This post is a question for participants who lean towards the theory that the hikers were murdered.
If they were murdered, how do you read the sequence of events?
If I were given orders to murder 9 people -- 9 is a lot -- I would first have to separate them into smaller groups because if I didn't, the other 8 could jump on me while I was killing one. Therefore, I don't think there was a single killer. I think Jean-Daniel is right, there were three. If there were three killers, they could each take a group of three hikers, separate the groups, and proceed.
Secondly, how can we account for the terrible brutality? Such brutality usually accompanies crimes of passion. Did Krivonischenko have his leg burned on purpose, so badly that he bit his own finger off in pain? Did Luydmila have her tongue ripped out? If I were a contract killer, I would just smash them and be done with it, but these people seem to have had a passion for cruelty. Do you think this?
Assuming there were three killers, do you see signs of different styles of killing, that would account for three killers, each with his own style?
And lastly, the clothing is weird. Someone, maybe Luydmila, was wearing a cut-off pants leg (and only one; if she was cold, why not two?); at one point, I read that the pants leg was "neatly cut" -- sorry, I can't remember where I read this, but I do know it was more than one place-- how did she get that, if she didn't have a knife or scissors, and how in the world does that fit into the murder scenario?
I hope we can use this post to discuss the theory of murder, possible sequence of events, number of killers, why such cruelty, and how the clothing fits into the murder, and just set aside the "it wasn't murder" for other topics.
My interpretation of the events is this:
1. First; when dead people are found, it is imperative that the cause of death is established. This was not done. Instead, the local investigators were instructed to conclude that the death of the nine was due to an accident:
https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2013?rbid=18461. That order would not have been given unless the tragedy was something entirely different from an accident. So, the necessary forensic investigation was never made because of the order from above.
2. The investigation was not only unreliable; it was deliberately hindered. Natalya Sakharova is a trained doctor who is competent in forensics, and she has pinpointed what happened:
https://dyatlovpass.com/natalya-saharova-KP?rbid=18461.
3. An old saying says that "corpses do not lie." The nine corpses do not either. The injuries are consistent with murder, and can only be explained by human attack with evil intent. For example, the injuries of Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle are most illustrative:
https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png. The almond-shaped injury can only have been caused by a crushing blow. The shape of the damage looks very like what can be expected from a rifle butt. I strongly believe that it is exactly what it is. Even more telling is the injury on the right arm, on the victim's biceps. This is the precise point where police forces attack the arms in order to paralyze a resisting person. These two injuries tell their tale.
Then a revealing statement from the investigator Vozrozhdenniy says a lot. Vozrozhdenniy gives his answer to the question: "Is it possible that Thibeaux-Brignolle was hit by a rock that was in someone’s hand?" The answer: "In this case, there would have been damage to the soft tissue, and this was not evident." - This is the most telling. Thibeaux-Brignolle wore headgear, and it protected the skin when the blow crushed the skull. So, why did the investigator answer they way he did? It was all about covering the truth. The investigators knew that they might die in an "accident" or from a "heart attack" unless they played their part as they were told.
3. The crushed ribs:
https://dyatlovpass.com/death?flp=1#Zolotaryov,
https://dyatlovpass.com/death?flp=1#Dubinina. It has been said that these injuries could not have been caused by human attack. That is wrong. I studied Jiu Jitsu for a couple of years, and my instructor Alain Sailly demonstrated how one can incapacitate and even kill a human by elbow strikes to the chest. The attackers who killed the Dyatlov group were no ordinary criminals, they must have been trained special forces. Elbow strikes from trained close combat specialists, such as those from the KGB (or similar forces), can even break skulls.
4. The injuries of Kolevatov:
https://dyatlovpass.com/death?flp=1#Kolevatov. There was an open wound behind ear, size 3x1.5 cm, and a deformed neck. Also, his larynx was destroyed. I have learned how to crush the larynx of people, and I recognized the injury. It is not something that happens from a fall or an avalanche, which is ruled out in this case. On this site, there is a good description, I quote:
"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. However we can't be sure about this since the autopsy report didn't specify any more details about the body. We are left guessing on the nature and origin of these injuries." - The doctor ignored the matter, and there is a reason for that.
5. The injuries of Rustem Slobodin:
https://dyatlovpass.com/death?flp=1#Slobodin. Look at the injury at the side of the head. On this site, it is written, I quote: "It is also unusual to harm the face and sides of the skull while the back of the head has no damage. In case of Slobodin's body we see the opposite. His injury pattern is a reverse of what we would usually see in injuries suffered by a freezing man in the last minutes of his life." - This is all very telling. The bruised knuckles and face may be the result of being dragged over snow crust. We see the same with Zinaida Kolmogorova. These injuries are not at all what is seen in avalanches.
6. Soviet and Russian authorities have insisted that the tragedy was an accident, and present-day Russian authorities have said that it was an avalanche. However, it has been proven that an avalanche could not have taken place and was also not possible in the area. Why do the official authorities maintain that an avalanche killed the nine students, when it has been demonstrated that no avalanche happened or could happen there? The reason is more than likely the same reason as when the investigators in 1959 were told from above to conclude that it was an accident.
7. There was not a single killer. There must have been a killing squad, probably at least six persons, perhaps more. Special forces attack in groups given different tasks and attacking different targets and persons. That explains why the victims had different injuries.
8. It is noteworthy that the four last victims, Dubinina, Zolotaryov, Kolevatov and Thibeaux-Brignolle were those who had the most serious injuries. They were also relatively better dressed than the others. This is also telling. These four might survive for hour and days if left alone. Therefore the attackers had to use greater force in order to hasten their death.
So what happened?
The nine students were loyal Soviet citizens, and there is not a single piece of evidence of anything else. Moreover, they were on their way upwards in Soviet society and had forceful friends and relatives. Therefore, they could not be accused of espionage. To shoot them and send them home in closed coffins would be too obvious. It would also be too obvious to make them "disappear." For this reason, those high up who ordered the murder had to arrange it to look like an "accident." The KGB was, by the way, experts in making "accidents" and "natural deaths."
To kill nine students on a mountain trip during winter, the best way to make a murder look like an accident is to force them out in the winter landscape at gunpoint, ensuring that they are improperly dressed, and then wait and let the cold do its job and accomplish the mission. However, during the night between February 1th and February 2th there was a sudden short rise in temperature. The result was that the nine students did not die as soon as planned. The attackers then had to hunt down those who had been driven out and taken refuge in the area, catch and kill them with force. This was a little difficulty caused by the weather; if the temperature had stayed low all the students would probably have frozen to death as was intended.
The strange clothing is not so weird given the circumstances: It is what can be expected when people are forced out from their tent and into a winter landscape. Such the victims do their best to survive by grabbing and cutting clothes as necessary. One can only imagine the terror they must have gone through.
It is not certain that Dubinina's tongue was ripped out. It was missing, but natural decomposition or the work of small predators like mice may be the explanation. We cannot know for sure. The burned legs of Krivonischenko may be indicative of torture by fire; but we do not know with certainty. Doroshenko's damage to his fingers may be the result of a desperate attempt to climb a tree to escape from attackers who took great care to avoid leaving any bullet wounds or knife/bayonet cuts. It is possible that both Krivonischenko and Doroshenko climbed a tree and fire was used to force them down. Perhaps a flame thrower was used and caused Krivonischenko's burns, but that is speculation since we cannot know for certain. What we can know, is that only murder can explain the injuries and the whole frightful tragedy that happened on the fateful night of February 2, 1959.
Lastly, there are some more details.
First; it was said that the local Mansi people initially came under suspicion and that some among them were interrogated for a while. Suddenly the Mansi were released and told that they they were no longer suspected, after a seamstress had declared that the group's tent had been cut from the inside. This has never been scientifically demonstrated in any way and is highly dubious. It was then said that since the tent was cut from the inside the students did it themselves, and the Mansi was not to be suspected. What was this? The Mansi were said to be suspected and they were interrogated, and then suddenly let off the hook with a non-scientific piece of evidence. That was a stern warning to the Mansi, who were in the area and must have been aware of what had happened. The unspoken message to the Mansi was that if any of them ever told what they know, the Soviet state would invent any evidence necessary in order to take harsh measures against them. The Mansi understood, and has kept silent ever since.
Second; The nine students had agreed with friends and relatives to arrive at Vizhay on February 12th. They did not, but everyone took for granted that there had been a little delay and nobody had any reason to assume that something was wrong on February 12th. Still, a document has since come to light that there had been preparations for a search long before the date when the group was expected to arrive in Vizhay. The document was dated February 6th, in other words long before anything could indicate that something special had happened. Now, such a document is hardly made on the fly. It is normally written after some meetings and deliberations. Yet it was ready on February 6th. This means that the Soviet authorities knew what had happened long before anyone else could have any reason to suspect anything, and even before the sixth of February.
Yes, it was murder. Natalya Saharova is right. Let it also be mentioned that before the case was closed by order from above, it was detected abnormally high levels of radioactivity on the clothes of the students, even those found in the water.
What did the Dyatlov group observe somewhere on their trip, which was so serious that these nine loyal Soviet citizens were considered a threat to state security, and which Soviet and Russian authorities have deliberately hidden up to this day?
That is the question.
Even today, an exposure of the full truth would create political unrest. That is the most probable reason why the truth is consistently denied.
One thing is beyond doubt; the nine were killed by human attackers.
Topic: Assuming murder (Read 3978 times)
