Recent Posts

1

General Discussion / How long can you live with a cracked skull?

« Last post by Axelrod on Today at 03:17:03 AM »

Thoughts after discussion

Sorry, and I will try to explain where I'm coming from . IAM guessing your conclusion comes from this page

https://dyatlovpass.com/death#Thibeaux

It state's,

"From what kind of force could Thibeaux-Brignolle have received such injury?

In the conclusion, it’s shown the damage to Thibeaux-Brignolle’s head could have been the result of the throwing, fall or jettisoning of the body. I don’t believe these injuries could have been the result of Thibeaux-Brignolle simply falling from the level of his own height, i.e. falling and hitting his head. The extensive, depressed, multi-splintered (broken fornix and base of the skull) fracture could be the result of an impact of an automobile moving at high speed. This kind of trauma could have occurred if Thibeaux-Brignolle had been thrown and fallen and hit his head against rocks, ice, etc., by a gust of strong wind.

Is it possible that Thibeaux-Brignolle was hit by a rock that was in someone’s hand?

In this case, there would have been damage to the soft tissue, and this was not evident.

How long could Thibeaux-Brignolle have lived after the trauma. Could he have moved on his own, talked, etc.?

After this trauma, Thibeaux-Brignolle would have had a severe concussion; that is, he would have been in an unconscious state. Moving him would have been difficult and, close to the end, movement would not have been possible. I believe he would not have been able to move even if he had been helped. He could only have been carried or dragged. He could have shown signs of life for 2-3 hours."

My relative Moisey Axelrod himself did not suffer during the treks and during the search (only morally). But a misfortune in the form of a broken skull of the head, as was the case with Rustem Slobodin or Thibeaux, befell his nephew (his sister’s grandson):

– www.newsru.co.il/israel/4jun2007/pavel_102.html (June 4, 2007)

A young man who was beaten after the “From Russia with Love” concert has died

Police report that 17-year-old Pavel Kozlov died at the Rambam Hospital (Haifa), who was seriously injured during a fight that occurred after the “From Russia with Love” concert, held on May 17 this year in Tel Aviv’s A-Yarkon Park.

Pavel Kozlov studied at a boarding school in the north of the country. Together with his friends, he came to a concert, after which he was attacked.

About two weeks ago, police detained 21-year-old Haifa resident Sergei Tanashko, who, according to witness testimony, attacked Kozlov. He may soon be charged with murder.

The body of Pavel Kozlov was taken to the Abu Kabir Forensic Medical Center.

Hundreds of police officers ensured order during the “From Russia with Love” gala concert. Ambulances were constantly on duty near the concert venue. Despite the fact that about 150,000 young people attend each concert, the police usually manage to prevent serious incidents.

Article in Hebrew:

www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3408295,00.html

-on the issue of moving Rustem Slobodin and Thibeaux-Brignolle after a skull injury.

2

General Discussion / Re: So I asked AI about the topic...

« Last post by Ziljoe on July 12, 2025, 11:44:45 PM »

Sorry, and I will try to explain where I'm coming from . IAM guessing your conclusion comes from this page

https://dyatlovpass.com/death#Thibeaux

It state's,

"From what kind of force could Thibeaux-Brignolle have received such injury?

In the conclusion, it’s shown the damage to Thibeaux-Brignolle’s head could have been the result of the throwing, fall or jettisoning of the body. I don’t believe these injuries could have been the result of Thibeaux-Brignolle simply falling from the level of his own height, i.e. falling and hitting his head. The extensive, depressed, multi-splintered (broken fornix and base of the skull) fracture could be the result of an impact of an automobile moving at high speed. This kind of trauma could have occurred if Thibeaux-Brignolle had been thrown and fallen and hit his head against rocks, ice, etc., by a gust of strong wind.

Is it possible that Thibeaux-Brignolle was hit by a rock that was in someone’s hand?

In this case, there would have been damage to the soft tissue, and this was not evident.

How long could Thibeaux-Brignolle have lived after the trauma. Could he have moved on his own, talked, etc.?

After this trauma, Thibeaux-Brignolle would have had a severe concussion; that is, he would have been in an unconscious state. Moving him would have been difficult and, close to the end, movement would not have been possible. I believe he would not have been able to move even if he had been helped. He could only have been carried or dragged. He could have shown signs of life for 2-3 hours."

As I understand this dialogue, it's someone or some expert reinterpretation of the autopsy.

In my basic knowledge, the injuries could have happened in a snow collapse and signs of asphyxiation wouldn't be present in an autopsy conducted 3 months later.

Basically, who ever stated that the hey could of lived 10,20 minutes , or 2, to there hours after their physical injuries doesn't take in to account that they may have died instantly ( or with in minutes of a crushing event) .

Unfortunately, the questions asked and answers given don't cite who and where this conversation came from. They don't seem to be in the case files or autopsy..

The autopsy conclusion states,

"Conclusion

On the basis of the examination of the body of Thibeaux-Brignolle, it is my opinion that his death was the result of a closed comminuted pressure fracture in the area of the base and the vault of the cranium with a prolific amount of bleeding under the meninges and brain matter while under low temperature. The above-mentioned extensive comminuted fracture of the base and the vault of the cranium are of in vivo origin and are the result of a great force with the subsequent falling, hurling and concussion of Thibeaux-Brignolle.

The corporal damage of the soft tissue in the area of the head and the ‘bath skin’ of the extremities are the result of post-mortem changes in the body of Thibeaux-Brignolle, which was found submerged in water after some time. The death of Thibeaux-Brignolle was a result of violence."

So , I remain confused what is fact or fiction. I may have missed some things and I'm happy to be guided to the source. .

Right, I see were you're coming from.
My understanding is that the signs of asphyxiation would be detectable in the bodies - even after three months of decomposition.
Personally, I'm trying to piece together a likely explanation to the tragedy and I'm referring to official documents and conclusions to form my theory - the documents on this site, listed as the autopsy reports for each of the hikers - conclude with causes of death as something other than asphyxiation.
I also think that because the bodies were found under several meters of snow - the specialist would be specifically looking for signs of asphyxiation - making it less likely for them to have been overlooked, specially in four bodies.
The theory I'm working on aims to provide a likely timeline and motive for the hikers being at the ravine in the first place - when it comes to explaining their death I opted for the hikers having fallen into the ravine - as it more closely correlates with what was found at their autopsy. Your argument opens up the possibility that perhaps the signs of asphyxiation may not be detectable by the time the bodies were found.
That is a valid point to consider if my aim is to avoid speculation.  As of yet this may alter my conclusions as to HOW they died, but it does not alter the sequence of events I'm suggesting, which is how they got there in the first place

I understand, unfortunately, I do not know if asphyxiation from snow would be detectable after 3 months , in other cases I've read , certain physical components can be found in the lungs, throat and mouth.

Obviously the conclusion about the deaths can only come from what they observe but again the skills and knowledge of 1959 would not be the same as today.

I am following your timeline and modifications with interest. I can't see the group cutting the tent and/or chasing down the slope without taking more equipment though, blankets , coats , axes , ski poles etc.

However, it is interesting as to why those two have the footwear and better clothing. It suggests two proposals, that they were the first down the slope to the woods or perhaps the last , having time to dress slightly better , or a third , that that's just how they were dressed at the time of having to leave the tent.

Please continue

3

General Discussion / Re: So I asked AI about the topic...

« Last post by Ziljoe on July 12, 2025, 11:11:54 PM »

Unfortunately, the questions asked and answers given don't cite who and where this conversation came from. They don't seem to be in the case files or autopsy..

Testimony of forensic expert Vozrozhdenniy
 
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-381-383?rbid=17743

Thanks Suri, one I missed .

4

General Discussion / Re: So I asked AI about the topic...

« Last post by SURI on July 12, 2025, 11:04:02 PM »

Unfortunately, the questions asked and answers given don't cite who and where this conversation came from. They don't seem to be in the case files or autopsy..

Testimony of forensic expert Vozrozhdenniy
 
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-381-383?rbid=17743

5

General Discussion / Re: So I asked AI about the topic...

« Last post by ZuriDog on July 12, 2025, 08:39:35 PM »

Sorry, and I will try to explain where I'm coming from . IAM guessing your conclusion comes from this page

https://dyatlovpass.com/death#Thibeaux

It state's,

"From what kind of force could Thibeaux-Brignolle have received such injury?

In the conclusion, it’s shown the damage to Thibeaux-Brignolle’s head could have been the result of the throwing, fall or jettisoning of the body. I don’t believe these injuries could have been the result of Thibeaux-Brignolle simply falling from the level of his own height, i.e. falling and hitting his head. The extensive, depressed, multi-splintered (broken fornix and base of the skull) fracture could be the result of an impact of an automobile moving at high speed. This kind of trauma could have occurred if Thibeaux-Brignolle had been thrown and fallen and hit his head against rocks, ice, etc., by a gust of strong wind.

Is it possible that Thibeaux-Brignolle was hit by a rock that was in someone’s hand?

In this case, there would have been damage to the soft tissue, and this was not evident.

How long could Thibeaux-Brignolle have lived after the trauma. Could he have moved on his own, talked, etc.?

After this trauma, Thibeaux-Brignolle would have had a severe concussion; that is, he would have been in an unconscious state. Moving him would have been difficult and, close to the end, movement would not have been possible. I believe he would not have been able to move even if he had been helped. He could only have been carried or dragged. He could have shown signs of life for 2-3 hours."

As I understand this dialogue, it's someone or some expert reinterpretation of the autopsy.

In my basic knowledge, the injuries could have happened in a snow collapse and signs of asphyxiation wouldn't be present in an autopsy conducted 3 months later.

Basically, who ever stated that the hey could of lived 10,20 minutes , or 2, to there hours after their physical injuries doesn't take in to account that they may have died instantly ( or with in minutes of a crushing event) .

Unfortunately, the questions asked and answers given don't cite who and where this conversation came from. They don't seem to be in the case files or autopsy..

The autopsy conclusion states,

"Conclusion

On the basis of the examination of the body of Thibeaux-Brignolle, it is my opinion that his death was the result of a closed comminuted pressure fracture in the area of the base and the vault of the cranium with a prolific amount of bleeding under the meninges and brain matter while under low temperature. The above-mentioned extensive comminuted fracture of the base and the vault of the cranium are of in vivo origin and are the result of a great force with the subsequent falling, hurling and concussion of Thibeaux-Brignolle.

The corporal damage of the soft tissue in the area of the head and the ‘bath skin’ of the extremities are the result of post-mortem changes in the body of Thibeaux-Brignolle, which was found submerged in water after some time. The death of Thibeaux-Brignolle was a result of violence."

So , I remain confused what is fact or fiction. I may have missed some things and I'm happy to be guided to the source. .

Right, I see were you're coming from.
My understanding is that the signs of asphyxiation would be detectable in the bodies - even after three months of decomposition.
Personally, I'm trying to piece together a likely explanation to the tragedy and I'm referring to official documents and conclusions to form my theory - the documents on this site, listed as the autopsy reports for each of the hikers - conclude with causes of death as something other than asphyxiation.
I also think that because the bodies were found under several meters of snow - the specialist would be specifically looking for signs of asphyxiation - making it less likely for them to have been overlooked, specially in four bodies.
The theory I'm working on aims to provide a likely timeline and motive for the hikers being at the ravine in the first place - when it comes to explaining their death I opted for the hikers having fallen into the ravine - as it more closely correlates with what was found at their autopsy. Your argument opens up the possibility that perhaps the signs of asphyxiation may not be detectable by the time the bodies were found.
That is a valid point to consider if my aim is to avoid speculation.  As of yet this may alter my conclusions as to HOW they died, but it does not alter the sequence of events I'm suggesting, which is how they got there in the first place

6

General Discussion / Re: So I asked AI about the topic...

« Last post by Ziljoe on July 12, 2025, 05:58:06 PM »

The injuries at the ravine were also not caused by snow-fall, none of the hikers died of suffocation, if they had been buried by enough snow to crush ribs, you'd expect at least one of them to have suffocated. Zolotarev was alive for up to an hour, Tibo - three to four hours.

Yes! That is actually a very good counterargument.

I'm not sure where the information came from that Zolotaryov was alive for up to an hour and tibo alive for three to four hours.

I think this is an overlap in speculation, if there was no snow den collapse that caused these injuries, then it's speculated that this is how long the might have lived.

That was taken straight from the death reports on this site. 2 to 3 hours for Tibo, I got that wrong.
But that is their official cause of death, if any of the four had died of asphyxiation it would have left clear signs at the autopsy and that would have been their cause of death... However that wasn't the case.
I don't understand where the speculation is

Sorry, and I will try to explain where I'm coming from . IAM guessing your conclusion comes from this page

https://dyatlovpass.com/death#Thibeaux

It state's,

"From what kind of force could Thibeaux-Brignolle have received such injury?

In the conclusion, it’s shown the damage to Thibeaux-Brignolle’s head could have been the result of the throwing, fall or jettisoning of the body. I don’t believe these injuries could have been the result of Thibeaux-Brignolle simply falling from the level of his own height, i.e. falling and hitting his head. The extensive, depressed, multi-splintered (broken fornix and base of the skull) fracture could be the result of an impact of an automobile moving at high speed. This kind of trauma could have occurred if Thibeaux-Brignolle had been thrown and fallen and hit his head against rocks, ice, etc., by a gust of strong wind.

Is it possible that Thibeaux-Brignolle was hit by a rock that was in someone’s hand?

In this case, there would have been damage to the soft tissue, and this was not evident.

How long could Thibeaux-Brignolle have lived after the trauma. Could he have moved on his own, talked, etc.?

After this trauma, Thibeaux-Brignolle would have had a severe concussion; that is, he would have been in an unconscious state. Moving him would have been difficult and, close to the end, movement would not have been possible. I believe he would not have been able to move even if he had been helped. He could only have been carried or dragged. He could have shown signs of life for 2-3 hours."

As I understand this dialogue, it's someone or some expert reinterpretation of the autopsy.

In my basic knowledge, the injuries could have happened in a snow collapse and signs of asphyxiation wouldn't be present in an autopsy conducted 3 months later.

Basically, who ever stated that the hey could of lived 10,20 minutes , or 2, to there hours after their physical injuries doesn't take in to account that they may have died instantly ( or with in minutes of a crushing event) .

Unfortunately, the questions asked and answers given don't cite who and where this conversation came from. They don't seem to be in the case files or autopsy..

The autopsy conclusion states,

"Conclusion

On the basis of the examination of the body of Thibeaux-Brignolle, it is my opinion that his death was the result of a closed comminuted pressure fracture in the area of the base and the vault of the cranium with a prolific amount of bleeding under the meninges and brain matter while under low temperature. The above-mentioned extensive comminuted fracture of the base and the vault of the cranium are of in vivo origin and are the result of a great force with the subsequent falling, hurling and concussion of Thibeaux-Brignolle.

The corporal damage of the soft tissue in the area of the head and the ‘bath skin’ of the extremities are the result of post-mortem changes in the body of Thibeaux-Brignolle, which was found submerged in water after some time. The death of Thibeaux-Brignolle was a result of violence."

So , I remain confused what is fact or fiction. I may have missed some things and I'm happy to be guided to the source. .

7

General Discussion / Re: So I asked AI about the topic...

« Last post by ZuriDog on July 12, 2025, 05:01:44 PM »

The injuries at the ravine were also not caused by snow-fall, none of the hikers died of suffocation, if they had been buried by enough snow to crush ribs, you'd expect at least one of them to have suffocated. Zolotarev was alive for up to an hour, Tibo - three to four hours.

Yes! That is actually a very good counterargument.

I'm not sure where the information came from that Zolotaryov was alive for up to an hour and tibo alive for three to four hours.

I think this is an overlap in speculation, if there was no snow den collapse that caused these injuries, then it's speculated that this is how long the might have lived.

That was taken straight from the death reports on this site. 2 to 3 hours for Tibo, I got that wrong.
But that is their official cause of death, if any of the four had died of asphyxiation it would have left clear signs at the autopsy and that would have been their cause of death... However that wasn't the case.
I don't understand where the speculation is

8

General Discussion / Re: Cover-up

« Last post by Ziljoe on July 12, 2025, 04:24:58 PM »

At a time when the Khrushchev thaw was being implemented with concrete initiatives, there was a fierce opposition against the stretching of the Stalinist legacy. The failure to find the last four individuals, in particular, and the lack of a plausible explanation for the tragedy's cause, must have served as an opportunity to accuse the government of erosion, embarrassment, and incompetence, based on the deaths of nine young people. Could a simple case of radioactive contamination have been exaggerated by opposition experts? It seems understandable that a tragedy that actually occurred due to a chain reaction of natural causes, the lack of reliable reporting, the lack of modern resources (TV, internet, etc.), and the government's inability to control events due to the distance between Yukaterinburg and Moscow, led to a plausible cover-up, or rather, steps to cover up the incident without delving into it too much.

I think something like this is the main reason, they weren't hiding some secret about the incident,, they just didn't know , which could be seen as a weakness. I think it's in this concept that the reason for secrecy existed.

9

General Discussion / Re: So I asked AI about the topic...

« Last post by Ziljoe on July 12, 2025, 04:15:39 PM »

The injuries at the ravine were also not caused by snow-fall, none of the hikers died of suffocation, if they had been buried by enough snow to crush ribs, you'd expect at least one of them to have suffocated. Zolotarev was alive for up to an hour, Tibo - three to four hours.

Yes! That is actually a very good counterargument.

I'm not sure where the information came from that Zolotaryov was alive for up to an hour and tibo alive for three to four hours.

I think this is an overlap in speculation, if there was no snow den collapse that caused these injuries, then it's speculated that this is how long the might have lived.

10

General Discussion / Re: Cover-up

« Last post by Osi on July 12, 2025, 12:48:50 PM »

At a time when the Khrushchev thaw was being implemented with concrete initiatives, there was a fierce opposition against the stretching of the Stalinist legacy. The failure to find the last four individuals, in particular, and the lack of a plausible explanation for the tragedy's cause, must have served as an opportunity to accuse the government of erosion, embarrassment, and incompetence, based on the deaths of nine young people. Could a simple case of radioactive contamination have been exaggerated by opposition experts? It seems understandable that a tragedy that actually occurred due to a chain reaction of natural causes, the lack of reliable reporting, the lack of modern resources (TV, internet, etc.), and the government's inability to control events due to the distance between Yukaterinburg and Moscow, led to a plausible cover-up, or rather, steps to cover up the incident without delving into it too much.