Churkina was absolutely unable to describe correctly the tent in her report:
Her comments about the cuts do not prove anything, and certainly not that the cuts were made from the inside. She failed to give a correct account of the length, number and position of cuts, how could she pretend to tell from which side they were made? She based her argument on scratches but didn't tell if all cuts were accompanied with scratches and how many scratches didn't accompany cuts. She even produced a photo with a scratch at a 45° angle form the cut. Her report is just a collection of professional shortcomings.
And by the way, the whole investigation is the same: what was done seriously, what was clear, strong and reliable, we can't say... Description of the tent? Botched. Photo of the tent? Botched. Photos of the corpses? Botched. Autopsies? Botched. Witnesses? Tampered. Prosecutors? Ordered to close the case and to make a forgery of the resolution to close the case. There is nothing clean and reliable, everything was messed up.
So some cuts were long, some short, they could be horizontal, vertical, in diagonal, and some were not larger than the width of a blade: at some places, the knife just pierced the fabric
. These smallest cuts had to be made at the beginning, when the fabric was under tension, and they could tell what was the type of the blade: single or double edged
. But Churkina was not interested with the knife. These small cuts were made from the outside, the blade(s) entering inside the tent. Then were made larger cuts, and finally the longest cuts which allowed the hikers to exit the tent. These small cuts mean that the first strikes at the fabric were not done to open the tent, not even to look through the fabric, but only to make a blade passing through the tent