I am new to the forum, but not to the DPI. First, I would like to thank Teddy and other collaborators for creating the website and forum, it is a great source of information about the case. Special thanks for English translation of case files and other documents.
I will not talk about any specific theory here, I would like to discuss what I perceive as major discrepancies and gaps in the case. I hope that other members of this forum who studied the case more thoroughly than me could help to provide more information.
What I will present here is based only on information available in 1959, not later additions and recollections.THE TENT:
The tent was cut with a sharp object on many places, even next to the entrance. These cuts are too small to be used for exit. As far as I know, the knives were found in their sheets in the tent (in their parkas - can anyone confirm this please?). This is inconsistent with the general theory that the Dyatlov group made the cuts by themselves. Even if for example Kolevatov would have his knife with him, the cuts are too many and could not be made with one person trying to get out by cutting the tent, as the cuts are visible also on the side opposite to the entrance. Basically along the whole length of the tent, and probably even on the other side.
The photo of the tent shows that it was severely damaged and the group tried to repair it with pieces of fabric - there are 3 pieces of white(ish) cloth visible on the photo, one of them is quite large (on the right). This is inconsistent with the presumption that the tent was abandoned quickly after the cuts were made
From Grigoriev's NB (part 2, scan 35): "Metal container with films. There are 20 films in it. A small stove in a duffel bag and folding pipes in it, a wire. In Zolotaryov's backpack a notebooks with new songs and hikers' songs.". I don't think those 20 films were examined (but they could be new, not used), and I am not aware of Zolotaryov's notebook being among evidence.. It also seems that the stove was not filled with wood, but with pipes for the chimney. THE SLOPE:
The investigators concluded that there was no presence of other people near the tent. This does not seem to be correct: the photo made by the search party on the slope - the footprint in the center looks to be fresh, as the edges are sharp and not eroded by wind/sun. However, what is more interesting is the long print that is definitely older and looks like it was made by a ski:
Also, from Maslennikov NB (scan 47): "A lighted flashlight was found 450 meters below the tent; 20 meters from the tent - a piece of broken skis
." Whose broken ski was it? Was any of the Dyatlov group's ski broken (at the location of the tent)?
Again from Maslennikov NB (scan 8): "The closest Kolmogorova 500 meters broken head"
. It seems that she did not just freeze, but could be hit to her head first, then fell on the ground unconscious and froze. Similar situation with Slobodin - his skull was broken on both sides, difficult to imagine the situation in which this could be caused by just falling to the ground, even repeatedly. The icy bed under him also suggests that he fell unconscious and then froze. It is also possible that he laid down for some time (hiding?) and then froze. Of the whole group, most of them had injuries to the side of their head.. this is hardly a mere coincidence, but I don't want to speculate:)THE CEDAR:
From Grigoriev's NB (part 3, scan 29), at the location of the Cedar: "The branches on it are bright green, in places dangling the hair of thick moss." This hanging moss/lichen burns exceptionally well and is ideal for starting a fire. This moss/lichen grows abundantly also on birches and other trees, so can be found in large amounts in the area of the cedar (this is obvious from the Grigoriev's diary). It is also a very good insulator, I wonder why the group did not use it..
In general, what really puzzles me is the fire. Based on information from the search party, there was a small fireplace near the cedar, there were thicker branches in the fireplace but it seemed that the fire was not maintained. But in the situation of the group, fire was the only real option that they had
. It seems that they managed to start a fire, why did they not make the fire bigger? They should have placed the fire right next to the cedar tree trunk, which would protect it from wind. Two people could have stand right next to the trunk from both sides, in order to provide even better wind protection. There was a lot of firewood - green cedar and spruce branches burn really well (the needles are full of resin), the birch bark and dangling moss are the best fire starters you can ever imagine, birch wood burns well even if wet.. They could have even put the whole cedar on fire. There were enough people for maintaining the fire, shading it from the wind, collecting the firewood etc. Something is not right here.. does anyone know what was the position of the fireplace from the cedar? Was the cedar in fact protecting the fire from the wind (slope direction)? How about the loose partially burnt logs found outside of the fireplace? It seems that even if there were no attacker involved in the case, the group did not really cooperate near the cedar, or the group was divided before arriving at the cedar and did not regroup before both Juris who started the fire were already dead..
Grigoriev's NB (part 3, scan 33): "When I found something soft near that cedar and began to dig one and a half meter of snow, at first one student decided to help me, but when I got closer to the ground, he ran away. It was hide covered with (thick) moss
." - this looks like presence of other people in the area of the cedar. But maybe the hide was old, left there by the Mansi before the event of the tragedy. But still - in the sheer vastness of Ural taiga, the Dyatlov group suddenly left the tent and went down to the nearest forest, and they end up in a place used by Mansi or other people.. what a coincidence:).THE DEN:
Radiogram from excavating the "den": "one soldier's puttee from an ordinary military material with sewn brown galloon about a meter long, I can't explain the presence of the puttee"
. There are no military-style putees with the length of 1m visible on any of the Dyatlov group photos - were there any comments from Yuri Yudin whether anyone in the group had similar putees? Was the other putee found in the tent (I don't think so)?
Autopsy report of Kolevatov says that the neck was deformed. What does this mean? Was his neck broken? Similar statements regarding Lyuda's neck..OTHER STRANGE THINGS:
Although most of them did not have a proper footwear, according to the autopsy reports, only Doroshenko had frostbite on his feet
. This is very strange. The others without shoes should have severe frostbites too, mostly Dyatlov, Slobodin and especially Zina. How is this possible? (I have a theory:).
The Dyatlov group followed the track of a Mansi hunter(s?), just one day or two before the incident. This person could have provided invaluable information about the weather, possible light phenomena, or other unusual events. Did the investigators found out who was this hunter? Can his testimony be found anywhere? If not, this is another reason to believe that the investigation was not done properly.
From Maslennikov NB (scan 21): "Meteorological rockets of a new type, launched beyond Sverd in the Southern Urals over the Urals, landed in this region. I ask you to request an urgent inquiry whether such a rocket was in the area on the night of February 2"
. - does anyone has any documents regarding this inquiry?
That's it for now, thank you for reading:) and I hope anyone could answer at least some of my questions above. Thanx.