Except for the diary, except for one backpack...

[Charles]

We can read in the protocol of camp site finding:

28.02.59 the prosecutor city of Ivdel Jr Counselor of Justice Tempalov in the presence of witnesses: comrade Maslennikov and Brusnitsin Vadim Dmitriyevich living in Sverdlovsk, Sheynkmana St № III, room 31, Sharavin Mihail Petrovich living in Sverdlovsk, Vtuzgorodok, housing 9, room № 201, Kurikov Stepan Nikolaevich living in Ivdel region village Suevat Paun (Paul - ed.), have written this report upon finding the place where Dyatlov group of hikers stayed overnight.

Camp site is located on the northeast slope of mountain 1079 at the source of Auspiya river. The camp site site is located 300 meters from the top of the mountain 1079 on a slope of 30°. The campsite is a snow-leveled area with 8 pairs of skis at the bottom. The tent is stretched out on ski poles, fixed with ropes, 9 backpacks with various personal belongings of the group members were laid down at the bottom of the tent, quilted jackets, storm jackets were put on top, 9 pairs of felt boots were found where the heads must have been, men's trousers were also found, and three pairs of felt boots, warm fur coats, socks, hat, ski caps, utensils, buckets, stove, ax, saw, blankets, food: biscuits in two bags, condensed milk, sugar, concentrates, notebooks, itinerary and many other small items and documents, camera and accessories to a camera. All items found were transferred for an inventory and delivery to ... base chief search group Evgeniy Maslennikov Polikarpovich for which this protocol was drawn up. There are no bodies found in the tent.

Attorney city of Ivdel
Jr Counselor of Justice / Tempalov /
Witnesses:
1) Brusnitsin
2) Sharavin
3) Kurikov
The head of the unit
4) Maslennikov

(https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-2?rbid=17743)

But we can read the following in Georgiy Vladimirovich Atmanaki about his discovery of the tent on February 26:

Together with two people from Slobtsov team and the guides, Borisov and I combed the slope lower and to the right of the tent (if we look down) meeting on the way two Mansi and a comrade of a paramilitary type, who later turned out to be the chief of the Ivdel fire brigade. They told us that they found two bodies 2 km down and showed us where the tent is located. Going up we observed traces that were going down and belonging, as it later turned out, to the dead hikers. Several pairs of other tracks belonged to the participants of the search parties who were working the day before. There were no other tracks or objects on this site, except for a roll of film about 15 m below the tent, which rolled out from there during the preliminary inspection of the tent the day before. All remained undisturbed except for one backpack in which small things were gathered around the tent. They did not make a detailed inspection of the tent, because they explained that they were afraid to see their comrades in it. The tent stood sideways to the slope by the entrance to the east, the entrance was unbuttoned but piled in half with buckets, stove and backpacks, so that at first there was an impression that people tried to barricade the entrance by stacking the corner of the tent with a load so that it will not be torn by the wind. The tent was laid on skis, straps were tied to ski poles, and most of them were not damaged. On the slope of the tent we found a flashlight, an ice ax not far away down, there was a pair of skis stuck in the snow, the windy (north) side of the tent was torn and some blankets and a quilted jacket were protruding out. The other side of the tent was heaped with bulging snow and lay on the bottom of the tent, overlaying all the contents in it. Before we started the search we decided to check if there was anyone left in the tent. Snow was removed, the fallen side of the tent was raised, and we carefully removed the blankets and quilted jackets. There were no people in the tent. Inspected the contents. The bottom of the tent lay on skis, then quilted jackets, backpacks, gaiters and other small equipment. Towards the heads on the south side were felt boots and boots, in the far right corner we found a field bag with the documents of the group, a box of films and money, a camera and a few small objects, everything was packed in a backpack, except for the diary and documents sent to the base camp. There was no point to continue the further dismantling of the things, and so they left everything into place before the investigator arrived, after raising the tent and pulling out three pairs of skis, because dog guides went on foot, and the rest of the skis were used by us to mark the places where the bodies of the dead were found.
(https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-209-220)

In the first testimony, all 9 backpacks were laid down at the bottom of the tent under jackets but in the second testimony, some of the backpacks were piled at the entrance. And there is an ambiguity about "All remained undisturbed except for one backpack in which small things were gathered around the tent": was this backpack taken from the tent and used to collect the small things (as the rescuers took skis belonging to the hikers: "pulling out three pairs of skis, because dog guides went on foot")? And one diary was treated differently, the diary of "except for the diary". And this one special diary was removed "before the investigators arrived".

These inconsistencies and ambiguities allow us to think that the tent was searched before the arrival of the investigators and that one diary was treated differently.

Either one of the two protocols is outrageously incorrect: counting all the 9 backpacks at the bottom vs noticing some of the backpacks piled up at the entry, or the backpacks were searched and moved between the two events, the two protocols correctly reporting a change about the backpacks positions - but in that case all didn't remain "undisturbed except for one backpack": all remained undisturbed except for the few backpacks piled up at the entrance.

[Ziljoe]

Hi Charles,

I'm a bit confused as you seemed to have edited your first post, which I'm sure you said they took SEMYON ZOLOTARYOV  diary?

[Charles]

Hello Ziljoe,

the first diary to be recovered seemed to be "group's diary", at the bottom of the tent... so just remains here the strange question of the backpacks.

I couldn't find when and how the different diaries were recovered.

[sarapuk]

Hello Ziljoe,

the first diary to be recovered seemed to be "group's diary", at the bottom of the tent... so just remains here the strange question of the backpacks.

I couldn't find when and how the different diaries were recovered.

If you search the Forum you will find the info you are looking for. Bear in mind that there are things missing from the investigation. The investigation started with the demise of the Dyatlov Group in 1959 and continues.

[Charles]

About the backpacks, I wanted to clarify how they were placed in the tent but I had the pleasure to read a beautiful variety of descriptions of the order in which the layers were found...


skis + jackets + backpacks:

The snow was trampled, on the snow were lying the skis with their sliding surface up, on top of them was the floor of the tent. At the very bottom of the tent were laid jackets (on the side of the slope), empty backpacks were spread on the bottom. (Chernysev’s testimony)

skis + jackets + backpacks + gaiters + small equipment

Snow was removed, the fallen side of the tent was raised, and we carefully removed the blankets and quilted jackets. There were no people in the tent. Inspected the contents. The bottom of the tent lay on skis, then quilted jackets, backpacks, gaiters and other small equipment., (ATMANAKI WITNESS TESTIMONY about his discovery of the tent on February 26)

And it was too easy...


skis + backpacks + jackets + blankets

Skis, quilted jackets lay down there ... backpacks, then quilted jackets ... blankets were spread like this… (Sharavin’s interview)

The quilted jackets were under the covers, first the skis lay below, then the backpacks, then the quilted jackets, then the blankets. (Sharavin’s interview)

backpacks + jackets + blankets + warm clothing

Backpacks were spread out on the bottom of the tent. On top were quilted jackets and then quilted blankets. Part of the blankets were not spread out. On top of the blankets were found the warm belongings of the members of the group, including most of their warm clothing. https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-32-35?rbid=17743

9 backpacks + jackets (quilted + Storm)

9 backpacks with various personal belongings of the group members were laid down at the bottom of the tent, quilted jackets, storm jackets were put on top (DISCOVERY PROTOCOL OF HIKERS CAMP SITE 28.02.59


And it was not too easy, it was much too easy...

skis + 9 backpacks + jackets + backpacks + personal belongings

In the tent were found 9 backpacks, 9 pairs of skis, all of them were under the tent floor (…) The bottom of the tent was covered with padded jackets, backpacks and personal belongings of the students (Tempalov’s testimony)

skis + jackets + backpacks + gaiters + small equipment + piled backpacks at the entry

Snow was removed, the fallen side of the tent was raised, and we carefully removed the blankets and quilted jackets. There were no people in the tent. Inspected the contents. The bottom of the tent lay on skis, then quilted jackets, backpacks, gaiters and other small equipment., (ATMANAKI WITNESS TESTIMONY about his discovery of the tent on February 26)

The tent stood sideways to the slope by the entrance to the east, the entrance was unbuttoned but piled in half with buckets, stove and backpacks, so that at first there was an impression that people tried to barricade the entrance by stacking the corner of the tent with a load so that it will not be torn by the wind. The tent was laid on skis, straps were tied to ski poles, and most of them were not damaged. (ATMANAKI WITNESS TESTIMONY about his discovery of the tent on February 26)

A picture confirmed by:

Strongly stretched roof, on the windward side inside are packed backpacks, at the entrance there is a "barricade" with the stove, backpacks so that it does not blow out. (Akselrod’s testimony)

----

I wanted to find clues about the destiny of the diaries as we can read:

Many backpacks have notebooks, but clean ones or with notes of different formulas, phones, addresses. These notes were made at the institute. (...) Only in Zina Kolmogorova’s backpack was a diary preserved. (…)  In one backpack there is a booklet with the inscription "Sasha Kolevatova" for the diary, but it is blank, not a single word iin it (…) Several diaries were still there, at the place of death, that prosecutor Tempalov took with him. (…)  In Zolotaryov's backpack a notebooks with new songs and hikers' songs. (…) Vishnevskiy took the letter, the purse, money, diaries and watches. (Grigoriev’s notebook 2, Scan 34-35, March 3. Belonging of the dead)

So Tempalov and Vishnevskiy shared the diaries... but about their provenance it is written somewhere that the rescuers gathered all objects found at the tent and put them "at random" in the backpacks to send them to the authorities... Grigoriev was wrong, the diaries he were not "at the place of death"... And the rescuers were unable to agree about the organization of the ground in the tent.

[Ziljoe]

Hi Charles,

You have put forth a number of quotes about the flooring of the tent. What is it that you're pointing out?

What's too easy?

[Charles]

Just wanted to make some point clear, got 100 times more obscurity as a result... 

[Ziljoe]

That's  the problem.  The more you look the more holes and contradictions.

They all seem to say the same about the flooring in the tent. The statements will vary because as humans we forget detail.
 Missed the bit about the big halos in the sky sitting about for a couple of minutes by the witness a few days after Feb 1st.

I was aware that there were other groups doing various field trips but the area sounds like it was busy with lots of tourists, Mansi, etc. I wasn't aware of another group having suffered frostbite around the same time. It would be interesting to find out what happened to them.

[Charles]

They all seem to say the same about the flooring in the tent.

Yes, of course, when they say "jackets on backpacks" or "backpacks on jackets", we don't care, but when they continue with and "backpacks laid on the floor plus backpacks piled at the entry" and  "9 backpacks under jackets plus extra backpacks on the jackets", we are dealing with furious people... And these two ones are really scary: "At the very bottom of the tent were laid jackets (on the side of the slope), empty backpacks were spread on the bottom"... "first the skis lay below, then the backpacks, then the quilted jackets, then the blankets"... they give details and insist on the description of contradictory pictures. Furious people...

And what remains of the value of all these witnesses and testimonies? Should we dismiss them all as "misleading" talkers? Like if they were fishermen describing the length of a fish they caught a long time ago just yesterday?

[Charles]

There are similar characters in the novels of Dostoyevsky, people who can't stop talking and saying nonsense, just because they enjoy to be listened at and are flattered of the attention they receive during the very short time when they are considered as serious people and worthy of being heard....

[neni_cesty_zpet]

I read many recent posts of you but I dont see the whole image. Could you summarize your theory about Dyatlov pass incident, please?

[Charles]

I met a few adult Russians who were lying like children, sincerely convinced that they could be believed. I remember very precisely these strange situations. A woman lying about the country where she lived... Men obviously lying about the agenda of their evening in Paris... A woman pretending to offer a reward for a help I gave her without expecting any kind of and lying about the value of her expenditure... this one (case) was beautiful. And lying when no question was asked, as if they were forced to talk... experiencing an imperious need to say anything... like in Dostoevsky's novels, indeed.

[Charles]

I read many recent posts of you but I dont see the whole image. Could you summarize your theory about Dyatlov pass incident, please?

Here it is: https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=1127.0

[Ziljoe]

They all seem to say the same about the flooring in the tent.

Yes, of course, when they say "jackets on backpacks" or "backpacks on jackets", we don't care, but when they continue with and "backpacks laid on the floor plus backpacks piled at the entry" and  "9 backpacks under jackets plus extra backpacks on the jackets", we are dealing with furious people... And these two ones are really scary: "At the very bottom of the tent were laid jackets (on the side of the slope), empty backpacks were spread on the bottom"... "first the skis lay below, then the backpacks, then the quilted jackets, then the blankets"... they give details and insist on the description of contradictory pictures. Furious people...

And what remains of the value of all these witnesses and testimonies? Should we dismiss them all as "misleading" talkers? Like if they were fishermen describing the length of a fish they caught?

Yes, I understand they vary in their statements, but they weren't brought in to investigate like a policeman. They were hoping to find the hikers alive.  There is also the problem of translation of any testimonies and the difference in grammar.

Equipment was taken on the first day and to be returned to the tent later.  The description of what was witnessed was over different times. Those that searched first may have moved backpacks to the entrance, they admit to cutting open the tent to access from the top , would the first, untrained searchers ,with no instruction know what to do?  They were looking for bodies , they didn't care what they moved or how to audit how things were placed. All the statements may be accurate according to their perception.

It all seems pretty innocent to me. If you are implying they were lying , then please supply your reason and conclusion. That would be great.

[Charles]

Immediately after the incident, people who were involved began to imagine theories. And it is very interesting to notice that the same theories were shared by people belonging to a same category. For students and locals, it was the cold wind, for sappers of the demolition squad, they had seen bright lights like explosions, for Kolevatova, it was the UPI in Sverdlovsk (and a conspiracy)... We probably could make a complete table of all theories raised in Feb.-Mar. 1959 according to the occupation of their supporters. They talked, but they talked more about themselves than about what happened on Kholyat Syakhl.

Two men escaped this pattern, Maslennikov and Grigoriev. In their beautiful notebooks (Maslennikov could also draw a fair landscape), we can read different theories, their minds were open: they were exploring the possibilities rather than expressing their own individual condition.

[Charles]

All the statements may be accurate according to their perception.

This kind of nonsense, you should not indulge yourself in. Your sentence can't have any meaning, dear Ziljoe. You are hurting yourself.

It all seems pretty innocent to me. If you are implying they were lying , then please supply your reason and conclusion.

Oh yes, they could lie, of course, just inventing so as not to remain silent. It is very possible. Not lying with premeditation, but like fishermen, yes. Given the fireworks of contradictions quoted above, no problem. If Yudin's testimony was a model of self control and of  language proficiency, for other witnesses, they seemed to be freely galloping in the steppe... ha ha ha! Lying, inventing, repeating hearsay, filling the blanks, making efforts to please the prosecutor, sincerely failing, how could we know?

[Charles]

All these fancy descriptions would be innocent compared to the answer that Prodanov could give at the 11th line of the witness ID form: Relation to the accused:. I would spend a lot of money to read such an answer... and this one, I'm sure, would not be innocent. ;-)

[Ziljoe]

Charles,

All the people at the tent on the first couple of days weren't there at the same time. Different people were poking about. It is quite possible that any lies are due to fear of getting in trouble for moving stuff.

What would they be lying about? What is the motive, what does it matter if the back pack was moved or blankets and coats. We know things were moved, they said they took stuff and had to return it.

I am struggling to understand your point. If you are suggesting someone came to the tent and moved things and looked through back packs etc then that is true because the rescuers say they did!

[Charles]

And here is an ugly and not innocent story. At the 11th line " Relation to the accused: ", none of the friends and relatives of the victims answered anything. We can imagine a surprise: "But they are not the accused, they are the victims!" and junior prosecutor Tempalov, embarrassed: "Yes, yes, of course we know, forget it, let's move on..." But some witnesses gave an answer: "Relation to the accused: Stranger" or "Relation to the accused: no"... And these ones, they gave consent to that ugliness. As we can read here:

https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-case-files-263.jpg

There was no room for victims in the Soviet Union (and the authorities even attempted to dump the hikers in a common grave), only room for accused people. Probably, most of individuals were more decent than the regime, but some of them had no difficulty to equal its ugliness. The few ones who answered the 11th question, they all belong to the underworld, don't they? Because none of the ones who kept silent at the 11th line was jailed or sent to Gulag. So, what pushed the ugly ones to consent to "the accused" ?

And it could be a magnificient title for a novel or a movie:

- The Eleventh line -

And may be, the failure to reach the truth about the dead hikers is all contained is these words: Relation to the accused, which all witnesses had to hear and to deal with. Because "the accused" had already been found and processed by the regime. Relation to the accused and unknown compelling force, it is the same ugliness... When "Relation to the accused" looks into the mirror, it sees "Unknown compelling force". "Unknown compelling force" which is itself a sadistic, pervert and hypocritical expression, and should be unveiled and revealed in its true face of "Our compelling force". Your relation to the accused, our compelling force.

This 11th line is by default intimidation and witness tampering, it ruins the credibility of all the investigation.

And here "intimidation and witness tampering" is absolutely established and irrefutable. If we want to be serious, the all case is rotten and truth is forever lost.

If we want to be serious, we have to exclude all testimonies as not reliable.

And write a story based on the remaining material...

[Charles]

So, the witnesses filled the form and reached the 11th line... The friends of the victims had a choice when facing here the "Relation to the accused":

- They could answer the question and say "Relative" or "Friend". But if so, they were giving their consent to the name "accused". "I am the sister of the "accused" Alexander Kolevatov, I will cooperate and give my best to support the efforts of the prosecutor of the people of the USSR."

- They could refuse to give an answer, but if so, they were abandoning their relative or friend, denying the blood link or the friendship. Leaving a blank could only mean: "No relation to the accused whatsoever, he's not my brother, he's not my lover, he's not my friend".

In either case, the witnesses were doomed.

And the 11th line was the last one: "Relation to the accused? Now, what do you have to say? Speak: we are waiting.".

All witnesses' records are rotten. All records after the 11th line were made under intimidation and are worth nothing. We can't escape it, there is no way out: all testimonies recorded by the procurators deserve the trash bin.

The testimonies are worth zero, they collapse to ground zero and the interviews given to the press get to the top of the chain food.

[Charles]

And this is a genuine breakthrough.

[Charles]

It is said that:

"The second diary belonged to Kolevatov, but it was never recovered. It is presumed lost or stolen by an unknown person."

https://dyatlovpass.com/unknown-diary

But how do we know that Kolevatov ever wrote a diary during the hike?