Victims and Case Files > Witness Testimonies
Interview with Nurse Pelageya Ivanovna
Nigel Evans:
--- Quote from: Star man on December 22, 2020, 04:07:01 PM ---
--- Quote from: Nigel Evans on December 22, 2020, 03:05:51 AM ---My vote would be that there is sufficient correlation between the morgue photos and the autopsies that the latter are genuine. Also that the autopsies contain big surprises which are central to the mystery (e.g. Lyudmila's and Nicolai's fractures) adds to their authenticity. Lets remember that it was the autopsies of the ravine4 that drove a coach and horses through the initial coverup of death by freezing. Why fabricate something like that?
However i like the observations about being dirty and singed hair, the yuri's hands and forearms were black when discovered (as in the photos) but have been cleaned up in the morgue photos. Zinaida's hair might also have received some similar attention.
--- End quote ---
If Solter is right, I think it is more likely that Lyuda's hair and face were singed/burnt.
Regards
Star man
--- End quote ---
Lyudmila's face seems to be sporting a sun tan except for the chin. The autopsy describes her face as "yellow/brown". If you use the side of both breasts facing the camera as a reference you can see that the chin is her natural colour but the rest of the face is considerably darker. Imo she has a mild version of the skin darkening seen at the funerals of Zinaida and YuriD.
Nigel Evans:
--- Quote from: mk on December 22, 2020, 03:28:28 PM ---So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?
--- End quote ---
I'd have a lot more respect for the Solter interview if for instance they showed her the morgue photographs to help her memory instead of all this vagueness.
Star man:
--- Quote from: Nigel Evans on December 23, 2020, 06:20:16 AM ---
--- Quote from: mk on December 22, 2020, 03:28:28 PM ---So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?
--- End quote ---
I'd have a lot more respect for the Solter interview if for instance they showed her the morgue photographs to help her memory instead of all this vagueness.
--- End quote ---
Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times. One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives. So how were the bodies formally identified? I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies? It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done? Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field? Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found? Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense. Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy. This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.
Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense. But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.
Regards
Star man
mk:
--- Quote from: Star man on December 23, 2020, 04:23:23 PM ---Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times. One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives. So how were the bodies formally identified? I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies? It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done? Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field? Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found? Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense. Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy. This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.
Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense. But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.
Regards
Star man
--- End quote ---
So what about the bodies that were found not quite clean? Not exactly dirty, but with traces of blood still evident. For example, autopsy of Dyatlov states, "The lips are of bluish purple color and covered in clotted blood." Slobodin's autopsy states, " On the end of the nose a part of the soft tissue is under a dry brown-cherry-red crust with a size of 1.5 x 1 cm. The lips are swollen. The mouth is closed. There is a trail of caked blood coming from the opening of the nose". Several other autopsies mention things like that: nothing that would be called really dirty, but certainly something that ought to have been cleaned away if Nurse Solter had seen them first.
The autopsies themselves seem somewhat cursory, as though going through the basic procedure without really searching for anything. Are you suggesting that the autopsies were "doctored" to some extent?
All of the autopsies state that rigor mortis had resolved--which is to be expected--so doesn't that mean that the description of the position of the person is based on their frozen position? But they would have to wait until the body thawed in order to remove the clothing and examine it, so any autopsy must have been done in stages: examination and report of the position/state of the frozen body and another examination after it was thawed. (Am I understanding this right?) Which means that it would have been easier for one person to do the "frozen examination" and another to do the "thawed examination".
I'm wondering because it seems like a very tedious job to position the bodies down to the curl of the toes in the socks and hold them in that position while they freeze in place in order to fool the person doing the autopsy. On the other hand, putting arms and legs into a basic position might be simpler and then just add to the autopsy report as needed.
Not really trying to make a point--just thinking through what would have been involved in an undertaking you suggest. I can imagine someone doing that. And putting the bodies in the ravine so that the would have time to decompose and hide evidence is a good idea. And if you were dressing bodies, you might get some of the clothing on the wrong person, which makes it look like they traded on purpose. It does seem rather extravagant to tear up clothing of one person and wrap it around parts of another person; it's not like that plays an important role in the "story".
I was reading the radiograms yesterday and was struck by Maslennikov's report (sent in a radiogram while he was on site conducting the search): The victims were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane without footwear, some without trouser and jackets. The direction of the hurricane is northeastern east, so all of them are on the same line from the discovered tent the farthest approximately two kilometers from the tent. In the sources of the stream flowing into Lozva, a fire is burning burned logs dead. The nearest neighbor Kolmogorov's head is broken tomorrow the survey will continue... It just seems like a premature conclusion at that point.
Sulman responds by asking why the tent stayed put if the hurricane blew the hikers down the hill.
In a later radiogram, Maslennikov gives basic theory we are all familiar with: In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00. They again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspia to the ravine ascended to the crest, and the Chamovs decided to break camp at this place, driven by a hurricane wind. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks of quilted jackets from one side stacked products with other shoes, here not all the blankets are all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top of the group the supper in the tent left the food and began to change clothes to take off the wet clothes of the shoes and put on a dry one. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to recover and he was sleeping. Jumped to the scream - were also demolished tent installed in the most dangerous place in the wind place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back meters from fifty since the tent was torn down, the lower ones could command her off to go into the woods, counting on the slope towards the XXXXXXXXXXXXX Auspya where the forest next to them they wanted to hide here can be found the place of their previous overnight but very stony and up to the forest 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire, they went back to look for clothes but were not dressed well enough and fell. Not enough and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this.
If we go with the theory that all the evidence was planted, I believe that Maslennikov was in on it. He made sure the right bodies were found, and fed everyone the approved interpretation of the evidence.
Star man:
--- Quote from: mk on December 24, 2020, 07:47:53 AM ---
--- Quote from: Star man on December 23, 2020, 04:23:23 PM ---Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times. One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives. So how were the bodies formally identified? I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies? It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done? Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field? Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found? Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense. Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy. This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.
Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense. But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.
Regards
Star man
--- End quote ---
So what about the bodies that were found not quite clean? Not exactly dirty, but with traces of blood still evident. For example, autopsy of Dyatlov states, "The lips are of bluish purple color and covered in clotted blood." Slobodin's autopsy states, " On the end of the nose a part of the soft tissue is under a dry brown-cherry-red crust with a size of 1.5 x 1 cm. The lips are swollen. The mouth is closed. There is a trail of caked blood coming from the opening of the nose". Several other autopsies mention things like that: nothing that would be called really dirty, but certainly something that ought to have been cleaned away if Nurse Solter had seen them first.
The autopsies themselves seem somewhat cursory, as though going through the basic procedure without really searching for anything. Are you suggesting that the autopsies were "doctored" to some extent?
All of the autopsies state that rigor mortis had resolved--which is to be expected--so doesn't that mean that the description of the position of the person is based on their frozen position? But they would have to wait until the body thawed in order to remove the clothing and examine it, so any autopsy must have been done in stages: examination and report of the position/state of the frozen body and another examination after it was thawed. (Am I understanding this right?) Which means that it would have been easier for one person to do the "frozen examination" and another to do the "thawed examination".
I'm wondering because it seems like a very tedious job to position the bodies down to the curl of the toes in the socks and hold them in that position while they freeze in place in order to fool the person doing the autopsy. On the other hand, putting arms and legs into a basic position might be simpler and then just add to the autopsy report as needed.
Not really trying to make a point--just thinking through what would have been involved in an undertaking you suggest. I can imagine someone doing that. And putting the bodies in the ravine so that the would have time to decompose and hide evidence is a good idea. And if you were dressing bodies, you might get some of the clothing on the wrong person, which makes it look like they traded on purpose. It does seem rather extravagant to tear up clothing of one person and wrap it around parts of another person; it's not like that plays an important role in the "story".
I was reading the radiograms yesterday and was struck by Maslennikov's report (sent in a radiogram while he was on site conducting the search): The victims were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane without footwear, some without trouser and jackets. The direction of the hurricane is northeastern east, so all of them are on the same line from the discovered tent the farthest approximately two kilometers from the tent. In the sources of the stream flowing into Lozva, a fire is burning burned logs dead. The nearest neighbor Kolmogorov's head is broken tomorrow the survey will continue... It just seems like a premature conclusion at that point.
Sulman responds by asking why the tent stayed put if the hurricane blew the hikers down the hill.
In a later radiogram, Maslennikov gives basic theory we are all familiar with: In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00. They again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspia to the ravine ascended to the crest, and the Chamovs decided to break camp at this place, driven by a hurricane wind. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks of quilted jackets from one side stacked products with other shoes, here not all the blankets are all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top of the group the supper in the tent left the food and began to change clothes to take off the wet clothes of the shoes and put on a dry one. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to recover and he was sleeping. Jumped to the scream - were also demolished tent installed in the most dangerous place in the wind place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back meters from fifty since the tent was torn down, the lower ones could command her off to go into the woods, counting on the slope towards the XXXXXXXXXXXXX Auspya where the forest next to them they wanted to hide here can be found the place of their previous overnight but very stony and up to the forest 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire, they went back to look for clothes but were not dressed well enough and fell. Not enough and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this.
If we go with the theory that all the evidence was planted, I believe that Maslennikov was in on it. He made sure the right bodies were found, and fed everyone the approved interpretation of the evidence.
--- End quote ---
I have looked at many of the theories in a fair amount of detail and I try to look at each one objectively. On this I am just speculating at the moment as it all hinges on Solters recollection of the events. However, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I had considered the possibility that the whole scene had been fabricated previously, but thought the chance was low, because there are lots of little details that hang together, and it didn't seem likely that anyone would go to that level of detail. But, it is possible that the people involved were professional scene creators, and in a way artists at what they do.
If Solter's account is correct, then Its possible that some of the details of the autopsies were not true?
There have always been things that have not made sense to me, like why the fire could not be kept going to sustain them, or why Yuri D climbed the cedar with severe frost bite on his hands and feet. How the Yuris died of the cold while the fire was still hot enough to burn their legs, The more you think about it the more you realise, that none of it makes any sense. Cutting the tent, leaving without adequate clothes, pitching the tent in a really bad spot, away from the planned route. Then there are the errors and obvious omissions. The flashlight on 10 cm of snow at the tent. The missing knife. The position of the rav 4 bodies in relation to the so called den. The lack of detailed forensic analysis of the foot prints. Missing toxicology report. The untidy way the boots were stored in the tent. The orderly way everything else is described in the tent, even though they have just cut the tent in panic and decended to their doom.
It is interesting that the case files state that there was no evidence of other people there, such as human or animal foot prints. What if the opposite is true, and the only evidence of people there is from other people and none of the prints are from the Dyatlov group? You travel there on skis, set up the tent, create the scene, air lift the bodies in by helicopter, plant the bodies, and then winch yourself up into the helicopters to leave the area?
Regards
Star man
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version