Theories Discussion > General Discussion

Who knew the answer?

(1/7) > >>

MDGross:
The criminal investigation passed through a number of men in a short period of time. It begs the question: Did one of them (or more than one) know what happened to the Dyatlov group? Was he replaced because he was close or had the answer? Is this conclusive proof of a cover up?
Here's how the investigation proceeded in an interview given by Okishev, who participated in the investigation from beginning to end. The criminal investigation was first handled by Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor. He was assisted in the investigation by another man from the Ivdel prosecutor's office named Korotaev. What did these two men uncover? They were soon replaced by Sverdlovsk Oblast prosecutor, Ivanov. Tempalov was actually questioned as part of the criminal investigation. And Korotaev and what he might have found aren't even mentioned in the case file. Then the investigation passed to Sverdlovsk Oblast Public Prosecutor, Klinov. It again raises the question had Ivanov found out too much? Okishev mentions that he had never heard of a prosecutor being present at any autopsies, as Klinov was present at each of the Dyatlov group autopsies. The criminal investigation at last was taken over by Urakov, the Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations. He was from Moscow and certainly had the power to order a cover up. He also made the decision to close the case in May. Was he following orders from the KGB or the supreme power, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?
Does all this point to a cover up of a military blunder, an exploded missile, for example? At this time in 1959 there was a Test Ban Treaty in place that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons by the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, although it's highly unlikely that any of these countries paid much attention to it. Or does it hint at involvement by the KGB from the beginning? 
All of this strongly suggests a state cover up. The crucial question is, of course, what was being covered up?

Star man:

--- Quote from: MDGross on September 24, 2020, 07:17:32 AM ---The criminal investigation passed through a number of men in a short period of time. It begs the question: Did one of them (or more than one) know what happened to the Dyatlov group? Was he replaced because he was close or had the answer? Is this conclusive proof of a cover up?
Here's how the investigation proceeded in an interview given by Okishev, who participated in the investigation from beginning to end. The criminal investigation was first handled by Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor. He was assisted in the investigation by another man from the Ivdel prosecutor's office named Korotaev. What did these two men uncover? They were soon replaced by Sverdlovsk Oblast prosecutor, Ivanov. Tempalov was actually questioned as part of the criminal investigation. And Korotaev and what he might have found aren't even mentioned in the case file. Then the investigation passed to Sverdlovsk Oblast Public Prosecutor, Klinov. It again raises the question had Ivanov found out too much? Okishev mentions that he had never heard of a prosecutor being present at any autopsies, as Klinov was present at each of the Dyatlov group autopsies. The criminal investigation at last was taken over by Urakov, the Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations. He was from Moscow and certainly had the power to order a cover up. He also made the decision to close the case in May. Was he following orders from the KGB or the supreme power, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?
Does all this point to a cover up of a military blunder, an exploded missile, for example? At this time in 1959 there was a Test Ban Treaty in place that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons by the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, although it's highly unlikely that any of these countries paid much attention to it. Or does it hint at involvement by the KGB from the beginning? 
All of this strongly suggests a state cover up. The crucial question is, of course, what was being covered up?

--- End quote ---

I think that without solid proof we will not discover what happened.  I think based 9n the available information that something unusual happened.  The behaviour of the hikers seems strange.  The way they left the tent  and why the cuts were made, and how the cuts were made.  Its bizarre.  Infrasound?  A massive dose of radiation?  Poisoning?  Drugs? Toxic chemical?  It seems to me that tge cold wasn't the only thing that they hsd to deal with.

Regards

Star man

Investigator:
MD Gross, the funny thing is that if they wanted to cover something up, all they would have had to do is to point to the evidence (including the diaries) and say that the group pitched a tent in a terribly dangerous spot and suffered the consequences.  However, from what I understand, the person in charge of the original investigation was some sort of "UFO nut" and made statements about "unknown forces" or something to that effect, which then led to the DPI becoming a "great mystery" in the internet age (that's how I learned about it).  Before you make such claims you should do reconstructions, because "failure of imagination" is a common problem among investigators of all types.  They could still do a precise reconstruction today, and it wouldn't cost much, so in a sense the officials thenselves are keeping the conspiracy theories alive for no good reason.  Are you aware of how common these kinds of "deaths by misadventure" are, especially in cold weather?

Nigel Evans:

--- Quote from: MDGross on September 24, 2020, 07:17:32 AM ---The criminal investigation passed through a number of men in a short period of time. It begs the question: Did one of them (or more than one) know what happened to the Dyatlov group? Was he replaced because he was close or had the answer? Is this conclusive proof of a cover up?
Here's how the investigation proceeded in an interview given by Okishev, who participated in the investigation from beginning to end. The criminal investigation was first handled by Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor. He was assisted in the investigation by another man from the Ivdel prosecutor's office named Korotaev. What did these two men uncover? They were soon replaced by Sverdlovsk Oblast prosecutor, Ivanov. Tempalov was actually questioned as part of the criminal investigation. And Korotaev and what he might have found aren't even mentioned in the case file. Then the investigation passed to Sverdlovsk Oblast Public Prosecutor, Klinov. It again raises the question had Ivanov found out too much? Okishev mentions that he had never heard of a prosecutor being present at any autopsies, as Klinov was present at each of the Dyatlov group autopsies. The criminal investigation at last was taken over by Urakov, the Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations. He was from Moscow and certainly had the power to order a cover up. He also made the decision to close the case in May. Was he following orders from the KGB or the supreme power, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?
Does all this point to a cover up of a military blunder, an exploded missile, for example? At this time in 1959 there was a Test Ban Treaty in place that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons by the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, although it's highly unlikely that any of these countries paid much attention to it. Or does it hint at involvement by the KGB from the beginning? 
All of this strongly suggests a state cover up. The crucial question is, of course, what was being covered up?

--- End quote ---
Good post, sums it up very well. Imo Okishev's interview is a key facet of the mystery stating the degree of state involvement. What's interesting is that this seems to continue to the present day, a reopened investigaton with a ridiculously limited scope followed by an equally ridiculous conclusion.

Nigel Evans:
Another interesting question is - "if there was clearly a cover up, then why is it so obvious? Why wasn't it done better?". If state personnel were on site before the search party surely the bodies, tent etc would have simply been disposed of never to be found?

Theory 1 :-
They (the state) didn't know they'd killed them until Tempalov's investigation was underway. Then it was in the public domain and known to highly connected people like YuriK's father (construction manager of power stations and carried the personal approval of Stalin). So the only choice was to take control of the public domain and use it's resources to locate the last four bodies as defection of workers at sensitive installations would have concerned them. On their discovery it was then closed (with extreme prejudice - seems like Ivanov was read the riot act, Urakov travelling from Moscow).
Theory 2 :-Whatever actually happened was unknown to the state but it had a (big) problem with Ivanov connecting the deaths with "lights in the sky" from many witnesses who seem to have seen rocket testing (Feb17, Mar31). So he was read the riot act fairly early into the saga and became "a changed man". Once all the bodies were found then the case was shutdown with the authority of Urakov in person. How they died was a trivial matter, what mattered was national security. In this theory the cover up is a red herring.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page