Victims and Case Files > Witness Testimonies
Testimonies Regarding the Tent
CalzagheChick:
This is still by far my favorite thread in the forum because LC did such an amazing job of putting all evidence in one spot and supporting his ideas with the evidence.
I'm quite sure that his ultimate goal is to convince us that the tent is NOT admissible in the DPI mystery because of its sketchy collection and sketchy history thereafter. It's just not a reliable source of information when you're considering the possibility of capital murder. Would anybody in the forum put another human being's LIFE on the line based upon what we know about the tent as of today?
I will go ahead and be the first to say, I could not. I couldn't smear any good name or watch someone's life go on trial based upon the "evidence" presented by the remains of the tent.
sarapuk:
--- Quote from: CalzagheChick on July 17, 2019, 12:50:52 PM ---This is still by far my favorite thread in the forum because LC did such an amazing job of putting all evidence in one spot and supporting his ideas with the evidence.
I'm quite sure that his ultimate goal is to convince us that the tent is NOT admissible in the DPI mystery because of its sketchy collection and sketchy history thereafter. It's just not a reliable source of information when you're considering the possibility of capital murder. Would anybody in the forum put another human being's LIFE on the line based upon what we know about the tent as of today?
I will go ahead and be the first to say, I could not. I couldn't smear any good name or watch someone's life go on trial based upon the "evidence" presented by the remains of the tent.
--- End quote ---
All evidence must be admissible if a proper investigation is under way. The TENT stands out as an important piece of evidence. Its disappearance allegedly down to some kind of damage caused to it while in storage. Sounds a bit iffy to Me. ! ?
Loose}{Cannon:
I think there is a lot more then the tent that "disappeared".
--- Quote ---The TENT stands out as an important piece of evidence
--- End quote ---
Perhaps re-read the original post? dunno1
sarapuk:
--- Quote from: Loose}{Cannon on July 22, 2019, 06:43:58 PM ---I think there is a lot more then the tent that "disappeared".
--- Quote ---The TENT stands out as an important piece of evidence
--- End quote ---
Perhaps re-read the original post? dunno1
--- End quote ---
All the main Evidence disappeared. The Bodies were soon buried after an Autopsy that fell short of the standards one might expect from such an Investigation.
Per Inge Oestmoen:
--- Quote from: sarapuk on July 22, 2019, 04:24:01 PM ---All evidence must be admissible if a proper investigation is under way. The TENT stands out as an important piece of evidence. Its disappearance allegedly down to some kind of damage caused to it while in storage. Sounds a bit iffy to Me. ! ?
--- End quote ---
Since the Dyatlov group's tent is no longer available, it is impossible to say whether it could yield any important evidence.
Still, there are some significant details about that tent.
It is not possible to find out who made the cuts in the tent, or whether it was simply destroyed during the search or transportation.
We know that a seamstress is said to have stated that the tent was cut from the inside. But, that statement was never substantiated or confirmed by any kind of scientific analysis. So, we really do not know.
What we know, is that at the first stages of the investigation the local Mansi people in the area were said to be suspected in the case. We also know that the statement that the tent was cut from the inside, immediately prompted the suspicion of the Mansi to be lifted. This is very interesting, because there is no scientifically acceptable evidence recorded to demonstrate that the tent was cut from the inside.
The Mansi were said to be suspected, but then a dubious conclusion from a single seamstress was used to lift the suspicion. What could that possibly mean?
It may be that the Mansi were given a powerful message, and then let off the hook. It is not certain that this is the case, but it is not unreasonable to be open to that possibility.
There is no evidence that the Mansi were the killers, although it is still remotely possible.
We do however know that the Mansi lived in the area. That means, even if the Mansi were not responsible for the death of the Dyatlov group, they likely were aware of what happened. For example, it would be difficult to land a helicopter in the area without some of the Mansi observing it. If the Mansi observed something and knew that the nine students had been killed, their lives would be cheap if they told anyone what they knew. They certainly understood that themselves. But in order to drive home the message, some of the Mansi were brought in to interrogation. After a short time, the statement about the tent was announced, and the Mansi were suddenly let free.
That may have been a stern message to the Mansi: "We let you off the hook now, but be aware if you ever tell anyone what you have seen we will quickly produce new conclusions."
I do not say this is what actually happened, it is a theory. It may well be that the tent and the statement about the cuts is all pure sloppiness.
However, it should be considered that the local Mansi people may have been told to keep quiet in a very effective way, and if this happened it would explain the curious lack of any scientific examination of the tent.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version