The number 3/2518‑59 is not a second criminal case. It matches the Soviet format for a supervisory file (надзорное производство), which higher‑level prosecutors opened for every significant regional case.Damn it, I cannot clearly say in English what I mean... When I said "surveillance proceedings", I meant exactly "надзорное производство" and not the Main case.
The number 3/2518‑59 is not a second criminal case. It matches the Soviet format for a supervisory file (надзорное производство), which higher‑level prosecutors opened for every significant regional case.Damn it, I cannot clearly say in English what I mean... When I said "surveillance proceedings", I meant exactly "надзорное производство" and not the Main case.
What is referred to by the number 3/2518‑59 is not that significant. The important thing is that certain materials linked to DPI existed at the USSR federal level, and we have not seen a single page of them. Our knowledge base is not complete. For the materials with number 3/2518‑59 I have 4 possible options, but without looking at the contents it's not possible to pinpoint the right one.
That supervisory file is basically contains the junk folder of administrative correspondence.
Its nature as a supervisory file is not speculative — it follows directly from the numbering format and from standard Soviet prosecutorial practice. Whatever is inside it, it is not a parallel criminal case and not a second investigative archive.I guess this requires some clarification. Could you please elaborate a little on this statement?
Today's 2026 Proshkin interview, presented by both Teddy and Axelrod, suggests that what happened at Dyatlov Pass was connected to the 21st Party Congress that was taking place at the same time as the DP hike, January 27 through February 5.
I am not sure that I understand it all, as I think Proshkin speaks carefully, but here is what I gathered:
It seems Khrushchev wanted to use the conference to present his leadership as a shining star to the world and perhaps was hoping that a rocket could be launched during the conference time period, to impress everyone. At this time, rockets were being tested in Russia; that much is known. And in just two more years (1961), all the testing paid off and Yuri Gagarin would become Russia's first cosmonaut. But this interview suggests that maybe there was another "first cosmonaut" before him, that ended in a crash and the deaths of the 9.
The event was immediately cleaned up (rocket debris was found and removed), the scene was staged, and everything hushed up. (This fits with the times, as, for example, the Nedelin catastrophe of an accidentally exploded rocket just one year later, 1960, which killed an unknown number of people and upon which "complete secrecy was immediately imposed on the events by Nikita Khrushchev" and it wasn't until 1989 that the Soviet Union even acknowledged the event had taken place.)
If we suppose that this cosmonaut-occupied rocket did crash in the Otorten area and the cosmonaut died, this would give credence to Nurse Solter's claim that 6 bodies were brought to her initially, followed by 5 more later. (Maybe there were two cosmonauts in the rocket?) It also lends credence to pilot Karpushin's claim that he flew over the pass on February 25 and saw the tent and 2 bodies. This would be during the staged-and-hushed-up time period.
A very similar theory was already proposed and can be found here: https://dyatlovpass.com/theories?flp=1#rocket (SECRET LAUNCHES) and also here: https://dyatlovpass.com/kizilov?rbid=18461. Proshkin fills this theory out a little bit by linking it to the 21st party congress and Krushchev's embarrassment at the failure.
Anyhow, this is how I understand the interview. Please correct me if I have misinterpretations