December 10, 2022, 12:27:28 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Igor Dyatlov's ankle wounds  (Read 958 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

August 02, 2022, 12:44:03 PM
Read 958 times
Offline

amashilu


The autopsy on Igor Dyatlov says "both ankles had brownish red abrasions, size 1x0.5 cm and 3x2.5 cm with hemorrhage into the underlying tissue."

Other abrasions on his body were defined as "minor," but these were not. They were deep and they bled.

I cannot think of anything that would cause deep ankle abrasions like this, except being tied with rope or hand-cuffs or some other strong material, and Igor struggling against the restraints. Can anyone? It would be beneficial if we could come up with any other cause and would help guide us to: human interference or not human interference.
 

August 02, 2022, 12:57:46 PM
Reply #1
Offline

Игорь Б.


Возможно вы плохо представляете себе метрические размеры.

http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=60016
« Last Edit: August 02, 2022, 01:03:06 PM by Игорь Б. »
The answers to all the questions related to the death of Dyatlov group:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=110407
Evidence of the death of the Dyatlov group from the Wolverine chemical weapon:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=69286
 

August 27, 2022, 05:56:22 PM
Reply #2
Offline

Manti


Could just be from ill-fitting boots. From the sizes (1x0.5cm and 3x2.5cm) it doesn't appear the wound went all the way around.



 

August 28, 2022, 02:51:21 PM
Reply #3
Offline

amashilu


Quoting from the autopsy:
There are abrasions of brown-red color in the area of the left ankle joint on the anterior lateral and on the posterior surfaces of both ankles hollowed over the surface of the skin and also on the skin level, sized 1 х 0.5 cm and up to 3 х 2.5 cm with hemorrhaging into the underlying soft tissues.

The abrasions went all the way around and they were deep.
 

August 28, 2022, 06:05:29 PM
Reply #4
Online

Charles


The autopsy on Igor Dyatlov says "both ankles had brownish red abrasions, size 1x0.5 cm and 3x2.5 cm with hemorrhage into the underlying tissue."

Other abrasions on his body were defined as "minor," but these were not. They were deep and they bled.

I cannot think of anything that would cause deep ankle abrasions like this, except being tied with rope or hand-cuffs or some other strong material, and Igor struggling against the restraints. Can anyone? It would be beneficial if we could come up with any other cause and would help guide us to: human interference or not human interference.

You are 100% right.
 

August 28, 2022, 06:17:27 PM
Reply #5
Offline

Ziljoe


The autopsy on Igor Dyatlov says "both ankles had brownish red abrasions, size 1x0.5 cm and 3x2.5 cm with hemorrhage into the underlying tissue."

Other abrasions on his body were defined as "minor," but these were not. They were deep and they bled.

I cannot think of anything that would cause deep ankle abrasions like this, except being tied with rope or hand-cuffs or some other strong material, and Igor struggling against the restraints. Can anyone? It would be beneficial if we could come up with any other cause and would help guide us to: human interference or not human interference.

You are 100% right.

Why is it 100% right?
 

August 28, 2022, 06:26:21 PM
Reply #6
Online

Charles


The autopsy on Igor Dyatlov says "both ankles had brownish red abrasions, size 1x0.5 cm and 3x2.5 cm with hemorrhage into the underlying tissue."

Other abrasions on his body were defined as "minor," but these were not. They were deep and they bled.

I cannot think of anything that would cause deep ankle abrasions like this, except being tied with rope or hand-cuffs or some other strong material, and Igor struggling against the restraints. Can anyone? It would be beneficial if we could come up with any other cause and would help guide us to: human interference or not human interference.

You are 100% right.

Why is it 100% right?

Because it is. English is not my native language but according to what I understood, the text of Amashilu is crystal clear and just makes sense. How can you be more right than his observation?
 
The following users thanked this post: melissa whisler

September 05, 2022, 11:24:21 AM
Reply #7
Offline

JohnK


The autopsy on Igor Dyatlov says "both ankles had brownish red abrasions, size 1x0.5 cm and 3x2.5 cm with hemorrhage into the underlying tissue."

Other abrasions on his body were defined as "minor," but these were not. They were deep and they bled.

I cannot think of anything that would cause deep ankle abrasions like this, except being tied with rope or hand-cuffs or some other strong material, and Igor struggling against the restraints. Can anyone? It would be beneficial if we could come up with any other cause and would help guide us to: human interference or not human interference.

Here’s one thought from my own experiences. (1) I’ve had ankle bruising from new modern x-country ski boots after only a few days of skiing from tying the laces tight around my ankles. (2) I’ve also done multi day hikes in the snow, and the absolute worst thing that you can have happen is to get your feet wet on a winter trek, the skin gets soft and splits easily, you will do anything to keep that from happening.

Combining these two facts, if I had their 1950’s ski boots, and wanted to keep my feet dry, I’d tie the straps very tight to keep water out (and for better ski control on hills/uneven surfaces). It’s no surprise to me at all that there were ankle abrasions, especially if the skin had gotten wet.

Just google “nordic ski ankle abrasion”. Even with modern ski equipment research says the majority of Nordic ski injuries involve soft tissue damage, 18% are abrasions.
 
The following users thanked this post: WarpedWing

September 05, 2022, 07:22:50 PM
Reply #8
Offline

GlennM


This thread makes me appreciate all the more the sturdiness of those student hikers in 1959. By the standards of today, they braved the elements with clothing unsuitable for extreme conditions. And, the wear and tear on their bodies, like these ankle abrasions is evidence of it.
 

November 27, 2022, 03:52:37 PM
Reply #9
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen


The autopsy on Igor Dyatlov says "both ankles had brownish red abrasions, size 1x0.5 cm and 3x2.5 cm with hemorrhage into the underlying tissue."

Other abrasions on his body were defined as "minor," but these were not. They were deep and they bled.

I cannot think of anything that would cause deep ankle abrasions like this, except being tied with rope or hand-cuffs or some other strong material, and Igor struggling against the restraints. Can anyone? It would be beneficial if we could come up with any other cause and would help guide us to: human interference or not human interference.


It is extremely likely that Dyatlov was indeed handcuffed on his feet.

Please look at all the injuries of the nine. These injuries can only be explained by murder.

There was a planned murder, which had to be made to look like an accident because the nine students were loyal Soviet citizens with connections in the "right" people in Russian society. However, if the nine students had witnessed something in the Urals which they were not supposed to know they would be a threat to state security. The relevant agency would mercilessly exterminate anyone who could jeopardize state secrets.

It completely escapes me how anyone can fail to see that these nine unfortunates were all murdered.
 

November 27, 2022, 05:51:13 PM
Reply #10
Offline

GlennM


Perhaps when someone reveals the exact nature of this State Secret, the theory will get more traction. The idea of " the enemy within" is interesting, but assumes much.
 

November 28, 2022, 01:58:07 AM
Reply #11
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen


Perhaps when someone reveals the exact nature of this State Secret, the theory will get more traction. The idea of " the enemy within" is interesting, but assumes much.


There is absolutely no indication that there was violence between the nine hikers, or that any of them harbored evil intentions towards the others.

The killers attacked the unfortunate nine as a result of someone having made the decision that they must die. It was a planned action, carefully orchestrated to make it look like an accident to prevent political unrest from the public.

Evidently, the Soviet state knew all along what happened, and they have tried to deny it ever since. That in itself is telling.
 

November 28, 2022, 02:52:11 AM
Reply #12
Online

Charles


that any of them harbored evil intentions towards the others.

To be precise, some hikers could have motives to feel anger: Dubinina against the group who ostracized her, Kolevatov and Thibeaux-Brignolle against the leader who had punished them... everything was not peaceful between them.

But whatever the level of dissension within the group, it made no difference (or small) when brutally attacked by outsiders. They could both quarrel and be attacked by outsiders.
 

November 28, 2022, 04:02:44 AM
Reply #13
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen


that any of them harbored evil intentions towards the others.

To be precise, some hikers could have motives to feel anger: Dubinina against the group who ostracized her, Kolevatov and Thibeaux-Brignolle against the leader who had punished them... everything was not peaceful between them.

But whatever the level of dissension within the group, it made no difference (or small) when brutally attacked by outsiders. They could both quarrel and be attacked by outsiders.

Yes, petty quarrelings and angry exchanges are perfectly normal when a group of people share space and time together as on an expedition. Nothing abnormal about that.
 

November 28, 2022, 07:32:06 AM
Reply #14
Offline

GlennM


The bickering should not extend to the forum however. We are volunteers, and volunteers can opt out far more easily than hikers on a trail. Your previous post was a good one.
 

November 29, 2022, 01:49:29 AM
Reply #15
Online

ilahiyol


As Dytlov walked towards the tent, an unknown force must have grabbed him by the wrists from behind. Then he must have laid her on the ground and killed her in an unknown way. It is a very remote possibility that the wrist wound was caused by another reason. After that, Rüstem attacked. He's pushed from behind. And Rustem fell to the ground. And he's dead. I think this unknown coercive force is a very developed human being. Or it could be a genie. But the death patterns and wounds of the corpses suggest that it belongs to a highly developed human being who can be invisible when necessary.
 

November 29, 2022, 02:56:28 AM
Reply #16
Online

Charles


a highly developed human being who can be invisible when necessary.

No, it was a skunk mermaid, they are very common in Russian forests.
 

November 29, 2022, 03:06:29 AM
Reply #17
Online

ilahiyol


a highly developed human being who can be invisible when necessary.

No, it was a skunk mermaid, they are very common in Russian forests.
Yes, my thought may seem strange and unbelievable to most of you. But in this world we live in, it is a fact that there have been very strange and incredible events in history and now. Many of these events have no logical explanation. The Dytlov affair is one of them. I'm sure of that. I think the attacker of the Dytlov group is an advanced human like superman. Because the attacks seem to be made by a human, but it does not seem possible for a normal person to do it. In other words, there may be a person who uses 100% of his brain and is highly developed both physically and mentally. This is possible. Why not?
 

November 29, 2022, 06:48:44 AM
Reply #18
Offline

amashilu


Per Inge Oestmoen wrote:  The killers attacked the unfortunate nine as a result of someone having made the decision that they must die. It was a planned action, carefully orchestrated to make it look like an accident to prevent political unrest from the public.
Evidently, the Soviet state knew all along what happened, and they have tried to deny it ever since. That in itself is telling.


I want to thank you for firmly and consistently sticking to the theory that these people were killed, and for your patience in explaining it over and over. To some of us, it is obvious from the deceased bodies that these skilled, experienced hikers, who would never leave their tent without their coats and boots, were forced out, engaged in hand-to-hand combat, lost the fight and were killed by being rifle-butted in the temple, or slammed and cracked in the chest; no arms or legs were broken, only the heads and the main body areas. It is difficult to understand how others cannot see this.  Many pathologists studying the photos and autopsies over the last 50 years have also concluded that these were clearly cases of murder. The positions of many of the arms also indicates that the bodies were dragged after death and then positioned. Dubinina could never have gotten up onto her knees with flail chest and a pierced heart. How did she get in that position? Dyatlov had his ankles tied so he couldn't move and froze to death after a hand-to-hand combat that ripped the skin from his hands.

There was a flat circle in the snow next to the tent, at the time it was found. More attention needs to be paid to that.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2022, 12:13:01 PM by amashilu »
 

November 29, 2022, 10:47:34 AM
Reply #19
Offline

Ziljoe


Per Inge Oestmoen wrote:  The killers attacked the unfortunate nine as a result of someone having made the decision that they must die. It was a planned action, carefully orchestrated to make it look like an accident to prevent political unrest from the public.
Evidently, the Soviet state knew all along what happened, and they have tried to deny it ever since. That in itself is telling.


I want to thank you for firmly and consistently sticking to the theory that these people were killed, and for your patience in explaining it over and over. To some of us, it is obvious from the deceased bodies that these skilled, experienced hikers, who would never leave their tent without their coats and boots, were forced out, engaged in hand-to-hand combat, lost the fight and were killed by being rifle-butted in the temple, or slammed and cracked in the chest; no arms or legs were broken, only the heads and the main body areas. It is difficult to understand how others cannot see this.  Many pathologists studying the photos and autopsies over the last 50 years have also concluded that these were clearly cases of murder. The positions of many of the arms also indicates that the bodies were dragged after death and then positioned. Dubinina could never have gotten up onto her knees with flail chest and a pierced heart. How did she get in that position? Dyatlov had his ankles tied so he couldn't move and froze to death after a hand-to-hand combat.

There was a flat circle in the snow next to the tent, at the time it was found. More attention needs to be paid to that.

Which pathologists studying the photos and autopsies over the last 50 years have  concluded that these were clearly cases of murder? I would be surprised if a professional forensic pathologist would offer a conclusion of murder without having more data.

 

November 29, 2022, 11:16:40 AM
Reply #20
Online

Charles


I would be surprised if a professional forensic pathologist would offer a conclusion of murder without having more data.

There is no need of more data, only the need not to neglect the available data as you do, as you do just like Ivanov did when writing  "considering the absence of external injuries".

And are you not surprised that Criminal Prosecutor L.N. Ivanov, who was head the 1959 investigation, finally offered the conclusion of murder by alien spaceships? And are you not surprised that the same prosecutor lied in his 1959 Resolution to close the case, creating thereby a false legal document?

 

November 29, 2022, 12:33:23 PM
Reply #21
Offline

amashilu


Ziljoe writes, "Which pathologists studying the photos and autopsies over the last 50 years have  concluded that these were clearly cases of murder?"


This is a fair question. I have read so much and watched so many documentaries, I am sorry that I did not write down the names during the process. I will try to get the names for you.
 

November 29, 2022, 12:40:55 PM
Reply #22
Offline

Ziljoe


I would be surprised if a professional forensic pathologist would offer a conclusion of murder without having more data.

There is no need of more data, only the need not to neglect the available data as you do, as you do just like Ivanov did when writing  "considering the absence of external injuries".

And are you not surprised that Criminal Prosecutor L.N. Ivanov, who was head the 1959 investigation, finally offered the conclusion of murder by alien spaceships? And are you not surprised that the same prosecutor lied in his 1959 Resolution to close the case, creating thereby a false legal document?


Charles,You just lied again about the re- opening of the case to x-ray the exhumed bodies?

"Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics. A forensic pathologist reading today would not commit to say that it was murder or otherwise, they don't have enough data from this forum or the autopsies , files etc.

They would consider  all the aspects . It even says not to jump to conclusions in the clinical governance. All you that have done is gone broken bones , meeting on a train, police , not conclusive outcome therefore 'murder'.

You have to take small baby steps, think, compare data from hypothermia case studies, examine the environment for possible explanations for the injuries.look at every detail. Can these injuries be explained by the environment along with possible sledge hammers etc.

We have to look at the flail chest , the swelling, the abrasions, the body positions, the postion of the hands and heads.

Are these injuries in keeping with hypothermia, or at least the effects of hypothermia.

We can't go into a court room and accuse someone for steeling because they had stolen something before. Likewise we can't go saying Russia is a murderous place with guns , gulags and break ribs with a hammer so it was them!

We can think it but no law, pathologist or otherwise would follow it. You have a bias and you are forcing it, try dropping the bias and you might suprise yourself.

So far you say everyone is lying. The tent tear/holes are  a lie , the tent photo is a lie, the photos are staged, ivanov is lying, the lack of xrays is a lie, Igor B is lying about not using x-rays in autopsies. I'm lying about snow caves, Wolverine's don't exist.

look at clinical case studies, they do help. The nearest to murder is the possibility of them being told to leave the tent. The rest of the injuries lean towards natural occurance .
 

November 29, 2022, 12:51:43 PM
Reply #23
Offline

Ziljoe


Ziljoe writes, "Which pathologists studying the photos and autopsies over the last 50 years have  concluded that these were clearly cases of murder?"


This is a fair question. I have read so much and watched so many documentaries, I am sorry that I did not write down the names during the process. I will try to get the names for you.

Thanks amashilu

I too, forget who said what. I have read so much that I forget if it's just junk media or factual.
 

November 29, 2022, 03:05:12 PM
Reply #24
Online

Charles


"Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics.


All nine autopsy reports were translated and are available. They all include a part "External examination" and Dr Vozrozhdenny listed more than 80 external injuries, all autopsies were performed "in the presence of the criminal prosecutor of regional prosecutor office junior Counselor in Justice L.N. Ivanov" who signed all the reports.

Ivanov lied when writing "Considering the absence of external injuries" and we know why: because he received an order from Urakov...

"Deputy Prosecutor General, comrade Urakov came to meet with us and gave orders that we were to all tell anyone who asked that the hikers’ death was an accident.", "It was, obviously, an order from the CPSU Central Committee.", "We told them it might be an earthquake, a storm or anything like that … But look, what else could we tell them?"

https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2013

"Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations Urakov arrived and immediately asked us to bring him the case. He told us to write the closing statement. He went to the Oblast committee and took Klinov and Ivanov with him. When Ivanov came back he told me that an order was to close the case.", "A bit later I received an express order from Urakov to tell parents it was an accident.", "Anyway, the case was already taken away from us. No doubt, Urakov could have told us, but preferred not to. Because he himself must have received orders from the Procurator General who, in his turn, executed orders from his superiors. And it looks like so: all of a sudden, in the midst of investigation, there comes Urakov and closes down all work."

https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2014

Prosecutor Lev Ivanov lied because he received the order to lie. In 1946, Prosecutor Nicolay Zorya who refused to obey orders and to falsify the reports about Katyn massacre was found dead in his hotel bedroom in Nuremberg. Soviet Union was a totalitarian state, killing its own citizens, lying, falsifying. In 1959, the head of the state, Khrushchev, was one of the mass murderers of 1937-1938: he provided the lists of names of people to be shot in the head at Butovo (21,000 killed) and Kommunarka (10,000 killed)... the youngest victim was 13 years old, Misha Shamonin.


The boy received a bullet in the head, thanks to Khrushchev's signature at the bottom of the list of names provided to Stalin.

These people were completely twisted, perverted and rotten to the core. Mass killing, falsifying, lying, making false accusations, sending millions of people to forced labor camps... it was not Switzerland, it was a totalitarian, pervert and bloody regime.

"Considering the absence of external injuries" was not "probably a true statement", it was a lie, and in obedience to an order from the regime. And your sentence ""Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics." is an absolute disgrace.


-



« Last Edit: November 29, 2022, 03:25:14 PM by Charles »
 

November 29, 2022, 04:27:09 PM
Reply #25
Offline

Ziljoe


"Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics.


All nine autopsy reports were translated and are available. They all include a part "External examination" and Dr Vozrozhdenny listed more than 80 external injuries, all autopsies were performed "in the presence of the criminal prosecutor of regional prosecutor office junior Counselor in Justice L.N. Ivanov" who signed all the reports.

Ivanov lied when writing "Considering the absence of external injuries" and we know why: because he received an order from Urakov...

"Deputy Prosecutor General, comrade Urakov came to meet with us and gave orders that we were to all tell anyone who asked that the hikers’ death was an accident.", "It was, obviously, an order from the CPSU Central Committee.", "We told them it might be an earthquake, a storm or anything like that … But look, what else could we tell them?"

https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2013

"Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations Urakov arrived and immediately asked us to bring him the case. He told us to write the closing statement. He went to the Oblast committee and took Klinov and Ivanov with him. When Ivanov came back he told me that an order was to close the case.", "A bit later I received an express order from Urakov to tell parents it was an accident.", "Anyway, the case was already taken away from us. No doubt, Urakov could have told us, but preferred not to. Because he himself must have received orders from the Procurator General who, in his turn, executed orders from his superiors. And it looks like so: all of a sudden, in the midst of investigation, there comes Urakov and closes down all work."

https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2014

Prosecutor Lev Ivanov lied because he received the order to lie. In 1946, Prosecutor Nicolay Zorya who refused to obey orders and to falsify the reports about Katyn massacre was found dead in his hotel bedroom in Nuremberg. Soviet Union was a totalitarian state, killing its own citizens, lying, falsifying. In 1959, the head of the state, Khrushchev, was one of the mass murderers of 1937-1938: he provided the lists of names of people to be shot in the head at Butovo (21,000 killed) and Kommunarka (10,000 killed)... the youngest victim was 13 years old, Misha Shamonin.


The boy received a bullet in the head, thanks to Khrushchev's signature at the bottom of the list of names provided to Stalin.

These people were completely twisted, perverted and rotten to the core. Mass killing, falsifying, lying, making false accusations, sending millions of people to forced labor camps... it was not Switzerland, it was a totalitarian, pervert and bloody regime.

"Considering the absence of external injuries" was not "probably a true statement", it was a lie, and in obedience to an order from the regime. And your sentence ""Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics." is an absolute disgrace.


-

Charles, you said that they re-opened the case, to do x-rays, then they stopped.

Charles wrote "When the case was re-opened they did x-rays of Zolotaryov and found new fractures. If they did their job seriously, they would have done x-rays of all hikers. But I think finding new fractures on Zolotaryov was an extra reason not to x-ray the other hikers...

That is to say, the motive to hide the cause of death in 1959 is still standing today: the contemporary Russian authorities inherited the motive to hide the truth
"

Is this the truth Charles? Did they reopen the case to do x-rays and stop ? 


The quote "Considering the absence of external injuries" may relate to it's context. There are marks on the body. There are internal injuries. The problem was , or is , is that there's nothing like stab wounds , bullet wounds or anything that suggests foul play. Lack of external injuries that show foul play or wounds causing death is what in means.

 The paradox could be that the alleged special forces did their job that good , that they fooled the autopsy people and all involved! The trained assassins that couldn't use a knife or gun because they were under strict orders to make it look like a "natural disaster"  managed to do this and fool everyone but yet you say it's obviously been done by hand? What are you trying to say?  Who are they trying to deceive. Everyone is in on it according to you. It was executed perfectly so no one would know that it was murder.

What else could they tell them, they didn't know what the cause of death was...that's what's being written and why the truth is in the quotes you keep posting. If they could not conclude or find evidence of anything , what else can they say.

And stop the emotive language, not one country is squeaky clean on how it treated its own citizens or populations of other countries. We could point the finger at France and it's history if you like.






 

November 29, 2022, 07:41:31 PM
Reply #26
Online

Charles


"Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics.


All nine autopsy reports were translated and are available. They all include a part "External examination" and Dr Vozrozhdenny listed more than 80 external injuries, all autopsies were performed "in the presence of the criminal prosecutor of regional prosecutor office junior Counselor in Justice L.N. Ivanov" who signed all the reports.

Ivanov lied when writing "Considering the absence of external injuries" and we know why: because he received an order from Urakov...

"Deputy Prosecutor General, comrade Urakov came to meet with us and gave orders that we were to all tell anyone who asked that the hikers’ death was an accident.", "It was, obviously, an order from the CPSU Central Committee.", "We told them it might be an earthquake, a storm or anything like that … But look, what else could we tell them?"

https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2013

"Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations Urakov arrived and immediately asked us to bring him the case. He told us to write the closing statement. He went to the Oblast committee and took Klinov and Ivanov with him. When Ivanov came back he told me that an order was to close the case.", "A bit later I received an express order from Urakov to tell parents it was an accident.", "Anyway, the case was already taken away from us. No doubt, Urakov could have told us, but preferred not to. Because he himself must have received orders from the Procurator General who, in his turn, executed orders from his superiors. And it looks like so: all of a sudden, in the midst of investigation, there comes Urakov and closes down all work."

https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2014

Prosecutor Lev Ivanov lied because he received the order to lie. In 1946, Prosecutor Nicolay Zorya who refused to obey orders and to falsify the reports about Katyn massacre was found dead in his hotel bedroom in Nuremberg. Soviet Union was a totalitarian state, killing its own citizens, lying, falsifying. In 1959, the head of the state, Khrushchev, was one of the mass murderers of 1937-1938: he provided the lists of names of people to be shot in the head at Butovo (21,000 killed) and Kommunarka (10,000 killed)... the youngest victim was 13 years old, Misha Shamonin.


The boy received a bullet in the head, thanks to Khrushchev's signature at the bottom of the list of names provided to Stalin.

These people were completely twisted, perverted and rotten to the core. Mass killing, falsifying, lying, making false accusations, sending millions of people to forced labor camps... it was not Switzerland, it was a totalitarian, pervert and bloody regime.

"Considering the absence of external injuries" was not "probably a true statement", it was a lie, and in obedience to an order from the regime. And your sentence ""Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics." is an absolute disgrace.


-

Charles, you said that they re-opened the case, to do x-rays, then they stopped.

Charles wrote "When the case was re-opened they did x-rays of Zolotaryov and found new fractures. If they did their job seriously, they would have done x-rays of all hikers. But I think finding new fractures on Zolotaryov was an extra reason not to x-ray the other hikers...

That is to say, the motive to hide the cause of death in 1959 is still standing today: the contemporary Russian authorities inherited the motive to hide the truth
"

Is this the truth Charles? Did they reopen the case to do x-rays and stop ? 

Let me correct my sentence:

"When the case was re-opened, new fractures had previously been found after Zolotaryov's exhumation. If they did their job seriously, they would have exhumed all hikers. But I think finding new fractures on Zolotaryov was an extra reason not to exhume the other hikers...

That is to say, the motive to hide the cause of death in 1959 is still standing today: the contemporary Russian authorities inherited the motive to hide the truth
"

And don't say that in Russia, they usually don't exhume corpses: in 1944, the Russians opened the mass graves of Katyn and exhumed the corpses of their own victims, because it suited their goals.

-


« Last Edit: November 29, 2022, 08:22:23 PM by Charles »
 

November 29, 2022, 08:16:54 PM
Reply #27
Online

Charles


The quote "Considering the absence of external injuries" may relate to it's context. There are marks on the body. There are internal injuries. The problem was , or is , is that there's nothing like stab wounds , bullet wounds or anything that suggests foul play. Lack of external injuries that show foul play or wounds causing death is what in means.

You are just descending deeper into your own perdition. During the Soviet era, the Russians killed thousand of people with hunger, freeze, drowning and all kind of bad treatments. The 80 external injuries of 20 different types recorded in the autopsy reports were simply denied, just like they erased Yejov from the famous photo with Stalin. Ivanov wrote "considering the absence of external injuries" and of "signs of fight": he had to deny the "external injuries" because he received the order to deny the "signs of fight". You can't even understand this easy process that denying the "signs of fight" implied to deny all "external injuries" because the given order was to say it was an accident. And Prosecutor Ivanov was obeying orders and had a career, contrary to Prosecutor Zorya who disobeyed orders and was killed.


And stop the emotive language, not one country is squeaky clean on how it treated its own citizens or populations of other countries.

So I was right. You prefer to be on the side of Ivanov who denied the injuries of the hikers and their sufferings, rather to be on the the side of the victims. It is the beginning of denial of crime against humanity. Your sentence:

"Considering the absence of external injuries" is probably a true statement in the world of forensics.

does not say anything about the case, it has no content related to case, it only speaks about you. You and some others could accept any fancy and ridiculous statements, the only thing you can't accept is to question the perversion of the Soviet regime... The Soviet Union was not just any country, it was a totalitarian regime, and now, you begin to defend the crimes and horrors of a totalitarian regime. It is the only truth about your comments here on the forum. That is to say all your writings here are of political nature. You don't treat equally all hypothesis, one is taboo: the political one, and this taboo define all other opinions. If your writings were not politically motivated, you would not put a taboo on the political aspect of the case...


-
« Last Edit: November 30, 2022, 08:12:47 AM by Charles »
 

November 29, 2022, 09:09:46 PM
Reply #28
Online

Charles


The quote "Considering the absence of external injuries" may relate to it's context. There are marks on the body. There are internal injuries.

The way "external injuries" become "marks on the body" in your writing is disgraceful. These actual injuries:

 "abrasion", "scratch", "flesh wound", "bruise", "swelling", "defect of the epidermis", "abrasion with hemorrhaging into the adjacent tissue", "diffuse bleeding into the underlying tissue", "graze wound", "skin wound", "hemorrhage", "ecchymoma", "burn", "contusion", "laceration", "deformation"

they are not simply "marks on the body". There are more than 80 of these injuries in the autopsy reports: you deny the sufferings of the victims... And you need to deny the sufferings of the victims... So there is here a tie of interest that you didn't declare.

-
« Last Edit: November 29, 2022, 09:16:18 PM by Charles »
 

November 29, 2022, 09:16:47 PM
Reply #29
Offline

Ziljoe


They reported the injuries, they include the marks, small cuts, abrasions etc. It would be interesting to compare autopsies of the time with other cases of hypothermia and what was found.

We have the have the autopsies of the dp9 so if they are hiding something , what are they hiding? If we take the tent for example, are you saying it wasn't cut from the inside? Are you saying it was cut from the outside and that the report of it being cut from the inside is a lie?

If the injuries are non life threating and consistent with hypothermia and there is no other evidence of outsiders , how can they say it was outsiders if you get my drift, it may have been but if they don't know for certain it can't be said. If we swing the argument the other way for example, they said it was murder, then they would have to prove it. What prove do they have? Some swollen extremities , abrasions and cuts. Bruises are missing for the impacts for blunt weapons , particularly for the rib fractures. Some of these injuries are postmortem. Some of them might have been from before the fatal event.

On other web sites and commentaries on the case, they question the interpretation of events. Who said what and when for example , as in how it's all been reported through media, who's getting paid to say what.

What country has not been part of some mass murder in the name of some idealism? You can't jump from "evil bad country " to they did it and they were all involved .

If they had that much control and power over everything why would they not just rewrite the case. Sort out all the anomalies or plant a camera from the tent or something in some Mansi hut and say, we got hard evidence and hang that Mansi and close the case.

What on earth is political about my writings? Perhaps it's you who are political?

You keep saying cover up, any which way but all you can conclude is the totalitarian regime, evil, horror etc .

Here's a bit more from the exhumation of Zolotaryov.

At our request, the exhumation was carried out by the forensic medical expert of the Moscow Bureau of Forensic Medical Examination, Sergei Nikitin. The researcher of the tragedy, doctor Galina Sazonova was also present at the cemetery. We talked to them on the radio "Komsomolskaya Pravda" (97.2 Moscow), where we talked about the first results of the examinations.

Here's a transcript of the conversation

Читайте на WWW.KP.RU: https://www.kp.ru/daily/26824/3861696/

GS : Is it correct to say that we evaluate the chest as a structure and talk about structural fractures? That is, one impact could cause several fractures?

SN: This indicates that the zone of contact, impact exceeded the dimensions from the first to the sixth rib. It was a big heavy mass. Most likely snow.

GS : Can you tell when these injuries occurred?

SN: The presence of blood in the pleural cavity of Zolotarev unequivocally indicates that it was in vivo.

GS: What position was the person in at the time of the injury?

Читайте на WWW.KP.RU: https://www.kp.ru/daily/26824/3861696/

SN: We can definitely say that he was lying on his back. And the traumatic impact occurred from front to back, maybe a little from right to left.

GS: Was the surface the person was lying on relatively hard?

SN: Yes. It is unlikely that he was lying in the snow.

GS: You found that not all ribs are broken the same way. Is it possible to say that the force that acted on the chest acted to the maximum where the ribs were completely broken? And where they didn’t break, it seems like the impact was lower?

SN: With such compression and with such fractures along the axillary line, the ribs broke as a result of excessive flexion. This is called the flexion nature of the fractures. Along the peristernal line, the nature of the fractures was extensor. This suggests that the traumatic impact occurred at the moment when the person was lying on his back, and suggests the direction of the traumatic mass.

GS: Is it like being crushed by a concrete slab? Or is it shock compression? There is a version that a large mass of snow fell.

SN: Was it impact or slow pressure over a period of time? When the corpse is examined not to the same degree of change as the corpse of Zolotarev was at the time of autopsy, there are soft tissues, subcutaneous fatty tissue, then hemorrhage into the subcutaneous fatty tissue can be assessed. If it was a blow, then we would see hemorrhages in the muscles and subcutaneous fatty tissue. If this mass, like a snow layer, was gradually squeezing, we would hardly have seen this hemorrhage.

GS: Hemorrhages were noted at autopsy. And on histology, and in the act.

Читайте на WWW.KP.RU: https://www.kp.ru/daily/26824/3861696/

SN: This suggests that it was a sharp pressure, a sharp impact. Not gradual.

Cor: Does it look like being hit by, say, a car?

SN : A car is like a comparison. In our case, we can say that it was the impact of a large mass.

GS: Could it have been a blast wave?

SN: Completely excluded. The injuries would have been different.

When Semyon was found in the stream, there was a camera on his chest. Pretty heavy stuff for the time. Could he walk with such injuries and with a camera around his neck?

- It is unlikely that the camera prevented him from moving. But we cannot say for sure where he got his ribs injured. You can allow this option. Two people were found in the creek with rib injuries and another with a skull injury. Therefore, it is impossible to exclude the version that they dug a cave in the area of ​​​​the ravine, but the snow collapsed and covered them.

Читайте на WWW.KP.RU: https://www.kp.ru/daily/26824/3861696/