor, snow slab , wolverine or crashing rocket for example. It does not mean the injuries happened at the tent ,which I'm sure you'll agree.

    Indeed, I agree.

    3 of these hikers with 28 fractures between them , were found in the ravine under several feet of snow. The snow was reported as being more difficult to dig , which could suggest a snow collapse at some point. I would argue that this is the "unknown compelling force" in this instance . It is reported that only an impact like a car crash could cause such injuries to the chest. This may be the cause of the blunt force trauma and the lack of other injuries for survival.

    But how to compare some collapsing snow with car crash ? On several photos we can see how the snow was cloudy...

    https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/15-008.jpg

    https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/15-001.jpg

    Some snow collapsing slowly and on a short distance, 3-4 meters, with very limited energy... And I didn't read anything about snow in mouth and lungs...

    The other single head fracture was to Slobodin which may have been caused by the slow freezing and the nature of his clothing . His neck is exposed but he is wearing a hat.  I did find a study about fractures of the skull found in deaths of hypothermia and frozen victims, so it can occur under certain circumstances.

    Yes, I have read about that. But it only says "it can happen" or "it could happen", no fact, no proof it did happen. But if we consider the most serious injuries, the ones which required very brutal blows, they are all in the area described in my diagram... and this is a fact. Can we say it is a fact ? My idea is to establish a fact here... Not paying attention to anything else but the massive force which was able to break bones and did break bones: this force did not hit one single of the 36 arms and legs available in the group but reached the small area I underlined with a circle. Only matters the number of fractures and the small area where they are concentrated on the human body. And this circle is valid for the 9 hikers by the way. It summarizes all broken bones in the group of 9, it shows the distribution of broken bones for all the 9 hikers, as they were all on site, in a limited perimeter, and experiencing the same event. My Vitruvian skeleton depicts the all group, he is the superposition of all broken bone marks on the 9 skeletons. We can give him the title: "Depiction of all broken bones in the 9 hikers group" and this title will be correct. Counting Dyatlov and Doroschenko and others makes sense because if in their case the "force" did not break any bone in the circle area, it could have broken a hand or a leg... but it didn't. Dyatlov and Doroschenko and others could widen the circle if they had a broken foot, but they don't... The force did hit in the circle or not at all. Adding 4 or 5 more hikers does not widen the circle.


    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on February 23, 2022, 01:40:10 PM
    Acnatural and blind force could have come as several events, maybe not all happening at the same time or not in the way we perceive it to be.

    If coming as several events and each time hurting the hikers... then it was not a blind force. And the cuts and destructions on the trees are said to be man made, with a knife. Why no marks of "natural and blind force" on the surrounding trees ? No broken rocks, no broken trees.. nothing.

    I mean several natural events. A snow collapse at the ravine from the possibility of the cold and also the possibility of getting wet at the ravine. Whatever happened at the tent is what made them descend to the ceder . The "natural and blind force " could be the collapse of snow on top of them from taking shelter in a natural snow bridge at the ravine. The four at the ravine were found under up to 3 meters of snow. At the bottom of a small stream. This would not do any damage to the surrounding trees or rocks.

    If we believe the tent was located where it was found and the group exited the tent for one of the many reasons suggested, earth tremor, snow slab , wolverine or crashing rocket for example. It does not mean the injuries happened at the tent ,which I'm sure you'll agree.

    Indeed, I agree.

    3 of these hikers with 28 fractures between them , were found in the ravine under several feet of snow. The snow was reported as being more difficult to dig , which could suggest a snow collapse at some point. I would argue that this is the "unknown compelling force" in this instance . It is reported that only an impact like a car crash could cause such injuries to the chest. This may be the cause of the blunt force trauma and the lack of other injuries for survival.

    But how to compare some collapsing snow with car crash ? On several photos we can see how the snow was cloudy...

    The comparison with a car crash is the investigators statement on the injuries to the flail chest injuries. It was an example to the confusion on how such injuries occur. Teddy gives an example of a tree causing these types of injuries and Igor b suggests that it was a snow collapse. I don't know what the exact volume of snow to height ratio it would take to break ribs and fracture a skull but the theory of the snow collapse in a naturally formed snow cave is plausible. There are many examples of people being crushed then suffocating from building snow forts . These examples are sad as they involve families and children but it didn't take a lot of snow to trap them.

    https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/15-008.jpg

    https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/15-001.jpg

    Some snow collapsing slowly and on a short distance, 3-4 meters, with very limited energy... And I didn't read anything about snow in mouth and lungs...

    I don't thing they would find snow in the mouth and lungs. It would have turned to water by the time they were found. They were in a state of decay . I also don't know if they would  even able to inhale any snow. If the chest were compressed and the collapse had exhaled their last air they would be able to take a breath.

    The other single head fracture was to Slobodin which may have been caused by the slow freezing and the nature of his clothing . His neck is exposed but he is wearing a hat.  I did find a study about fractures of the skull found in deaths of hypothermia and frozen victims, so it can occur under certain circumstances.

    Yes, I have read about that. But it only says "it can happen" or "it could happen", no fact, no proof it did happen. But if we consider the most serious injuries, the ones which required very brutal blows, they are all in the area described in my diagram... and this is a fact. Can we say it is a fact ? My idea is to establish a fact here... Not paying attention to anything else but the massive force which was able to break bones and did break bones: this force did not hit one single of the 36 arms and legs available in the group but reached the small area I underlined with a circle. Only matters the number of fractures and the small area were they are concentrated on the human body. And this circle is valid for the 9 hikers by the way. It summarizes all broken bones in the group of 9, it shows the distribution of broken bones for all the 9 hikers, as they were all on site, in a limited perimeter, and experiencing the same event. My Vitruvian skeleton depicts the all group, he is the superposition of all broken bone marks on the 9 skeletons. We can give him the title: "Depiction of all broken bones in the 9 hikers group" and this title will be correct. Counting Dyatlov and Doroschenko makes sense because if in their case the "force" did not break any bone in the circle area, it could have broken a hand or a leg... but it didn't. Dyatlov and Doroschenko could widen the circle if they had a broken foot, but they don't... The force did hit in the circle or not at all. Adding 4 or 5 more hikers does not widen the circle.

    Only four had broken bones though,  3 that were in the ravine and 1 on the slope.
    But it is an interesting way to look at it and make me think of another angle.


    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on February 23, 2022, 01:41:23 PM
    Sorry, I messed up with the quotes on the above threads. I'll try again.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on February 24, 2022, 02:02:56 AM
    Hello Ziljoe !

    I mean several natural events. A snow collapse at the ravine from the possibility of the cold and also the possibility of getting wet at the ravine. Whatever happened at the tent is what made them descend to the ceder . The "natural and blind force " could be the collapse of snow on top of them from taking shelter in a natural snow bridge at the ravine. The four at the ravine were found under up to 3 meters of snow. At the bottom of a small stream. This would not do any damage to the surrounding trees or rocks.

    Yes but this is not proof of a snow collapse at the ravine. And collapsing from what above ? Where is the above ?

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/6S-54-1.jpg)

    There was a lot of snow everywhere and a very gentle slope...
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on February 24, 2022, 04:13:48 PM
    Hello Ziljoe !

    I mean several natural events. A snow collapse at the ravine from the possibility of the cold and also the possibility of getting wet at the ravine. Whatever happened at the tent is what made them descend to the ceder . The "natural and blind force " could be the collapse of snow on top of them from taking shelter in a natural snow bridge at the ravine. The four at the ravine were found under up to 3 meters of snow. At the bottom of a small stream. This would not do any damage to the surrounding trees or rocks.

    Yes but this is not proof of a snow collapse at the ravine. And collapsing from what above ? Where is the above ?

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/6S-54-1.jpg)

    There was a lot of snow everywhere and a very gentle slope...


    Hi Charles!

    In the other photos it shows them retrieving the 4 ravine bodies from under the snow mass. The statements also confirm this. There are at least 3 theories as to why they were found under the snow mass.

    1) They were placed there by staging and they were covered up  by outsiders.

    2) they fell in to the ravine and snow slowly drifted up to cover them.

    3) They found a natural snow bridge / cave already formed by the stream and decided to take cover there until they could return to the tent and whatever drive them out but the cave collapsed on top of them causing the injuries for the ravine 4 .

    I agree there's no proof for anything in this mystery . But it is plausible that given the injuries that this is where the fractures to the bones happened.

    But I am interested in your Theories.






    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on February 24, 2022, 11:03:50 PM
    In the other photos it shows them retrieving the 4 ravine bodies from under the snow mass. The statements also confirm this. There are at least 3 theories as to why they were found under the snow mass.

    1) They were placed there by staging and they were covered up  by outsiders.

    2)they fell in to the ravine and snow slowly drifted up to cover them.

    3) They found a natural snow bridge / cave already formed by the stream and decided to take cover there until they could return to the tent and whatever drive them out but the cave collapsed on top of them causing the injuries for the ravine 4 .

    Snowing is here the only way a snow mass could descend from above... so "they fell in to the ravine and snow slowly drifted up to cover them" is right.

    I agree there's no proof for anything in this mystery . But it is plausible that given the injuries that this is where the fractures to the bones happened.

    Yes, I don't believe they could have walked for long distances with such injuries.

    But I am interested in your Theories.

    Thank you for your interest. But I don't have theories... There are only a few points I stick to as quite certain :

    - the weakness of the group, morally, psychologically and physically

    - the weakness of Dyatlov as a leader : his instability and lack of judgement

    - the boiling anger in Vizhay and smoldering social unrest

    - the delirious episode at Herzen's pharmacy

    - the class and singularity of Yudin who was so wiser and so deeper than the other hikers

    - the effect of the tourists on Ognev's gang of outcasts (like tourists from Switzerland having fun in the suburbs of Monrovia)

    - the Mansi hunter's track just beyond the hikers and the fate of his reindeer

    - Slobodin not having time to put his second valenka on when they exited the tent

    - the pattern of bone breaking blows limited to such a small area

    And I am perfectly unable to link these points and make sense of them all...  dunno1

    The theory I would keep as the last one to stand would be a homicide theory: because of the four hikers suffering from broken bones injuries and because of the general context of tension, unrest, frustration, anger, quarrel, argument, etc...

    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on April 25, 2022, 06:05:53 AM
    Hello,
    There are no indications of the presence of other people in the area.

    Nothing to really suggest that other people were involved.
    The nature of the threat that made them all get out of the tent and run to the forest. If they were alone with the laws of physics, there was no reason to leave the tent in such a hurry without shoes and equipment. If they were alone with animals such as bear or wolves, why stop a the the border of the forest (and no marks of bites) ? And they had knives, ski poles and axes which were of no use against the threat (which give a reasonable chance to repel animals but not firearms). If it is neither physical, nor animal... then it is human. It's like if the threat claimed the tent and the hikers knew their only chance was to stay away but not so far from the tent in the hope that the threat would finally leave it. If it's physical, no reason to leave the tent whatsoever, if it's animal, no reason not to fight back with cold steel... so, leaving the tent without fighting back means attacker with firepower and interested with the tent... human. Maybe the attackers stayed in the tent for a while, waiting for the cold to kill the hikers, and cut the tissue when leaving to check and finish off the hikers...


    You are absolutely right.

    If there is no avalanche, and it is clear that there was none, there would be no need to leave a tent improperly dressed unless forced to by human attackers.

    Those who planned ordered the attack must have been very intelligent professionals, and they knew that if the hikers just disappeared it would be clear to all that they had been killed. The same holds true if they had been shot and placed in closed coffins. Remember, the nine were resourceful people, and loyal Soviet citizens belonging to the middle strata in Soviet society. If they had witnessed something in the Urals which they were not supposed to know about, it was necessary to end their lives because they nevertheless posed a potential risk to state security. Because they were people with a standing in society, they had to be dispatched in such a way as to make it appear that it was an accident.

    The most intelligent way to do it was to chase them out from their tent at gunpoint, and let the cold to the "job." If they all froze to death, it would be the perfectly executed mission.

    However, the temperature had taken a sudden rise on this evening. That is why the hikers did not die as expected.

    Therefore, the nine had to be hunted down and killed by physical force in order for the mission to be accomplished.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on April 25, 2022, 06:48:30 AM

    Thank you for your interest. But I don't have theories... There are only a few points I stick to as quite certain :

    - the weakness of the group, morally, psychologically and physically

    - the weakness of Dyatlov as a leader : his instability and lack of judgement

    - the boiling anger in Vizhay and smoldering social unrest

    - the delirious episode at Herzen's pharmacy

    - the class and singularity of Yudin who was so wiser and so deeper than the other hikers

    - the effect of the tourists on Ognev's gang of outcasts (like tourists from Switzerland having fun in the suburbs of Monrovia)

    - the Mansi hunter's track just beyond the hikers and the fate of his reindeer

    - Slobodin not having time to put his second valenka on when they exited the tent

    - the pattern of bone breaking blows limited to such a small area

    And I am perfectly unable to link these points and make sense of them all...  dunno1

    The theory I would keep as the last one to stand would be a homicide theory: because of the four hikers suffering from broken bones injuries and because of the general context of tension, unrest, frustration, anger, quarrel, argument, etc...


    The homicide theory is more than a theory. Homicide, brilliantly planned and professionally executed, is the only possible explanation of the deaths and the injuries of the Dyatlov group.

    The slope was not steep enough to break any bones, and there was demonstrably no trace of an avalanche in the area. Moreover, the injuries are in no way consistent with what is seen from an avalanche. Broken ribs and broken skulls with no damage to the limbs, there is no possibility that these kinds of injuries could be created by an avalanche without accompanying injuries to the other parts of the body.

    The injuries of Kolevatov are described very well here on this site, and they are telling:

    "This autopsy had similar strange silence about the injuries of the victim. Broken nose, open wound behind the ear and deformed neck might be the result of a fight and be cause of death. On the other hand it could have been caused by natural elements since the body was exposed to nature for three whole months. Yet the doctor ignores this matter and doesn't try to explain the reason for these strange injuries. We should probably add that snapped neck and blow behind the ear is a common sign of killing performed by special forces."

    I have studied jiu jitsu, and I recognize the injuries as consistent with lethal close combat techniques I have learned.

    Kolevatov's injury to the neck is what happens if a close combat expert breaks your neck, and the technique is one of those recommended in the KGB training manual.

    The chest injuries of Dubinina and Zolotaryov are consistent with repeated elbow strikes from a trained killer proficient in close combat.

    Why the difference in the injuries? Why did not all the nine victims have the same types of injury? Because professional killers typically group themselves into two or three, each targeting different victims. Also, it is very clear that those four with the most serious and lethal injuries were those who were relatively better dressed than the others. The killers wanted to finish their mission, knowing that the Mansi would observe them. The five students who had the least complete clothing only needed to be incapacitated so that they did not move and keep warm. The four who were better dressed might have survived for days and even gotten help. Therefore, they had to be killed forcefully on the spot in order to ensure death. That is the probable reason why those four with the most clothing on them were also those with the most serious injuries.

    The injuries of Slobodin and Thibeaux-Brignolle are also interesting. In particular, the shape of the damage of the crushing of Thibeaux-Brignolle's skull closely resembles that of the butt of a submachine gun. We also see that Thibeaux-Brignolle had a damage to his biceps on his right arm. But no other injuries to the body. To deal a blow to the biceps is a tested and effective way of paralyzing a resistant victim, and this technique is fundamental to police forces all over the world. After being paralyzed and in great pain, Thibeaux-Brignolle likely was thrown to the ground and then lethally wounded with a rifle butt.

    Look at these injures. They are all, without exception, what one can observe when professional forces attack with lethal intent. These injuries cannot possibly be caused by accidents or cold weather.

    It was only the sudden rise of temperature on the evening between February 1 and February 2 which prevented the planned murder of the nine unfortunates from being a perfectly executed "accident."

    The fact that the first leader of the investigation was called to Moscow, and thereafter soon closed the case with the conclusion that it had been an accident, really says it all.

    The brilliant intelligence of this killing mission is perhaps best shown by what happened to the Mansi. The authorities first said that the Mansi were suspect, and several Mansi were interrogated.

    Then, suddenly, a message came that a seamstress had declared that the tent had been cut from the inside - and it was concluded that the Mansi must be innocent. Of course, there never was any scientific forensic report or documentation, and there is nothing to indicate that the students were those who cut the tent, but the Mansi were freed. The message to the Mansi, who of course had seen the bodies in their area and were aware of what had happened, was very clear even if it was unspoken: "We let you off the hook now, but if you ever tell anyone what you have seen we will invent any necessary evidence against you."

    The Mansi understood, and they have kept their silence to this day.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Jean Daniel Reuss on April 27, 2022, 03:26:21 PM

    The more I reasoned about the many aspects of the DPI, the more I became convinced that the 9 hikers were murdered.

    My conviction of the criminal nature of the DPI is therefore closer to the opinion of Per Inge OestMoen and is also compatible with the expert statements of Eduard Tumanov.

    However, I disagree on many points of detail. For instance, I think that the attackers were few in number (only 3) and did not possess firearms...
    It was the attackers who after their victory in the deadly altercation quietly rested in the shelter of the tent, and then the attackers-and-murderers cut the canvas from the inside, just before leaving the area of the massacre, probably to manifest their joy.

    A complete and detailed plausible explanatory scenario, in any case worthy of study even if it does not provide an absolute proof, has been written in Russian by Aleks Kandr:

    http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova

    So for me, the DPI is a completely banal news story. The only question that puzzles me is why so few people, such as Sasha Kan, refuse to see the simplest fact, that is, that there were many motives for a fierce, ruthless and deadly attack.

    After Stalin's death, the end of the Gulag, orchestrated by Krushchev, did not make the USSR a paradise on earth: if the hikers had been warned of the dangers of attacks lurking in the vicinity of Vizhay and had therefore come out of the tent with their three short-handled axes, then perhaps the hikers would have been able to counterattack...

    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on May 06, 2022, 12:38:06 PM
    (https://i.ibb.co/pKn1Yf9/Grouping-of-bone-breaking-blows.png) (https://ibb.co/VC3LfgP)

    I found this quite interesting article in the Lancet : "Global, regional, and national burden of bone fractures in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019." based on the recording of 178 million bone fractures in 2019.

    Source : https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2666-7568%2821%2900172-0 (https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2666-7568%2821%2900172-0)

    Skull, sternum and ribs fractures only represent 6,57% of the 178 M fractures, but at Dyatlov's Pass they represent 90% of the fractures.

    Arm, hand, leg and foot fractures represent 60,51% of the 178 M fractures, but at Dyatlov's Pass they represent 0% of the fractures.


    Unfortunately, the study mixes "clavicle, scapula, or humerus" fractures in a same category. Zolotaryov had a very rare scapula fracture and none of the 18 humerus was broken. In the USA, scapula fracture represent approximately 0.4-1% of all fractures (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537312/ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537312/)) and humerus fracture 8% of all fractures (https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/825488-overview (https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/825488-overview)). If we could have the details of the "clavicle, scapula, or humerus" category, it would even increase the contradiction, with something close to :

    Skull, scapula, sternum and ribs fractures represent 6,97-7,57 % of all fractures, but at Dyatlov's Pass they represent 100% of the fractures.

    Arm (humerus included), hand, leg and foot fractures represent 68,51% of all fractures, but at Dyatlov's Pass they represent 0% of the fractures.

    Approximatively, we expect 7% and get 100%, we expect 70% and get 0%...

    I have no expertise in statistics but somebody should seriously analyze the Dyatlov's Pass event in terms of statistics. The distribution of bones fractures is not at random and even it defies the general statistics of bone fractures based on a 178 million cases study. Working on the broken bones has serious advantages as bone fracture is a precise fact and not an interpretation, as any bone fracture is always related to an accidental or catastrophic event of whatever type, as it is related to the hikers' death and to a force having caused death and as there is a number of 29 fractured bones for 9 individuals.

    In my opinion, the concentration of the 29 bone fractures in the blue circle also containing brain, heart and lungs can only mean "aiming at vital organs in the purpose to kill".

    And if we consider other types of injury : cut, scratch, bruise, it becomes even more meaningful. That is to say all other parts of the body were exposed to injuries : but not a single of these injuries at not vital organs was caused with enough strength to break the smallest phalanx. We should consider the event, the destruction and the destructed as a whole. And even extend the destructed to objects : skis, stove, poles, cameras, eyeglasses, pens, biscuits, matches, glass bottles... any object that could be broken into two pieces, how many breakable objects did they have and how many were broken ? And what is the pattern of destruction ? Are we talking of a random catastrophic event that hit their camp and that avoided to break any match, any eyeglass, any pencil, any bottle, any toe, any finger, any foot, any hand, any leg  or any arm but reached and broke 29 human bones just centimeter close to the vital organs ?
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on May 09, 2022, 08:02:43 AM
    Hi Charlie

    The fractures are a good Foundation to start from . As you say, they are something factual about the case that we do know about.

    To help with statistics I would recommend "Thinking, Fast and Slow: Daniel Kahneman". It's not an easy read but gives good examples of how we can jump to conclusions.

    I'm not sure if your statistics add up with regards to 100% fractures across all the victims as only 4 of the 9 had fractures. ( I am not much better at statistics) . The initial findings by the investigation did say that the injuries received were like that of a car accident.

    We have several theories for the fractures at the ravine.
    1) a tree falling on the group whilst in the tent.
    2)  outsiders and deliberate violence.
    3)  the possibility of taking shelter in a snow cave, natural or man made that fell on top of them.
    4) falling down a steep embankment.
    5) an avalanche at the tent location.

    Most of these suggest some sort of Traumatic Asphyxia. Research on traumatic asphyxia highlights the following.

    Internal petechiae and ecchymoses (e.g., pharyngeal, nasal, laryngeal, epiglottic, tracheal, subpleural, and subepicardial)


    Pulmonary congestion with subsequent edema


    Cerebral edema and petechiae


    Fractures, (e.g., ribs, clavicles, and sternum)


    Lacerations of abdominal organs (e.g., spleen)


    Retinal hemorrhages (Purtscher syndrome)


    Tympanic hemorrhages


    Pulmonary microembolism (fat and bone marrow)


    Hypoxic changes in internal organs (e.g., vacuolization and swelling of hepatocytes)


    I am no expert on the above but it does mention, landslides, crushing in crowds and deliberate murder. There is a case that goes back to 1800s in Scotland called "burking" . Two gentlemen set about killing innocent people by sitting on their chests and smothering their faces to supply the corpses  for dissection at anatomy lectures.

    Due to where the bodies with most fractures were found , I lean towards some sort of snow collapse.




    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on May 09, 2022, 11:43:17 AM
    Hello Ziljoe

    I'm not sure if your statistics add up with regards to 100% fractures across all the victims as only 4 of the 9 had fractures. ( I am not much better at statistics) .

    All 9 hikers received injuries, minor or serious, and all 9 were taken in the same deadly event. Therefore we had to consider that the fractures are meaningful for the group of 9 hikers. They could have toe fractures as the didn't have their shoes on and crossed a field of stones to reach the forest, but they had not a single toe fracture : the concentration of 29 fractures in the blue circle of my sketch if meaningful for the group of 9 hikers. And for a group of 9 hikers with so many bones to break, the greatest distance from the most distant fracture to the heart is approximatively 30 cm (a foot).

    The strength applied to the group broke 29 bones in the immediate proximity of brain, heart and lungs, in the blue circle of 30 cm of radius... sparing the 1080 bones of arms and legs : (2 humerus + 2 radius + 2 ulan + 54 hand + 2 femur + 2 patella + 2 tibia + 2 fibula + 52 foot) x 9 hikers... where 70% of all fractured happened in a sample of 178 million fractures. And this sample does not discriminates context, it listed fractures whatever the cause : sport, car accident, fall in the kitchen, fight... the context was just catastrophic at some point, a least enough catastrophic to cause bone fracture... from the grand-mother falling in her  kitchen to the young biker hitting a tree.

    And the avalanche theory does not stand, you just have to look at the picture of the tent with the pole still standing and a perfectly flat surface of the snow layer above the tent. The supporters of the theory even concede that their avalanche was something like 5 meters wide and at the limit of possible slope angle... just passing inside the tent without crushing the stove and the pipe but fracturing 29 bones of the hikers... and being at the limit of possible angle for an avalanche to be triggered: the hypothetic avalanche would have had of the lowest energy (as acceleration is lowered with the flatness of the slope)... 5 meters wide low energy slow avalanche that didn't crush the stove and left the pole standing and which none of the rescuers arriving on site ever recognize... no signs of avalanche according to the testimonies. And they say the cutting of the layer triggered their avalanche but there should have been some space just in front of the entrance, the cut of the trench must have exceeded the length of the tent in front of the entrance, there should have been more cut in front of the entrance than at the back of the tent.... and the entrance is intact, the pole still standing with Slobodin jacket hanging inside.

    So we can consider my sketch as the superposition of the 9 skeletons of the hikers. And what we see looks like what we call shot grouping in precision shooting: when somebody aims at a target.



    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on May 09, 2022, 03:03:08 PM
    Hi Charles ,

    I agree with your considerations of any avalanche at the site of the tent causing theses injuries. I don't believe that these fractures could have happened  there . Although a small slide may have been the trigger to leave the location of the tent and seek refuge in the tree line.

    I'm not sure if using the 178 million fractures has context though. Because it leaves out another billion  plus people that would have not recorded fractures. So I think the statistics can only be applied from the 4 with fractures.

    For example , if there was a bus crash and one person out of 9 on the bus had 20 fractures to their chest but they all died I don't think you could apply that 20 fractures were distributed across the 9 people on the bus.

    I am somewhat out of my depth on this and I appreciate what you are saying.
    I think that there is a high possibility that they were crushed after finding or digging a snow hole.

    However , I'm enjoying your research and ideas and I am interested.





    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on May 09, 2022, 03:37:27 PM
    Thank you for your kind answer.

    I'm not sure if using the 178 million fractures has context though. Because it leaves out another billion  plus people that would have not recorded fractures. So I think the statistics can only be applied from the 4 with fractures.

    It is difficult to find a better sample if you want to know what bones usually break when there is an accident or fight or any catastrophic event involving any person. A better sample would be only more specific about age as bone fragility is mostly related to age...

    For example, if there was a bus crash and one person out of 9 on the bus had 20 fractures to their chest but they all died I don't think you could apply that 20 fractures were distributed across the 9 people on the bus.

    Why not ? We can even make an average: 2.2 fractures/person in the bus. It has more meaning with Dyatlov's group because 4/9 hikers had fractures. The figures are low and it is better to make statistics with larger groups, but 4/9 and 29 is a beginning and that's all we have.

    I think that there is a high possibility that they were crushed after finding or digging a snow hole.

    And consider that Zolotaryov had both scapula and ribs fractures, which is not likely compatible with compression when the weakest link breaks and releases the pressure. Zolotaryov had two lignes of fractures at the ribs, on the same side, one close to the sternum. When these two lines broke they released the pressure. But breaking the scapula required a second blow... Zolotaryov had lines of 5 fractured ribs, but Dubinina had a line of 6 fractured ribs... If it was compression fractures, why didn't a 6th rib break on his chest to release the pressure on Zolotaryov as it did on Dubinina ? But the the scapula did break on him, a stronger bone in his back ? At least two blows on Zolotaryov...

    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on May 09, 2022, 03:56:52 PM
    Hi Charles,

    I will get back to you on this. At the moment it's a gut instinct that the stats you suggest are incorrectly applied. But I am only debating the issue and not dismissing your thinking. It's a journey that I'm happy to look into.

    I just don't think you can put people with no fractures in with those that did. Hopefully someone else on the forum can comment.

     thumb1
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Игорь Б. on May 09, 2022, 05:08:23 PM
    At least two blows on Zolotaryov...
    Нет.
    Quote
    Переломы лопатки достаточно редко наблюдаются в травматологии... Как правило, возникают одновременно с переломами ребер.
    http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=86651
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on May 09, 2022, 05:13:44 PM
    I just don't think you can put people with no fractures in with those that did.

    If we want to calculate a fertility rate, we divide the number of children by the number women of childbearing age, they might have 3, 2, 1 or 0 children, they are all included as long as they have the age to bear a child. Same with the fracture rate, we divide the number of broken bones by the number of hikers exposed to injury, they might have 14, 13, 1 or 0 fractures, they are all included as long as they have breakable bones.

    Greetings
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on May 09, 2022, 05:21:43 PM
    At least two blows on Zolotaryov...
    Нет.

    Thank you Igor, so... only one blow from the snowman.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on May 09, 2022, 05:49:37 PM
    I think this is wrong way to analyse the statistics? If there are no fractures in the other 5 ,then they don't lead to the event that caused the fractures. It could be a separate event? I don't think you can link fractures to non fractures? I need you to be more specific. 3 in the ravine had their fractures . One on the hill side had his fracture in the skull which could have been to a freezing of the fluids .
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on May 10, 2022, 03:03:26 PM
    At least two blows on Zolotaryov...
    Нет.

    Thank you Igor, so... only one blow from the snowman.


    The quote from Igor translated to English:

    Fractures of the scapula are rarely observed in traumatology ... As a rule, they occur simultaneously with fractures of the ribs

    : Igor b is not for the snowman. He explains that he believes that there was a snow collapse at the ravine. He hypothesizes through researched  data also. From his link I will translate some to English.

    About fractures of the right scapula in Zolotarev.

    A comprehensive assessment of the location of cadaveric spots and flexion-extensor fractures of the ribs made it possible to determine the exact position of Zolotarev's body at the time of snow collapse in the stream:
    http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&sho...ost&p=86124

    Attached image

    It can be seen that the main blow fell on the right side of the chest and the right shoulder blade.
    As it turned out, there is nothing surprising in the fracture of the scapula along with the ribs:
    Quote
    Fractures of the scapula are rarely observed in traumatology ... As a rule, they occur simultaneously with fractures of the ribs .http://www.krasotaimedicina.ru/diseases/tr...oulder-fracture
    Quote
    Scapular fractures are caused by direct trauma with a large force vector. As a rule, in 80% of cases, fractures of the scapula are accompanied by injuries to the chest , lungs and shoulder.
    Quote
    A scapular fracture requires significant force and, as a rule, a scapular fracture is accompanied by other injuries , which requires a thorough examination.https://www.dikul.net/wiki/perelomy-lopatki/
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Manti on May 10, 2022, 07:14:30 PM

    They could have toe fractures as the didn't have their shoes on and crossed a field of stones to reach the forest, but they had not a single toe fracture
    Do we know this? Were their feet checked for fractures? Perhaps the pathologist was only looking to determine cause of death and  toe fractures aren't fatal.



    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on May 10, 2022, 07:48:49 PM

    They could have toe fractures as the didn't have their shoes on and crossed a field of stones to reach the forest, but they had not a single toe fracture
    Do we know this? Were their feet checked for fractures? Perhaps the pathologist was only looking to determine cause of death and  toe fractures aren't fatal.






    Not my quote manti, it was Charles.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on May 11, 2022, 02:02:38 PM
    Igor b is not for the snowman. He explains that he believes that there was a snow collapse at the ravine.

    Yes, I got that point, that's why I conceded a single blow and thanked Igor, but I am not convinced with the snow crushing the hikers yet.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Charles on May 11, 2022, 02:34:36 PM
    Do we know this? Were their feet checked for fractures? Perhaps the pathologist was only looking to determine cause of death and  toe fractures aren't fatal.

    They noted scratches and pine needles in the hair which were not causes of death. And they noted 26 fractures, then 29, which not so bad for a check. We have to rely on the autopsies, even if new material forces us to modify our hypothesis as when they later discovered Zolotaryov's scapular fractures. But we can't go anywhere if we consider that there could be 20 more unnoticed fractures. We can consider the autopsies as a sufficiently serious ground, at least provisory, to begin building a theory. The material of the diaries is very different, much more complex, with different layers of reality: the said, the half-said, the unsaid, the missing in the absolute, the missing which can be found elsewhere, the said with repentance, the begun to be said but finally silenced and lost...

    The diaries allow us recapture information despite some seeming gaps, but we have to stick to the autopsies because if we supposes gaps, then they become perfectly useless. And a provisory theory is better than no theory at all.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Jean Daniel Reuss on May 15, 2022, 12:28:08 PM
                      Reply #59
    .........................
    I think that there is a high possibility that they were crushed after finding or digging a snow hole.

    If I understand correctly you are supporting the hypothesis that the fatal injuries to the 4 of the Den are the consequences of a natural collapse of the hardened snow above them.

    Conversely, you will be aware that I am a proponent of the criminal explanation for the DPI (the TOKEB theory). In other words, I am convinced that there is no problem with the homicide theory. Here is a remark that allows us to think that there was the intervention of other people.

    First it seems that the 4 of the Den had decided to wait and hide in the ravine (small valley) near the cedar.

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-pass-ravine-Aleexenkov-map-cropped.png)

    To be able to stay a long time in the Den without getting cold they had judiciously built 4 small beds of branches, (probably following the advice of Zolotaryov).

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-pass-the-den-11-thumb.jpg)(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-the-den-10.jpg)

    The bed of branches consisted of 14 fir tree branches and one birch, and on top were belongings and clothes.
    The clothes included:
        One leg of a pair of black ski trousers;
        A thick brown woolen sweater;
        A white woolen jumper, made in China; and
        A pair of brown trousers tied at the ankles but flared open with a tear to widen them.


    I then assume that you do not object to the visual reconstruction of Vasilii-Zyadik, who has certainly worked as rigorously as possible in constructing his instructive synthesized images.
    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-Vasilii-Zyadik-12.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Dyatlov-pass-Vasilii-Zyadik-05.jpg)

    (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-Vasilii-Zyadik-05.jpg)

    Therefore a question is mandatory :

       How could the corpses have been moved by a natural cause while the beds of branches seem not to have moved?

    In 2013 Askinadzi published a letter in Ural Stalker magazine, in which he recalls that the distance between all the heads of those found in the brook was about 30 cm (about 11.5") – they were all very close to each other.

    On the contrary, this grouping of the four corpses can easily be explained by the final action of "outsiders" who threw, or rather flung, chucked, the corpses into a place (or a hole like a pit) located below.

    Once their work was done, the murderers wanted to tidy things up and also align the corpses to make absolutely for sure that there were 4 of them, because 9, minus the previous 5 = 4.
    • Only Kolevatov was not quite dead yet and was able to turn a bit on Zolotaryov in a last and almost involuntary movement.
    • By coincidence, there was a small difference in level at this point and Dubinina slipped and ended up in the bizarre kneeling position that we know.

    mk :   December 04, 2020, 03:34:13 AM      Reply #7
    it strikes me that the killers were rather unconcerned about making things look natural.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Ziljoe on May 15, 2022, 03:04:45 PM
    Hi Jean Daniel Reuss,

    I support the hypothesis that the fatal injuries could have been caused by the collapse of snow on top of the ravine 4.

    I assume that some of, or all the clothing on the fir bed  were from the 2 Yuri's?. What exactly happened at the den , we will never know. However we have four bodies and a number of fractures.

    It is not because it was hardened snow that fell on top of them but rather the reporting of hard snow when digging the bodies out that indicates that there had been a snow collapse.

    The position of the bodies also suggests that they were perhaps lying in that position , perhaps cuddling each other. It is not that the snow collapsed at the actual den and there bodies migrated , rather the ravine 4 moved themselves to that location where the bodies were found.

    Igor b goes into more detail about the specifics.

    I am open to all hypothesis.
    Title: Re: A problem with homicide theories
    Post by: Игорь Б. on May 15, 2022, 05:15:07 PM
    How could the corpses have been moved by a natural cause while the beds of branches seem not to have moved?
    Никто никуда не перемещался. Было два укрытия - настил из деревьев и снежная пещера. Расстояние между ними 11 метров. Сделать одно укрытие на 9 человек в тех условиях было невозможно.
    Кроме того, очевидно, что у них было два разных подхода к строительству снежных укрытий.

    P.S. Любые версии с убийством опровергаются пятнами Вишневского:
    http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=107726
    http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=90162