This is the best video
regarding the Dyatlov case in English! I'm especially grateful to Daniel for not interrupting with questions and letting Teddy talk.
I hope there will be a sequel!
oh...and I can explain why Ivanov gave the photo negatives to the searchers without knowing what was visible in the pictures! It was a very dishonest trick!
Explain!
The initial allegation is that Ivanov is committing a crime by handing over evidence to civilians. If a prosecutor did this today, he would be immediately investigated and his career would be over! The transmission of photo-negatives is particularly sensitive! In the event of an error during the develop of photo negatives, the images are lost forever, and thus the evidence is permanently destroyed! It is possible that the whole case will be solved in the pictures! Let's ask the question, is there a prosecutor who would dare to risk this? No way!
Russian prosecutors' offices have been equipped with photographic technology labs since 1954. They can summon the film negatives themselves.
So Ivanov's action is irrational, certainly against the law and unnecessary! It happened anyway, why?
The explanation:
The tent was found earlier with the cameras. The film negatives in the cameras were developed in the photo lab of the prosecutor's office. The images were examined and censored. With those images that did not contain danger, new photo-negatives were taken using a photographic process and these new films were returned to the cameras. This is how they will be found on February 26! So Ivanov already has all the photos of the case, and thus hands over the film negatives found in the cameras, but actually already censored, to the seekers for development!
Why did you do this?
This was able to completely shield the prosecution from an accusation that pictures had been removed. BUt that's what they actually did. If the searchers developed the images, no one can assume that the prosecution has removed the images. It's a trick! Fraud! Ivanov used search engines to develop photo negatives as if he needed their help. But what he really needed was not their help, but the false appearance that the images could not be removed.
Why did the images have to be censored?
Two conspiracies are conceivable:
1) Related to events directly involving Gyatlovs
2) Relating to the investigation of the case
We don't know what happened to the Gyatlovs. Something they want to cover up. The official investigation of the case is the cover-up itself. Instead of the original events, some alternative explanation had to be invented for the deaths of 9 people. This was Ivanov's task, which he failed to meet. All he could achieve was to confuse the clues and evidence so much that the false facts thus produced would not allow any possible narrative to be established. But a full-fledged false alternative theory cannot be put forward either.
When the film exchange takes place, there is no final version of how the location will be furnished. e.g. It has not yet been decided where the tent will be. Therefore, images related to the tent are considered dangerous. The famous last two pictures of the digging of the tent, which are not included in any of the inventoried films and their origin is completely uncertain! What happened here was that these images were censored. They didn't make it back to the new censored movie negatives that were put back on camera. Later, when the decision was made that the equipment of the location will correspond to the location of the tent, as it actually did, i.e. according to the pictures, from then on these pictures will be used as evidence to prove camping in the snow field. That's why these photos will be found later! And the Ivanov don't care about the contradiction that these photos were not on the film negatives given to the searchers and are not inventoried! This is the story of loose images!
Where and when will the pictures digging up the tent appear for the first time?
Ivanov makes an extremely ridiculous statement about these images; film sensitivity; based on the shutter speed of the camera and the lens used, regarding what time the tent site is dugged up. How does Ivanov know which camera these pictures were taken with? In order to make a statement about what the set shutter speed of the given camera was, what len was on it, you should know which camera the pictures were taken with. Or all cameras found should have had the same settings and lens! How do he know which camera the images not included in the inventory were taken with? Hm?
"
In one of the cameras the last frame shows the moment of excavation of snow for the installation of the tent. Considering that this frame was shot with an exposure of I/25 seconds, with a diaphragm of 5.6 at a film sensitivity of 65 Un. GOST, and taking into account the density of the frame, we can assume that the hikers started the installation of the tent around 5 pm 1.II.59. A similar picture was taken with another camera."
from:
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-384-387?rbid=17743
Topic: Daniel Curtis interview with Teddy Hadjiyska (Read 6826 times)