The cuts on tent simply doesn't make any sense

[Sunny]

I can accept some  cuts were maybe made in panic, in a hurry. But those horisontal cuts up in the tent are made (to my opinion) on a calm and careful way. Not in any kind of hurry or panic. This just doesn't add up at all, if you assume there was anykind of avalance or slab avalance. Or any kind of fear for their lives. Someone said the tent fabric must be tight to make those long vertical cuts. I agree. It is very difficult to cut long straight cuts if the tent is lying down on top of you, there's snow piled on it, and it's pitch dark. I don't know how some people think this is how it happened...And there's no point trying to cut the tent in complete straight line, like some cuts are made. Why? For what purpose? If you need fresh air in tent, you open the door. If you need to peak out, you peak from door way. If you  need to get out, or get injured bodies out, you go from door. If the door is shut, like it may have been by snow, then one cut-no matter how it is made- should be enough for all to get out.
I can't read all the other theories on this web site about the tent and the cuts. Maybe some of you have a theory, why the cuts were made, and why this way, either straight horisontal, or straight vertical way?

[Jean Daniel Reuss]

..................................................................
 Maybe some of you have a theory, why the cuts were made, and why this way, either straight horisontal, or straight vertical way?
.................................................

Of course I have one theory. It allows us to reconstruct all the main lines of the DPI, even if some of the particular actions remain in doubt.
I call it the TOKEB theory in honour and gratitude to those who found the essential key elements.

TOKEB = Eduard Tumanov + Per Inge Oestmoen + Aleks Kandr + EBE + BottledBrunette

Summary in one single row :
 A sponsor or client from Vizhay, pays 3 mercenary contract killers with the mission to kill the 9 hikers.

The overwhelming evidence of a surprise attack by brutish murderers, absolutely determined to leave no survivors, is categorised as a criminal theory and is therefore for various reasons (psychological, political.......) rejected by a majority of commentators.

At no time none of the 9 hikers would have damaged or cut the precious tent which was essential to their survival and which they had very often sewn back together. For the hikers the old tent was almost like a sacred object, at least during the hike in the snow.

It was obviously the attackers who on the morning of February 2, 1959, after having rested and eaten some of the hikers' provisions (inside the then undamaged tent), cut the canvas any way they could, before leaving off again in the direction of North-2.

Put yourself in the shoes of the attackers in the tent on the morning of 2 February 1959. They are celebrating their hard-won victory, but they are suffering painfully from the punches they received in the face from the 5 hikers who have damaged fists; (Kolgomorova, Slobodin, Doroshenko, Dyatlov, Krivonischenko in chronological order of disabling).

In the natural gestures of revenge, hatred and rage the attackers destroy and randomly lacerate the last symbol of the hikers (who did not die without a hard resistance).

But the tent does not fall in small pieces easily and the result of their destructive will is not very spectacular :

Moreover, according to Aleks Kandr, the missing part of the canvas was used by the attackers (murderers) to make a protective band (soldier's puttees), replacing the one lost near the Den.

For the unwritten TOKEB theory, see :
Eduard Tumanov : https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=411.0     +   videos
Aleks Kandr : http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova
Per Inge Oestmoen : https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=325
Jean Daniel Reuss : https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=613
EBE : https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=984
BottledBrunette : https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=326

[Manti]

About the cuts I have two theories

A.

The investigation was botched, evidence not collected with enough care. The cuts in this scenario are made by searchers' ice axes as they were digging out the tent.

Counterarguments: the cuts being apparently from the inside, however this might be a mistake of the person who examined the tent.


B.

Hypothermic hallucinations. The cuts were made by a member or members of the Dyatlov group, in a state of hypothermic delirium or paranoia which set in already in the tent. Remember that the tent was unheated, exposed to the wind on the slope that was compared to the speed of airflow from a jet engine. In this scenario, the group is already getting hypothermic on their ascent up Kholat. They see no other option but to set up the tent as some members can't continue, however, they fail to install the stove for some reason. Some members of the group are in more advanced hypothermia and start hallucinating and cut the tent. At this point the group leaves for the forest, their last hope is starting a campfire. Some succumb on the way.


Somewhat supporting this are the autopsies stating they died 6-8 hours after their last meal, and my recent readings about hypothermia victims among Mount Everest climbers, who in some cases took more than 8 hours to die after becoming immobile in similar temperatures and windchill.

[sarapuk]

I can accept some  cuts were maybe made in panic, in a hurry. But those horisontal cuts up in the tent are made (to my opinion) on a calm and careful way. Not in any kind of hurry or panic. This just doesn't add up at all, if you assume there was anykind of avalance or slab avalance. Or any kind of fear for their lives. Someone said the tent fabric must be tight to make those long vertical cuts. I agree. It is very difficult to cut long straight cuts if the tent is lying down on top of you, there's snow piled on it, and it's pitch dark. I don't know how some people think this is how it happened...And there's no point trying to cut the tent in complete straight line, like some cuts are made. Why? For what purpose? If you need fresh air in tent, you open the door. If you need to peak out, you peak from door way. If you  need to get out, or get injured bodies out, you go from door. If the door is shut, like it may have been by snow, then one cut-no matter how it is made- should be enough for all to get out.
I can't read all the other theories on this web site about the tent and the cuts. Maybe some of you have a theory, why the cuts were made, and why this way, either straight horisontal, or straight vertical way?

Plenty of discussion has taken place in this Forum on the cuts to the Tent.

[Star man]

The cuts were probably made after the tree fell on the tent while it was in the ravine area.  Those who were able cut their way out.  Later the tent was moved onto the mountain during the cover up.

Regards

Star man

[sarapuk]

A tree falling on a tent is probably going to make a bit of a mess to the fabric. We dont see that mess but we do see what appears to be clean cuts in the fabric.

[GlennM]

Conspiracists hold that a branch fell in the woods, injuring the tourists. Those who caused the branch to fall then did their best to cover up their accident/crime. This included moving the tent up the slope of 1079 and staging that scene. It strikes me as wrong for these reasons. First and foremost,  there were easily identified footprints leading from the tent, but none leading toward it! Secondly, there were no drag marks or other evidence of the damaged tent and camp gear being carried up the hill. Third, how are the scattered remains of the tourists any sort of a deception? It does not pass the sniff test.

[Ziljoe]

I would speculate that that some of the cuts to the tent would have been done when the searchers tried to find out what was inside. They would not know if there were bodies inside so unlikely push a knife in to the canvas incase they damaged anything inside . Perhaps small cuts were made from the outside to be able to put a hand in, then rotate the knife and cut up and outwards . It all depends on how the searchers dismantled the tent, which we have little information on.

However , we have 3 reasonable explanations for the injuries of the fractures.

A tree/branch falling, a snow collapse at the ravine and outsiders using some sort of physical force.

To me ,it can only be one of these three . The lack of evidence of other people , footprints etc is a problem.

[GlennM]

I have busted the knees out of denim blue jeans. Even if the tear happened from outside, the fray always looks like it came from inside. The fray is always pushed out. Could the canvas tent be similar in a way?

[Ziljoe]

I have busted the knees out of denim blue jeans. Even if the tear happened from outside, the fray always looks like it came from inside. The fray is always pushed out. Could the canvas tent be similar in a way?

I guess it's next to impossible to know. Although , the reports seem quite confident that there was evidence that some of the cuts were made from the inside. If the cuts were done from the outside it just adds to the mystery ....

[Игорь Б.]

Экспертизой установлено, что все разрезы сделаны изнутри. Об этом говорят царапины от ножа на ткани перед разрезом и после него.
У поисковиков ножей не было. Они рубили полотнище палатки ледорубом и рвали руками.

[sarapuk]

Apparently the tent disappeared with the fall of the USSR. We are led to believe that it was found, but in such poor condition that it was destroyed  ! ? Or maybe it wasn't destroyed. If we could examine that tent today we may find something interesting.

[Ziljoe]

Hi sarapuk,

Great to see you back. I mean that in a good way. Hope yo are well. 👍

[GlennM]

Welcome back Sarapuk,

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

To me ,it can only be one of these three . The lack of evidence of other people , footprints etc is a problem.

From February 2th to February 26th when the tent was discovered, almost a month had passed. Would you expect that traces left by attackers, in particular as they would likely have used skis, were still present?

[Ziljoe]

Hi Per Inge Oestmoen.

There's a problem, or should say many. .

The dyatlov ski tracks and Mansi tracks were seen in various detail. The dyatlov foot prints were also evident. For the amount of work needed to be done and, for attackers to know their foot prints or ski tracks would not be visible 3 weeks later raises questions. I don't think they would carry out an attack without accepting their would be some kind of physical trail. Depending on how you think these attackers did their attack might have some merit to not evidence left. Depends how you propose they were murdered. What are your thoughts on the methods of killing?

[GlennM]

To add on, I believe it axiomatic in forensics that everyone leaves a trace of themselves as evidence of where they come from. Everyone takes something when they leave.  If there was hostility at the camp at elevation 880, the aggressors both brought and left with evidence in some form. The tracks, or lack thereof falls into this category. Since the DP9 left clear trace evidence of foot and ski tracks, so to would agressors. Only a fundamental attribution error would explain that the prints associated with the DP9 going down slope were in fact those of the aggressor. Teddy claims the boot heel impressions reinforce this belief. This of course begs the question, " If the tracks were the aggressors,  where are the tracks of the DP9?"   Trace evidence over a winter, let alone six decades usually disappears.  But then again, Teddy et.al. find a milk tin in the woods. Perhaps, some day a diary will be found from the alleged killers. As of now, I feel the tragedy was caused and finished by the forces of Nature, not Man. The hikers response to their circumstance, of course is vexing. If they were attacked,  the case is even more vexing.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

To add on, I believe it axiomatic in forensics that everyone leaves a trace of themselves as evidence of where they come from. Everyone takes something when they leave.  If there was hostility at the camp at elevation 880, the aggressors both brought and left with evidence in some form. The tracks, or lack thereof falls into this category. Since the DP9 left clear trace evidence of foot and ski tracks, so to would agressors. Only a fundamental attribution error would explain that the prints associated with the DP9 going down slope were in fact those of the aggressor. Teddy claims the boot heel impressions reinforce this belief. This of course begs the question, " If the tracks were the aggressors,  where are the tracks of the DP9?"   Trace evidence over a winter, let alone six decades usually disappears.  But then again, Teddy et.al. find a milk tin in the woods. Perhaps, some day a diary will be found from the alleged killers. As of now, I feel the tragedy was caused and finished by the forces of Nature, not Man. The hikers response to their circumstance, of course is vexing. If they were attacked,  the case is even more vexing.

To add on, I believe it axiomatic in forensics that everyone leaves a trace of themselves as evidence of where they come from. Everyone takes something when they leave.  If there was hostility at the camp at elevation 880, the aggressors both brought and left with evidence in some form. The tracks, or lack thereof falls into this category. Since the DP9 left clear trace evidence of foot and ski tracks, so to would agressors. Only a fundamental attribution error would explain that the prints associated with the DP9 going down slope were in fact those of the aggressor. Teddy claims the boot heel impressions reinforce this belief. This of course begs the question, " If the tracks were the aggressors,  where are the tracks of the DP9?"   Trace evidence over a winter, let alone six decades usually disappears.  But then again, Teddy et.al. find a milk tin in the woods. Perhaps, some day a diary will be found from the alleged killers. As of now, I feel the tragedy was caused and finished by the forces of Nature, not Man. The hikers response to their circumstance, of course is vexing. If they were attacked,  the case is even more vexing.

Why this resistance to the reality that all available evidence from the corpses points to murder?

None of the injuries can be attributed to natural causes. Even Igor Dyatlov, the one among the nine who likely died from hypothermia, was found to have clear marks of violence: In all probability he had handcuffs on his feet to ensure that he laid still and froze to death.

By the way, why would present-day Russian authorities state that an avalanche or snow slab is the only acceptable cause, when it has been conclusively proven that it is impossible? They want to hide the reality, which would cause political unrest in 1959 and in 2022. The incessant cover-ups and denials are alone enogh to tell us that they knew very well what happened.

[ilahiyol]

The numerous cuts in the tent are evidence of the existence of a struggle. If people were taken out at gunpoint, there would be a single cut in the tent. But there is no human attack, because there is not a single cut in the tent, there are at least 15-20 cuts. In such a case, it can be thought that they were attacked by a bear. But there is no evidence of a bear attack. If he is not human, there is only one answer. Unknown coercive force. There is no other option.

[GlennM]

the mass grave of Zolotoya Gora near Chelyabinsk
Perpetuated by Nazi Germans in Operation Barbarossa, not the Soviets yes?
DP9 require a better explanation than Nazi war crimes attributed to Russia.
Keep casting. You might catch a fish.

[Tony]

Noted by the examiner during the original examination of the cuts to the tent, only 3 of the cuts were documented (not counting the cut made by Slobtzov). According to the examiner, not all of the damage was a cut made by a sharp object. Some of the damage was caused by tears. I agree that it would have been difficult to make such long cuts in a collapsed tent covered by snow. Since avalanche is the most popular of all the theories at the moment, it would seem that the biggest argument against avalanche is whether or not the cuts were made while the tent was still taut and not already collapsed.

In an interview by M. Sharavin, he briefly states that when the tent was found, it was found with the windward side collapsed on top of the leeward side *("The cut was on the leeward side, and so it fell, as it were, on the holes..."). There are no other remarks made by any of the other searchers or investigators with regard to how the tent was found or to which side was facing up. If the windward side was facing up (when found) and fell on top of and convered the cut (leeward) side of the tent, this completely rules out avalanche as it doesn't make sense that the hikers would cut into the side that is facing into the ground (an avalanche would have forced the leeward side into the ground), somehow climb out, and then turn the windward side back on top of the leeward side covering it. This would cause one to believe that the cuts to the tent were made while the tent was taut and then later the wind caused the collapse of the tent, blowing the windward side over and on top of the leeward side and thus ruling out the avalanche theory.

*Important to note that this comment was made many years later and is a bit ambiguous to say the least.