Theories Discussion > Murdered
A problem with homicide theories
Charles:
nothing here
Ziljoe:
Hi Charles,
--- Quote from: Charles on February 23, 2022, 02:36:36 AM ---Hello Ziljoe
--- Quote from: Ziljoe on February 22, 2022, 03:01:59 PM ---You mention Slobodin had chest injuries?
"Slobodin having both life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area and minor wounds at the back of the hands"
I am not aware of Slobodin having having fractures in the chest area. ( it is possible that I missed this). It has been suggested that his skull fracture was down to freezing and I believe this has been recorded in other cases. Due to Slobodin wearing a hat and having been found with ice under his body there is the possibility that it was freezing that caused the fracture of the skull.
--- End quote ---
I wrote "life threatening fracture injuries in the chest-head area" as you correctly quoted. Chest and head, or upper body, or upper torso and head. Injuries resulting from the most violent impact are all limited to this small area. Whatever the nature of the force, it never severely impacted lower parts of the body, never broke a leg or an arm... But aimed at brain, heart and lungs. As you have 9 hikers and 36 body members (legs and arms), how could a deadly random force have avoided these 36 members and selected 4 times the small area where brain, heart and lungs are located ?
And how could a natural and blind force target so many times the metacarpophalangeal joint ? This force went 4 times to chest and head with enough violence to break many bones (29 bone fractures on 4 hikers: 2 fractures of skull, 3 of scapula, 24 of rib) and kill, then changed its mind, and went after metacarpophalangeal joint but gently this time, restraining from breaking bones, just inflicting bruises and scratches (28 metacarpophalangeal joints injured but not a single broken phalanx) ?
I made a diagram of a Vitruvian skeleton with red dots markings all 29 broken bones... So we can estimate the grouping of the bone breaking blows...
They said "unknown compelling force", "unknown" but not blind... and even looking for the kill.
Greetings
--- End quote ---
A natural and blind force could have come as several events, maybe not all happening at the same time or not in the way we perceive it to be.
If we believe the tent was located where it was found and the group exited the tent for one of the many reasons suggested, earth tremor, snow slab , wolverine or crashing rocket for example. It does not mean the injuries happened at the tent ,which I'm sure you'll agree.
Of the 29 bone fractures on 4 hikers: 2 fractures of skull, 3 of scapula, 24 of rib. 27 of these fractures are on 2 hikers and 1 each for a skull fracture on the other 2 hikers.
3 of these hikers with 28 fractures between them , were found in the ravine under several feet of snow. The snow was reported as being more difficult to dig , which could suggest a snow collapse at some point. I would argue that this is the "unknown compelling force" in this instance . It is reported that only an impact like a car crash could cause such injuries to the chest. This may be the cause of the blunt force trauma and the lack of other injuries for survival.
The other single head fracture was to Slobodin which may have been caused by the slow freezing and the nature of his clothing . His neck is exposed but he is wearing a hat. I did find a study about fractures of the skull found in deaths of hypothermia and frozen victims, so it can occur under certain circumstances.
Those with the fractures and lack of frostbite are found under a deep layer of compact snow. Two are found by the large ceder, they show signs of undressing and minor burns next to a fire. The 3 on the slope are found to have died by hypothermia/freezing.
They could have left the tent for a number of reasons but the injuries/deaths seem to look like they happened where the bodies were found.
Perhaps the "deadly random force" was just that, random ....
Charles:
nothing here
Ziljoe:
--- Quote from: Charles on February 23, 2022, 08:08:49 AM ---
--- Quote from: Ziljoe on February 23, 2022, 05:49:40 AM ---Acnatural and blind force could have come as several events, maybe not all happening at the same time or not in the way we perceive it to be.
--- End quote ---
If coming as several events and each time hurting the hikers... then it was not a blind force. And the cuts and destructions on the trees are said to be man made, with a knife. Why no marks of "natural and blind force" on the surrounding trees ? No broken rocks, no broken trees.. nothing.
I mean several natural events. A snow collapse at the ravine from the possibility of the cold and also the possibility of getting wet at the ravine. Whatever happened at the tent is what made them descend to the ceder . The "natural and blind force " could be the collapse of snow on top of them from taking shelter in a natural snow bridge at the ravine. The four at the ravine were found under up to 3 meters of snow. At the bottom of a small stream. This would not do any damage to the surrounding trees or rocks.
--- Quote from: Ziljoe on February 23, 2022, 05:49:40 AM ---If we believe the tent was located where it was found and the group exited the tent for one of the many reasons suggested, earth tremor, snow slab , wolverine or crashing rocket for example. It does not mean the injuries happened at the tent ,which I'm sure you'll agree.
--- End quote ---
Indeed, I agree.
--- Quote from: Ziljoe on February 23, 2022, 05:49:40 AM ---3 of these hikers with 28 fractures between them , were found in the ravine under several feet of snow. The snow was reported as being more difficult to dig , which could suggest a snow collapse at some point. I would argue that this is the "unknown compelling force" in this instance . It is reported that only an impact like a car crash could cause such injuries to the chest. This may be the cause of the blunt force trauma and the lack of other injuries for survival.
--- End quote ---
But how to compare some collapsing snow with car crash ? On several photos we can see how the snow was cloudy...
The comparison with a car crash is the investigators statement on the injuries to the flail chest injuries. It was an example to the confusion on how such injuries occur. Teddy gives an example of a tree causing these types of injuries and Igor b suggests that it was a snow collapse. I don't know what the exact volume of snow to height ratio it would take to break ribs and fracture a skull but the theory of the snow collapse in a naturally formed snow cave is plausible. There are many examples of people being crushed then suffocating from building snow forts . These examples are sad as they involve families and children but it didn't take a lot of snow to trap them.
https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/15-008.jpg
https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/15-001.jpg
Some snow collapsing slowly and on a short distance, 3-4 meters, with very limited energy... And I didn't read anything about snow in mouth and lungs...
I don't thing they would find snow in the mouth and lungs. It would have turned to water by the time they were found. They were in a state of decay . I also don't know if they would even able to inhale any snow. If the chest were compressed and the collapse had exhaled their last air they would be able to take a breath.
--- Quote from: Ziljoe on February 23, 2022, 05:49:40 AM ---The other single head fracture was to Slobodin which may have been caused by the slow freezing and the nature of his clothing . His neck is exposed but he is wearing a hat. I did find a study about fractures of the skull found in deaths of hypothermia and frozen victims, so it can occur under certain circumstances.
--- End quote ---
Yes, I have read about that. But it only says "it can happen" or "it could happen", no fact, no proof it did happen. But if we consider the most serious injuries, the ones which required very brutal blows, they are all in the area described in my diagram... and this is a fact. Can we say it is a fact ? My idea is to establish a fact here... Not paying attention to anything else but the massive force which was able to break bones and did break bones: this force did not hit one single of the 36 arms and legs available in the group but reached the small area I underlined with a circle. Only matters the number of fractures and the small area were they are concentrated on the human body. And this circle is valid for the 9 hikers by the way. It summarizes all broken bones in the group of 9, it shows the distribution of broken bones for all the 9 hikers, as they were all on site, in a limited perimeter, and experiencing the same event. My Vitruvian skeleton depicts the all group, he is the superposition of all broken bone marks on the 9 skeletons. We can give him the title: "Depiction of all broken bones in the 9 hikers group" and this title will be correct. Counting Dyatlov and Doroschenko makes sense because if in their case the "force" did not break any bone in the circle area, it could have broken a hand or a leg... but it didn't. Dyatlov and Doroschenko could widen the circle if they had a broken foot, but they don't... The force did hit in the circle or not at all. Adding 4 or 5 more hikers does not widen the circle.
Only four had broken bones though, 3 that were in the ravine and 1 on the slope.
But it is an interesting way to look at it and make me think of another angle.
--- End quote ---
Ziljoe:
Sorry, I messed up with the quotes on the above threads. I'll try again.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version