Theories Discussion > Murdered

A problem with homicide theories

<< < (3/17) > >>

RMK:
Let me try to get this thread back to its topic.  If the DPI was really homicide, but the killers wanted to make it not look like homicide, why didn't they stage or fabricate some non-homicide reason why the hikers exited their tent and subsequently abandoned it?  For example, why didn't the killers manipulate the campsite to make it look like a tent fire or a small avalanche had occurred?

Star man:
Good point.  I would like to know the answer to that question.

Regards

Star man

mk:
Lets take it back a step.  Why do we think the murderers wanted to make it look "natural"?  As far as I can tell, we get that because there seem to be many easier & quicker ways of killing people.  (They weren't shot or stabbed, for example.)  But there is very little about their actual injuries that looks natural. Additionally, as you point out, no effort was made to provide an excuse for their injuries, or for their leaving the tent.  According to this theory, someone went to great trouble to cover up their own presence at the site, but no trouble at all to provide plausible excuses for the hikers leaving the tent or sustaining such injuries.

It looks to me, then, if this was the case, that the killers were only concerned with a very superficial "fooling" of the public.  KGB killers had to have known that autopsies would be done--and that the injuries of the hikers would be suspicious.  This implies that the killers felt responsible for not leaving any screamingly obvious signs of their own presence, but were relying on officials to make sure everything was properly swept under the rug in the end.

And, perhaps, that was done.

Personally, I am unconvinced by this theory.  Partly because of what I posted earlier about simpler ways of killing people, but also because of the responses of the families at the time.

I feel that the families' responses are usually a good guess when it comes to things like this.  Guesses, yes.  But they have intimate knowledge of the personalities of the hikers, as well as what to expect from the culture and the government. KGB Killers were quite well known to exist.  It was known that the government could make people disappear.  But the families seem much more concerned with the possibility of weapons testing.  While not a definitive answer, in my opinion, this lends a bit of weight to that theory.

While the families didn't have access to the specifications of the tragedy in the same way we do, they had the advantage of living at the same time, in the same place, and knowing the people involved.  This can be very important when it comes to understanding why people behave in curious ways.

sarapuk:

--- Quote from: RMK on December 10, 2020, 04:20:43 PM ---Let me try to get this thread back to its topic.  If the DPI was really homicide, but the killers wanted to make it not look like homicide, why didn't they stage or fabricate some non-homicide reason why the hikers exited their tent and subsequently abandoned it?  For example, why didn't the killers manipulate the campsite to make it look like a tent fire or a small avalanche had occurred?

--- End quote ---

Yes thats what has been put a few times in this Forum. Why didnt any alleged killers do more to make it look like an accident. For the same reason that they left no footprints, or other traces. There were no human killers.

sarapuk:

--- Quote from: Star man on December 11, 2020, 07:21:32 AM ---Good point.  I would like to know the answer to that question.

Regards

Star man

--- End quote ---

The answer is simple. There were no human killers. No footprints. No traces of any kind.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version