Murder Indead

[sarapuk]

This might not be true of the 1950's and 60's era Soviet Union, but when i was a teenager in the 80's we had a speaker come to our school who lived in the USSR for awhile.  He said something that took me by surprise at the time.  He said that in pure criminal cases such as rape, murder, theft, that sort of thing, the Soviet legal system was not as corrupt and biased against the defendant as in the pure political cases. 

In the case of a dissident complaining about the government, they would manufacture evidence, force people to make false statements, find witnesses who would lie during the trial, that sort of thing.  In criminal cases they didn't do that so much.  If it wasn't a crime against the state, they didn't really care enough to put in the special effort. 

If there was a coverup, it had something to do with a matter greater than just simple murder.  There was a reason for the state to feel threatened in some way.   

Yes that kind of makes sense when you suggest a cover up because of something greater than just simple murder.  And it would follow from that that the Higher Authorities would feel threatened in some way or certainly be very concerned.  Thats assuming there was a cover up, of course.

As my opinion is in favor of the murder " solution " , it is not easy to find a real organised reason for a trained group ( whatever it may be) to make all this mess, looking like a bunch of misfits trying to cover their tracks ( they did not make it anyway ! ) 
What I mean here is : it would have been quite easy to make all these people disappear for good and to build a plausible story for this killing . GPU was the best organisation for it .

If it was a Murder by other Humans then it was a botch up, whichever way you look at it.  But the findings do not lead us to a Murder scenario. Not a Murder by other Humans at least.

[Star man]

This might not be true of the 1950's and 60's era Soviet Union, but when i was a teenager in the 80's we had a speaker come to our school who lived in the USSR for awhile.  He said something that took me by surprise at the time.  He said that in pure criminal cases such as rape, murder, theft, that sort of thing, the Soviet legal system was not as corrupt and biased against the defendant as in the pure political cases. 

In the case of a dissident complaining about the government, they would manufacture evidence, force people to make false statements, find witnesses who would lie during the trial, that sort of thing.  In criminal cases they didn't do that so much.  If it wasn't a crime against the state, they didn't really care enough to put in the special effort. 

If there was a coverup, it had something to do with a matter greater than just simple murder.  There was a reason for the state to feel threatened in some way.   

Yes that kind of makes sense when you suggest a cover up because of something greater than just simple murder.  And it would follow from that that the Higher Authorities would feel threatened in some way or certainly be very concerned.  Thats assuming there was a cover up, of course.

As my opinion is in favor of the murder " solution " , it is not easy to find a real organised reason for a trained group ( whatever it may be) to make all this mess, looking like a bunch of misfits trying to cover their tracks ( they did not make it anyway ! ) 
What I mean here is : it would have been quite easy to make all these people disappear for good and to build a plausible story for this killing . GPU was the best organisation for it .

If it was a Murder by other Humans then it was a botch up, whichever way you look at it.  But the findings do not lead us to a Murder scenario. Not a Murder by other Humans at least.

[Star man]

This might not be true of the 1950's and 60's era Soviet Union, but when i was a teenager in the 80's we had a speaker come to our school who lived in the USSR for awhile.  He said something that took me by surprise at the time.  He said that in pure criminal cases such as rape, murder, theft, that sort of thing, the Soviet legal system was not as corrupt and biased against the defendant as in the pure political cases. 

In the case of a dissident complaining about the government, they would manufacture evidence, force people to make false statements, find witnesses who would lie during the trial, that sort of thing.  In criminal cases they didn't do that so much.  If it wasn't a crime against the state, they didn't really care enough to put in the special effort. 

If there was a coverup, it had something to do with a matter greater than just simple murder.  There was a reason for the state to feel threatened in some way.   

Yes that kind of makes sense when you suggest a cover up because of something greater than just simple murder.  And it would follow from that that the Higher Authorities would feel threatened in some way or certainly be very concerned.  Thats assuming there was a cover up, of course.

As my opinion is in favor of the murder " solution " , it is not easy to find a real organised reason for a trained group ( whatever it may be) to make all this mess, looking like a bunch of misfits trying to cover their tracks ( they did not make it anyway ! ) 
What I mean here is : it would have been quite easy to make all these people disappear for good and to build a plausible story for this killing . GPU was the best organisation for it .

If it was a Murder by other Humans then it was a botch up, whichever way you look at it.  But the findings do not lead us to a Murder scenario. Not a Murder by other Humans at least.

This might not be true of the 1950's and 60's era Soviet Union, but when i was a teenager in the 80's we had a speaker come to our school who lived in the USSR for awhile.  He said something that took me by surprise at the time.  He said that in pure criminal cases such as rape, murder, theft, that sort of thing, the Soviet legal system was not as corrupt and biased against the defendant as in the pure political cases. 

In the case of a dissident complaining about the government, they would manufacture evidence, force people to make false statements, find witnesses who would lie during the trial, that sort of thing.  In criminal cases they didn't do that so much.  If it wasn't a crime against the state, they didn't really care enough to put in the special effort. 

If there was a coverup, it had something to do with a matter greater than just simple murder.  There was a reason for the state to feel threatened in some way.   

Yes that kind of makes sense when you suggest a cover up because of something greater than just simple murder.  And it would follow from that that the Higher Authorities would feel threatened in some way or certainly be very concerned.  Thats assuming there was a cover up, of course.

As my opinion is in favor of the murder " solution " , it is not easy to find a real organised reason for a trained group ( whatever it may be) to make all this mess, looking like a bunch of misfits trying to cover their tracks ( they did not make it anyway ! ) 
What I mean here is : it would have been quite easy to make all these people disappear for good and to build a plausible story for this killing . GPU was the best organisation for it .

If it was a Murder by other Humans then it was a botch up, whichever way you look at it.  But the findings do not lead us to a Murder scenario. Not a Murder by other Humans at least.

I am beginning to think that one of the group themselves may be responsible for the events that night.  I have been firing ideas out on “simplest credible explanation” thread.

I think Dyatlov himself could have triggered the events. 

The scenario goes like this in basic terms:

Dyatlov’s behaviour is unusual on this trip as reported in Zina’s diary.  Maybe he had a thing for Zina and others are flirting with her.?  He is jealou? He is also a bit of a control freak.

Dyatlov starts a fight at the tent that escalates into something more serious.  The group rally on Dyatlov and he pulles a knife and charges at the group.  The group flee running away from Dyatlov down the slope with Dyatlov in persuit.  The group split up scattering in the darkness.  Dyatlov follows the Yuris to the cedar.  The Yuris climb the tree to escape Dyatlov.  Dyatlov waits underneath. He maybe lights the fire and uses burning branches to try and reach the Yuris and force them down from the tree.  He later gives up and heads back up the slope.

Travel 4 meet with a terrible accident on the dark slope falling off a ridge not far from the ravine.

Zina wanders on the slope in dark and eventually gives up and dies from the cold.

Rustem who has been injured in the fight at the tent wanders in the dark alone until he collapses and dies from the cold.

Why this scenario?

If Dyatlov had a thing for Zina then it is unlikely that he would leave her to die on the slope.  Unless Zina was running from him?

There is no evidence of any other people there that night.  And if there were other people lightning a fire under the cedar would give your position away - unless the person lightning the fire is the attacker?

The two Yuris have severe frost bite are poorly dressed and yet their injuries indicate they climb the tree.  If there were others there better dressed you would think that they would climb the cedar.?  And if a fire was lit why did the Yuris have severe frost bite?  It they had frost bite before they lit a fire then how would they be able to strike the matches?  If they lit the fire before they got frost bite then they should not have got frost bite?  Also if they were all working together as a team they should have been able to survive.  Why not keep the fire going?  Why build a separate den.  It points towards a divided group.  Dyatlov’s hands are grimy in the morgue.  Some suggest frost bite but could be because he lit the fire under the cedar and was trying to get the Yuris. 

Regards
Star man

[sarapuk]

This might not be true of the 1950's and 60's era Soviet Union, but when i was a teenager in the 80's we had a speaker come to our school who lived in the USSR for awhile.  He said something that took me by surprise at the time.  He said that in pure criminal cases such as rape, murder, theft, that sort of thing, the Soviet legal system was not as corrupt and biased against the defendant as in the pure political cases. 

In the case of a dissident complaining about the government, they would manufacture evidence, force people to make false statements, find witnesses who would lie during the trial, that sort of thing.  In criminal cases they didn't do that so much.  If it wasn't a crime against the state, they didn't really care enough to put in the special effort. 

If there was a coverup, it had something to do with a matter greater than just simple murder.  There was a reason for the state to feel threatened in some way.   

Yes that kind of makes sense when you suggest a cover up because of something greater than just simple murder.  And it would follow from that that the Higher Authorities would feel threatened in some way or certainly be very concerned.  Thats assuming there was a cover up, of course.

As my opinion is in favor of the murder " solution " , it is not easy to find a real organised reason for a trained group ( whatever it may be) to make all this mess, looking like a bunch of misfits trying to cover their tracks ( they did not make it anyway ! ) 
What I mean here is : it would have been quite easy to make all these people disappear for good and to build a plausible story for this killing . GPU was the best organisation for it .

If it was a Murder by other Humans then it was a botch up, whichever way you look at it.  But the findings do not lead us to a Murder scenario. Not a Murder by other Humans at least.

This might not be true of the 1950's and 60's era Soviet Union, but when i was a teenager in the 80's we had a speaker come to our school who lived in the USSR for awhile.  He said something that took me by surprise at the time.  He said that in pure criminal cases such as rape, murder, theft, that sort of thing, the Soviet legal system was not as corrupt and biased against the defendant as in the pure political cases. 

In the case of a dissident complaining about the government, they would manufacture evidence, force people to make false statements, find witnesses who would lie during the trial, that sort of thing.  In criminal cases they didn't do that so much.  If it wasn't a crime against the state, they didn't really care enough to put in the special effort. 

If there was a coverup, it had something to do with a matter greater than just simple murder.  There was a reason for the state to feel threatened in some way.   

Yes that kind of makes sense when you suggest a cover up because of something greater than just simple murder.  And it would follow from that that the Higher Authorities would feel threatened in some way or certainly be very concerned.  Thats assuming there was a cover up, of course.

As my opinion is in favor of the murder " solution " , it is not easy to find a real organised reason for a trained group ( whatever it may be) to make all this mess, looking like a bunch of misfits trying to cover their tracks ( they did not make it anyway ! ) 
What I mean here is : it would have been quite easy to make all these people disappear for good and to build a plausible story for this killing . GPU was the best organisation for it .

If it was a Murder by other Humans then it was a botch up, whichever way you look at it.  But the findings do not lead us to a Murder scenario. Not a Murder by other Humans at least.

I am beginning to think that one of the group themselves may be responsible for the events that night.  I have been firing ideas out on “simplest credible explanation” thread.

I think Dyatlov himself could have triggered the events. 

The scenario goes like this in basic terms:

Dyatlov’s behaviour is unusual on this trip as reported in Zina’s diary.  Maybe he had a thing for Zina and others are flirting with her.?  He is jealou? He is also a bit of a control freak.

Dyatlov starts a fight at the tent that escalates into something more serious.  The group rally on Dyatlov and he pulles a knife and charges at the group.  The group flee running away from Dyatlov down the slope with Dyatlov in persuit.  The group split up scattering in the darkness.  Dyatlov follows the Yuris to the cedar.  The Yuris climb the tree to escape Dyatlov.  Dyatlov waits underneath. He maybe lights the fire and uses burning branches to try and reach the Yuris and force them down from the tree.  He later gives up and heads back up the slope.

Travel 4 meet with a terrible accident on the dark slope falling off a ridge not far from the ravine.

Zina wanders on the slope in dark and eventually gives up and dies from the cold.

Rustem who has been injured in the fight at the tent wanders in the dark alone until he collapses and dies from the cold.

Why this scenario?

If Dyatlov had a thing for Zina then it is unlikely that he would leave her to die on the slope.  Unless Zina was running from him?

There is no evidence of any other people there that night.  And if there were other people lightning a fire under the cedar would give your position away - unless the person lightning the fire is the attacker?

The two Yuris have severe frost bite are poorly dressed and yet their injuries indicate they climb the tree.  If there were others there better dressed you would think that they would climb the cedar.?  And if a fire was lit why did the Yuris have severe frost bite?  It they had frost bite before they lit a fire then how would they be able to strike the matches?  If they lit the fire before they got frost bite then they should not have got frost bite?  Also if they were all working together as a team they should have been able to survive.  Why not keep the fire going?  Why build a separate den.  It points towards a divided group.  Dyatlov’s hands are grimy in the morgue.  Some suggest frost bite but could be because he lit the fire under the cedar and was trying to get the Yuris. 

Regards
Star man

But could one man really have be responsible for all that happened to that Group  !  ?  What about the Radioactivity question. And the very serious and unusual injuries at the so called Ravine  !  ? 

[Star man]

I think one man could be responsible.  The radiation as discussed in other threads could be circumstantial.  Contamination from some nuclear accident.

Regards
Star man

[cennetkusu]

A person with a knife can have no chance against 6 men and 2 women. Most of the other youngsters also had knives. None of the teenagers have a knife injury. It is not possible for these professional young people to find a tent in only 1.5 km. Whatever the weather conditions.Already there is an almost straight line from the tent to the cedar tree. I mean, even a normal person can find the tent at night. But it can be a little difficult. It is much simpler for these young people to be professional.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

But could one man really have be responsible for all that happened to that Group  !  ?  What about the Radioactivity question. And the very serious and unusual injuries at the so called Ravine  !  ?

There is no ground for assuming that any of the group members had any role in the tragedy other than being victim. They were all victims.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

But the main question of why the victims were not simply shot

the victims were  injured with one blow. Simply  and effectively.

But the main question of why the victims were not simply shot

The simplest answer is  - attacers didnt have weapons.

Weapons were strictly prohibited in USSR except for hunting weapons. If it is correct assumption,  we can exclude some categories of people attacker did not belong

1) soldiers (army, KGB)
2) hunters
3) organized criminal groups

But the blows were very effective. This tells us that attackers were very well trained to kill. Special Forces? Without weapons? 
What about the people who had have this training and took part in еspecial forces operations  during the WWII? They were 30+ in 1959.

To force people out in the cold at gunpoint or by overwhelming force, and then let the winter do the work is far from unsophisticated and primitive. It is a brilliant method, which leave the public much in doubt about what happened.

agree.

What you bring up there in the above, is a good question. Why were the victims not simply shot?

There are only two realistic possibilities:

1. The attackers did not have firearms. This is a possibility to consider, it cannot be ruled out completely.

2. The attackers were professionals who did have firearms, but chose not to use them because bullet wounds would make it obvious that the deaths were caused by other humans. To remove the bodies and make them disappear, would also be understood by the public for what it was. The more I read about the Dyatlov pass incident, the more I understand the intelligent orchestration and execution of this terrible mission. These killers were no ordinary criminals. It is a serious mistake to think that professional killers always use firearms. Dramatic shootings is what we see in typical American films, because shooting and loud sounds looks and sounds "macho" on film. However, the reality is different. Very resourceful, intelligent killers more often than not make the killing look like an accident. This is particularly the case in killings performed by state agencies who want to avoid negative publicity.

It is impossible to say with certainty which of the two possibilities is the correct one.

What is possible to say, is that the killers who murdered the Dyatlov group were likely highly skilled people who knew lethal close combat techniques. A close examination of the injuries gives a depiction of a carefully executed killing, indicative of professional work. Also, I see it as doubtful that non-professional people would have had the discipline and the cool head required to avoid leaving knife or bullet wounds. As for Igor Dyatlov, it is conceivable that he was injured when trying to grab a gun with a bayonet mounted on it. If that was what happened, it is all the more significant that his attacker did not follow up with stabbings.

If this line of reasoning is close to what happened, the assailants had carefully planned the operation, and they had decided that it must look like an accident.

So I incline to the second possibility, while leaving the first possibility open since it cannot be entirely excluded either.

[Star man]

I find it difficult to subscribe to the super intelligent murder theory, orchestrated to remove suspicion and make it look like an accident.

Why?  Because if they had been super intelligent then in 1959 the investigators would have concluded that the deaths had been accidental and closed the case and we probably wouldn't be on this forum debating what happened. 

Regards

Star man

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

I find it difficult to subscribe to the super intelligent murder theory, orchestrated to remove suspicion and make it look like an accident.

Why?  Because if they had been super intelligent then in 1959 the investigators would have concluded that the deaths had been accidental and closed the case and we probably wouldn't be on this forum debating what happened. 

Regards
Star man

That was precisely what happened.

The local police in nearby Sverdlovsk and Ivdel would not know what happened.

Therefore, when the local police made their official investigation in the last days of February almost a month after the tragedy they only understood that the Dyatlov group was missing. They of course had no reason to assume anything criminal. The nine failed to meet at an agreed meeting point on February 12, and after that people in the area began to worry. Had the group met difficulties in the cold winter? 

The first leader of the investigation was a man named Vladimir Korotaev. When the bodies were found, he was instructed by high officials to say that the deaths were due to freezing. He refused, because his findings suggested otherwise. Then he was fired, and there is every indication that the order to say that the deaths were an accident caused by freezing came directly from Moscow.

Another investigator, Lev Ivanov, was appointed. He also concluded that the nine had been murdered, and he even initiated and examination of the clothes of the dead. When high radiation values were found, the investigation was suddenly closed with the conclusion that the deaths were due to unfortunate accidental circumstances and to "a series of mistakes made by Igor Dyatlov." Again there is every indication that Ivanov was ordered by high officials to stop his work. However, Ivanov evidently was a smart fellow. He chose his words so that they would suggest that the deaths were not accidental.

"At the time Korotaev was helping Tempalov, the prosecutor in the criminal case. After this visit, Korotaev was unexpectedly fired from the investigation all together. On May 28, 1959, investigator Lev Ivanov closed the case, was promoted to the prosecutor of the Kostanay region, and the annals of Soviet jurisprudence were supplemented with a sophisticated formulation: "The reason for the death of students was overwhelming force which they were unable to overcome."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/korotaev)

So, the closing of the case by orders from above, and with a conclusion ordered from above, was precisely what happened.

[Star man]

But my point is that if the murderers were so smart then the investigators themselves would conclude that the whole thing was a dreadful accident.  The authorities would not have needed to force the investigators into a conclusion?

Regards
Star man

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

But my point is that if the murderers were so smart then the investigators themselves would conclude that the whole thing was a dreadful accident.  The authorities would not have needed to force the investigators into a conclusion?

Regards
Star man

1. If it had been an accident, it would be unnecessary to compel the local investigators into the desired conclusion. The fact that the local police was prevented from performing an unbiased forensic examination, is strong evidence that the central authorities knew what happened, and did everything they could to prevent the disclosure of the true cause of the tragedy.

2. A likely scenario is that the assailants forced the nine victims out from the tent at gunpoint after having ensured that they were improperly dressed for the winter, expecting their victims to perish soon in the cold. However, that part of the plan failed because the temperature was not sufficiently low. The attackers soon realized that the nine students did not die as they had planned, so they had to hunt them down and expedite their deaths. Every other documented detail including the injuries found on the bodies are consistent with this sequence of events, and realistically only consistent with a human attack with lethal intentions.

3. Even the most carefully planned operation cannot change the weather. The closest weather stations at Burmantovo and Nyaksimvol recorded temperatures no lower than -15C during the night of February 1-2, 1959. If the temperature had been lower, it is probable that all the victims would have died rather rapidly from freezing-induced hypothermia. Then there would have been no grave injuries to tell the tale of murder. So, it was only the changeable nature of the weather that prevented the mission to be executed fully as planned.

[Star man]

But my point is that if the murderers were so smart then the investigators themselves would conclude that the whole thing was a dreadful accident.  The authorities would not have needed to force the investigators into a conclusion?

Regards
Star man

1. If it had been an accident, it would be unnecessary to compel the local investigators into the desired conclusion. The fact that the local police was prevented from performing an unbiased forensic examination, is strong evidence that the central authorities knew what happened, and did everything they could to prevent the disclosure of the true cause of the tragedy.

2. A likely scenario is that the assailants forced the nine victims out from the tent at gunpoint after having ensured that they were improperly dressed for the winter, expecting their victims to perish soon in the cold. However, that part of the plan failed because the temperature was not sufficiently low. The attackers soon realized that the nine students did not die as they had planned, so they had to hunt them down and expedite their deaths. Every other documented detail including the injuries found on the bodies are consistent with this sequence of events, and realistically only consistent with a human attack with lethal intentions.

3. Even the most carefully planned operation cannot change the weather. The closest weather stations at Burmantovo and Nyaksimvol recorded temperatures no lower than -15C during the night of February 1-2, 1959. If the temperature had been lower, it is probable that all the victims would have died rather rapidly from freezing-induced hypothermia. Then there would have been no grave injuries to tell the tale of murder. So, it was only the changeable nature of the weather that prevented the mission to be executed fully as planned.

Well given what I have read so far I do not doubt that there seems to be a strong possibility of a cover up.  the question is why?

I find the forced out of the tent argument difficult though because from what I can tell the way they left was chaotic, lacking in any kind of order.  If they had been forced out then I would expect a clearer pattern in terms of the clothing they wore, the equipment they took with them etc.  some were quite well dressed and had valenki others very poorly dressed.  At least one had a knife, another a pen knife.  Some had matches.  They had a flashlight that was dropped during the decent.  The three cuts in the tent.  It seems very chaotic to me.  And then there's the injuries.  Flail chest equivalent of the force of a car crash.  How could those injuries be produced by a human?  Then there is Kolevatov who appears to have been the last of the rav 4 to die.  He had no apparent life threatening injuries.  Why was he spared the same fate as the others in terms of injuries?

I agree that the cold was not the greatest threat, particularly of the rav 4 who left clothes behind at the cedar.

It would be interesting to see how you would explain the flail chest injuries - a massive fracture across 7 ribs or more creating a straight fracture that lines up through all the broken ribs?

Regards

Star man

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

Well given what I have read so far I do not doubt that there seems to be a strong possibility of a cover up.  the question is why?

I find the forced out of the tent argument difficult though because from what I can tell the way they left was chaotic, lacking in any kind of order.  If they had been forced out then I would expect a clearer pattern in terms of the clothing they wore, the equipment they took with them etc.  some were quite well dressed and had valenki others very poorly dressed.  At least one had a knife, another a pen knife.  Some had matches.  They had a flashlight that was dropped during the decent.  The three cuts in the tent.  It seems very chaotic to me.  And then there's the injuries.  Flail chest equivalent of the force of a car crash.  How could those injuries be produced by a human?  Then there is Kolevatov who appears to have been the last of the rav 4 to die.  He had no apparent life threatening injuries.  Why was he spared the same fate as the others in terms of injuries?

I agree that the cold was not the greatest threat, particularly of the rav 4 who left clothes behind at the cedar.

It would be interesting to see how you would explain the flail chest injuries - a massive fracture across 7 ribs or more creating a straight fracture that lines up through all the broken ribs?

Regards
Star man

We must consider the relevant points one by one.

-The exit from the tent. Was it chaotic? In fact, no.

A quotation from this site:

"Unfortunately no one expected to find the hikers dead so there was no attempt to preserve or record the footprints of people around the Dyatlov Pass. To this day there has been a discussion of exactly how many people were in this pass on that fateful day. However judging by words of the people involved in the search and who took the lower right picture there were definitely 8-9 tracks of footprints left by hikers who wore almost no footwear. Their feet pressed the snow and this left a characteristic "columns" of pressed snow with a footprint on top. Members of the group walked in a single file with a tall men walking in the back. His footprints partially covered the footprints of his friends who walked in front of him. Overall the path gave an impression of organized and uneventful descent down the slope of the mountain. Several trails would deviate from the general direction, but then rejoin the group. Other footprints were also discovered and photographed. It is hard to say if these were left by someone else or rescuers themselves."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/1959-search)

Next, I will quote from Svetlana Oss' book "Don't go there." I recommend that book because Svetlana Oss is a Russian who has consulted the original material from the first investigations and translated them. She therefore has done an invaluable service in bringing forth much of the available evidence that the tragedy was indeed due to human attack, and the parts of the book where she demonstrates how the injuries would have been caused by a determined human attackers are very valuable together with much of the same material which is also available on this site. Let it be said that when Svetlana Oss concludes her book by forwarding her own theory about the identity of the attackers, I do not agree with her. In the first parts of the book, she presents the available material including documented witness testimonies in a factual way. However, when it comes to her theory of who were responsible she becomes sensational and has only hearsay evidence to offer, and that is a kind of evidence that could never be accepted in a court of law. This part of the book must be read with great care. Fortunately, it is the factual material and the testimonies that are the important parts - and they are very solid and documented. 

On page 183, Svetlana Oss refers to a three members of the first searches, Yuri Koptelov, Boris Slobtsov, and Aleksey Chernyshov. All three are also listed here: https://dyatlovpass.com/rescuers. I will quote from the book:

"Yuri Koptelov, the rescue team member who found the first two bodies, recently made a drawing of the footprints nearest to the tent as they appeared to him and Sharavin. It seemed that the people were not walking but standing in one row, shoulder to shoulder."

"Slobtsov's statement, taken from the criminal case file, is as follows: 'The footprints were not proceeding in single file, but were abreast in a horizontal line, sometimes closer and converging, sometimes not. I had the feeling that the hikers had left the tent in an organized state. It also seems that they were scared, possibly even holding each other by hand in the darkness.'"

"Captain Chernyshov stated in his testimony for the criminal case: 'For about thirty to forty metres I saw very good human footprints walking abreast in parallel chains, as if they were holding each other.'"

This gives a picture of an exit from the tent that was in no way disorderly and chaotic. On the contrary, the pattern which was observed by the first rescue teams is consistent with a situation where the nine were forced out from the tent at gunpoint and out in the cold wintery night. Only that this particular night was not very cold.

The first search and rescue team also found that heavy winter clothes and boots were lying in heaps inside the tent. This is consistent with determined assailants who wanted to make sure that their victims were not able to survive outside. The fact that some members of the group were a little better dressed than the others does not necessarily contradict this - they might have been outside of the tent at the moment of attack and simply had more clothes on them which the attackers did not take the time to worry about. All the big knives were later found in the tent, even if there was a later rumor that some of the victims had sheath knives with them this is not correct. That detail is also described by Svetlana Oss.

- The cuts in the tent are inconclusive. We cannot be sure who made them or when. Most significantly, no proper scientific examination was ever made of the tent.

- Then there are the injuries. Did Kolevatov really have no apparent life threatening injuries? In fact, he had very suspicious injuries, indicative of being attacked by a skilled close combat practitioner - a professional killer.

From this site:

"- open wound behind ear, size 3x1.5 cm
- deformed neck
- diffuse bleeding in the underlying tissues of the left knee (not shown on diagram)
- softened and whitened skin (maceration) of the fingers and feet, sign consisted with putrefaction in a wet environment
- overall skin had a gray green color with a tinge of purple"

"This autopsy had similar strange silence about the injuries of the victim. Broken nose, open wound behind the ear and deformed neck might be the result of a fight and be cause of death. On the other hand it could have been caused by natural elements since the body was exposed to nature for three whole months. Yet the doctor ignores this matter and doesn't try to explain the reason for these strange injuries. We should probably add that snapped neck and blow behind the ear is a common sign of killing performed by special forces. However we can't be sure about this since the autopsy report didn't specify any more details about the body. We are left guessing on the nature and origin of these injuries."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/death#Kolevatov)

There is little chance that any accidents or non-human causes would create all these injuries simultaneously - and leave the limbs unscathed. Judging from the above, it seems much more likely that Kolevatov was dispatched by a skilled professional.

- Lastly, there are the injuries of Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle. The first two had massive chest injuries. These injuries could not have been caused by a fall, because the slope where they were found did not have sufficient height to produce an energy that could break rib cages. An avalanche might do it, but there had demonstrably been no avalanches there and moreover falls and avalanches would typically also break or dislocate the limbs. The injury patterns are simply not consistent with natural causes. It has been said that the chest injuries of Dubinina and Zolotaryov must have been the result of a great force. True, it really takes great force to create such damage to human bones. There were however no avalanches in the area where the bodies were found, and the injuries cannot realistically have been caused by a fall. Now the interesting part comes. The injuries of Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle had damaged the bone, but not the skin. This is precisely what is expected when a force such as strong blows hit a person with clothes on, and that is why Thibeaux-Brignolle had a crushing injury to his skull with no damage to his skin. His head was covered by headgear which protected the skin while the skull absorbed the impact strongly suggestive of being caused by a blunt object like a rifle butt:

https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png

That injury looks very unlike a result from any natural cause or accident. It is the distinctive mark of a hard, pointed blow, which is rather likely to have been made by the butt of a rifle.

As for the injuries of Dubinina and Zolotaryov, since there were no realistic natural forces in operation we have to look at what could cause such damage. It has not been established that these injuries were caused by one single impact. There is nothing that contradicts the more likely possibility: The damages to the rib cages were created not by one single blow, but by several repeated blows. It is conceivable that these two were hit by repeated elbow strikes by their killers, and if so a possible scenario is that one attacker holds the victim upright with his/her arms forced behind the back while another strikes the victim.

When dead bodies are found, the correct approach is to examine them to find the cause of death. The local investigators of 1959 was evidently prevented by orders from above from performing a full forensic investigation. To produce more evidence today, the skeletons of the victims should all be exhumed and examined with modern forensic methods.

[sarapuk]

I think one man could be responsible.  The radiation as discussed in other threads could be circumstantial.  Contamination from some nuclear accident.

Regards
Star man

1 against 9 ! ? Its pushing it. Even if that 1 was armed I would have thought that 9 could have managed to overcome the 1. For that matter even several against 9.  And then the separate parts of this Mystery just dont seem to fit together for that kind of scenerio.

[sarapuk]

But the main question of why the victims were not simply shot

the victims were  injured with one blow. Simply  and effectively.

But the main question of why the victims were not simply shot

The simplest answer is  - attacers didnt have weapons.

Weapons were strictly prohibited in USSR except for hunting weapons. If it is correct assumption,  we can exclude some categories of people attacker did not belong

1) soldiers (army, KGB)
2) hunters
3) organized criminal groups

But the blows were very effective. This tells us that attackers were very well trained to kill. Special Forces? Without weapons? 
What about the people who had have this training and took part in еspecial forces operations  during the WWII? They were 30+ in 1959.

To force people out in the cold at gunpoint or by overwhelming force, and then let the winter do the work is far from unsophisticated and primitive. It is a brilliant method, which leave the public much in doubt about what happened.

agree.

What you bring up there in the above, is a good question. Why were the victims not simply shot?

There are only two realistic possibilities:

1. The attackers did not have firearms. This is a possibility to consider, it cannot be ruled out completely.

2. The attackers were professionals who did have firearms, but chose not to use them because bullet wounds would make it obvious that the deaths were caused by other humans. To remove the bodies and make them disappear, would also be understood by the public for what it was. The more I read about the Dyatlov pass incident, the more I understand the intelligent orchestration and execution of this terrible mission. These killers were no ordinary criminals. It is a serious mistake to think that professional killers always use firearms. Dramatic shootings is what we see in typical American films, because shooting and loud sounds looks and sounds "macho" on film. However, the reality is different. Very resourceful, intelligent killers more often than not make the killing look like an accident. This is particularly the case in killings performed by state agencies who want to avoid negative publicity.

It is impossible to say with certainty which of the two possibilities is the correct one.

What is possible to say, is that the killers who murdered the Dyatlov group were likely highly skilled people who knew lethal close combat techniques. A close examination of the injuries gives a depiction of a carefully executed killing, indicative of professional work. Also, I see it as doubtful that non-professional people would have had the discipline and the cool head required to avoid leaving knife or bullet wounds. As for Igor Dyatlov, it is conceivable that he was injured when trying to grab a gun with a bayonet mounted on it. If that was what happened, it is all the more significant that his attacker did not follow up with stabbings.

If this line of reasoning is close to what happened, the assailants had carefully planned the operation, and they had decided that it must look like an accident.

So I incline to the second possibility, while leaving the first possibility open since it cannot be entirely excluded either.

But why would any other people want to go to that much trouble to Murder them ?

[sarapuk]

I find it difficult to subscribe to the super intelligent murder theory, orchestrated to remove suspicion and make it look like an accident.

Why?  Because if they had been super intelligent then in 1959 the investigators would have concluded that the deaths had been accidental and closed the case and we probably wouldn't be on this forum debating what happened. 

Regards

Star man

Another little gem. And of course you are correct. If it was meant to be Murder dressed up as an Accident it was a right old mess up. The Murderers failed in that case. I dont subscribe to any Murder Theory by other people. Note : I say other People.

[varuna]

Hello all .
I was travelling . not so far .   
I think we must work by parts before choosing a theory or whatever.
- material possibilities
-whodunit
-the context
I have no positive idea of the 2+ 3° point. Not enough knowledge .
For the first , a strong and deadly action without USING of firearms is possible .
1) a wrong time at  the wrong place
2) push at point blank ( or with dagues or kukhri or othes on throats, not slide but edge ) all the group outside
3) start to walk and wait for instructions .. did not come
4) some escaped or try to, not easy to maintain the threat outside with bad weather, no visibility and group of young athletes
5) several murders , maybe the last two died of starvation
6) wash out tracks and leave stuff , to hurry or too upset or both
5 people could have been enough . some ideas who ? 

[sarapuk]

Well given what I have read so far I do not doubt that there seems to be a strong possibility of a cover up.  the question is why?

I find the forced out of the tent argument difficult though because from what I can tell the way they left was chaotic, lacking in any kind of order.  If they had been forced out then I would expect a clearer pattern in terms of the clothing they wore, the equipment they took with them etc.  some were quite well dressed and had valenki others very poorly dressed.  At least one had a knife, another a pen knife.  Some had matches.  They had a flashlight that was dropped during the decent.  The three cuts in the tent.  It seems very chaotic to me.  And then there's the injuries.  Flail chest equivalent of the force of a car crash.  How could those injuries be produced by a human?  Then there is Kolevatov who appears to have been the last of the rav 4 to die.  He had no apparent life threatening injuries.  Why was he spared the same fate as the others in terms of injuries?

I agree that the cold was not the greatest threat, particularly of the rav 4 who left clothes behind at the cedar.

It would be interesting to see how you would explain the flail chest injuries - a massive fracture across 7 ribs or more creating a straight fracture that lines up through all the broken ribs?

Regards
Star man

We must consider the relevant points one by one.

-The exit from the tent. Was it chaotic? In fact, no.

A quotation from this site:

"Unfortunately no one expected to find the hikers dead so there was no attempt to preserve or record the footprints of people around the Dyatlov Pass. To this day there has been a discussion of exactly how many people were in this pass on that fateful day. However judging by words of the people involved in the search and who took the lower right picture there were definitely 8-9 tracks of footprints left by hikers who wore almost no footwear. Their feet pressed the snow and this left a characteristic "columns" of pressed snow with a footprint on top. Members of the group walked in a single file with a tall men walking in the back. His footprints partially covered the footprints of his friends who walked in front of him. Overall the path gave an impression of organized and uneventful descent down the slope of the mountain. Several trails would deviate from the general direction, but then rejoin the group. Other footprints were also discovered and photographed. It is hard to say if these were left by someone else or rescuers themselves."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/1959-search)

Next, I will quote from Svetlana Oss' book "Don't go there." I recommend that book because Svetlana Oss is a Russian who has consulted the original material from the first investigations and translated them. She therefore has done an invaluable service in bringing forth much of the available evidence that the tragedy was indeed due to human attack, and the parts of the book where she demonstrates how the injuries would have been caused by a determined human attackers are very valuable together with much of the same material which is also available on this site. Let it be said that when Svetlana Oss concludes her book by forwarding her own theory about the identity of the attackers, I do not agree with her. In the first parts of the book, she presents the available material including documented witness testimonies in a factual way. However, when it comes to her theory of who were responsible she becomes sensational and has only hearsay evidence to offer, and that is a kind of evidence that could never be accepted in a court of law. This part of the book must be read with great care. Fortunately, it is the factual material and the testimonies that are the important parts - and they are very solid and documented. 

On page 183, Svetlana Oss refers to a three members of the first searches, Yuri Koptelov, Boris Slobtsov, and Aleksey Chernyshov. All three are also listed here: https://dyatlovpass.com/rescuers. I will quote from the book:

"Yuri Koptelov, the rescue team member who found the first two bodies, recently made a drawing of the footprints nearest to the tent as they appeared to him and Sharavin. It seemed that the people were not walking but standing in one row, shoulder to shoulder."

"Slobtsov's statement, taken from the criminal case file, is as follows: 'The footprints were not proceeding in single file, but were abreast in a horizontal line, sometimes closer and converging, sometimes not. I had the feeling that the hikers had left the tent in an organized state. It also seems that they were scared, possibly even holding each other by hand in the darkness.'"

"Captain Chernyshov stated in his testimony for the criminal case: 'For about thirty to forty metres I saw very good human footprints walking abreast in parallel chains, as if they were holding each other.'"

This gives a picture of an exit from the tent that was in no way disorderly and chaotic. On the contrary, the pattern which was observed by the first rescue teams is consistent with a situation where the nine were forced out from the tent at gunpoint and out in the cold wintery night. Only that this particular night was not very cold.

The first search and rescue team also found that heavy winter clothes and boots were lying in heaps inside the tent. This is consistent with determined assailants who wanted to make sure that their victims were not able to survive outside. The fact that some members of the group were a little better dressed than the others does not necessarily contradict this - they might have been outside of the tent at the moment of attack and simply had more clothes on them which the attackers did not take the time to worry about. All the big knives were later found in the tent, even if there was a later rumor that some of the victims had sheath knives with them this is not correct. That detail is also described by Svetlana Oss.

- The cuts in the tent are inconclusive. We cannot be sure who made them or when. Most significantly, no proper scientific examination was ever made of the tent.

- Then there are the injuries. Did Kolevatov really have no apparent life threatening injuries? In fact, he had very suspicious injuries, indicative of being attacked by a skilled close combat practitioner - a professional killer.

From this site:

"- open wound behind ear, size 3x1.5 cm
- deformed neck
- diffuse bleeding in the underlying tissues of the left knee (not shown on diagram)
- softened and whitened skin (maceration) of the fingers and feet, sign consisted with putrefaction in a wet environment
- overall skin had a gray green color with a tinge of purple"

"This autopsy had similar strange silence about the injuries of the victim. Broken nose, open wound behind the ear and deformed neck might be the result of a fight and be cause of death. On the other hand it could have been caused by natural elements since the body was exposed to nature for three whole months. Yet the doctor ignores this matter and doesn't try to explain the reason for these strange injuries. We should probably add that snapped neck and blow behind the ear is a common sign of killing performed by special forces. However we can't be sure about this since the autopsy report didn't specify any more details about the body. We are left guessing on the nature and origin of these injuries."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/death#Kolevatov)

There is little chance that any accidents or non-human causes would create all these injuries simultaneously - and leave the limbs unscathed. Judging from the above, it seems much more likely that Kolevatov was dispatched by a skilled professional.

- Lastly, there are the injuries of Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle. The first two had massive chest injuries. These injuries could not have been caused by a fall, because the slope where they were found did not have sufficient height to produce an energy that could break rib cages. An avalanche might do it, but there had demonstrably been no avalanches there and moreover falls and avalanches would typically also break or dislocate the limbs. The injury patterns are simply not consistent with natural causes. It has been said that the chest injuries of Dubinina and Zolotaryov must have been the result of a great force. True, it really takes great force to create such damage to human bones. There were however no avalanches in the area where the bodies were found, and the injuries cannot realistically have been caused by a fall. Now the interesting part comes. The injuries of Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle had damaged the bone, but not the skin. This is precisely what is expected when a force such as strong blows hit a person with clothes on, and that is why Thibeaux-Brignolle had a crushing injury to his skull with no damage to his skin. His head was covered by headgear which protected the skin while the skull absorbed the impact strongly suggestive of being caused by a blunt object like a rifle butt:

https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png

That injury looks very unlike a result from any natural cause or accident. It is the distinctive mark of a hard, pointed blow, which is rather likely to have been made by the butt of a rifle.

As for the injuries of Dubinina and Zolotaryov, since there were no realistic natural forces in operation we have to look at what could cause such damage. It has not been established that these injuries were caused by one single impact. There is nothing that contradicts the more likely possibility: The damages to the rib cages were created not by one single blow, but by several repeated blows. It is conceivable that these two were hit by repeated elbow strikes by their killers, and if so a possible scenario is that one attacker holds the victim upright with his/her arms forced behind the back while another strikes the victim.

When dead bodies are found, the correct approach is to examine them to find the cause of death. The local investigators of 1959 was evidently prevented by orders from above from performing a full forensic investigation. To produce more evidence today, the skeletons of the victims should all be exhumed and examined with modern forensic methods.

We dont really have enough Evidence to say for certain that they were all walking down the slope side by side. Also I would have thought that if they were being escorted down the slope by other people then those people would prefer them more closely bunched together. And then it becomes even more of a Mystery !  What happens at the Cedar Tree ? Where are the escorts ? And then those Injuries on Bodies at the so called Ravine ? Injuries highly unlikely to have been caused by another person or persons. And then how come 3 of the Dyatlov Group make it part way back up the slope or so it appears ? Whats the escorts MODUS OPERANDI ?

[Star man]

Well given what I have read so far I do not doubt that there seems to be a strong possibility of a cover up.  the question is why?

I find the forced out of the tent argument difficult though because from what I can tell the way they left was chaotic, lacking in any kind of order.  If they had been forced out then I would expect a clearer pattern in terms of the clothing they wore, the equipment they took with them etc.  some were quite well dressed and had valenki others very poorly dressed.  At least one had a knife, another a pen knife.  Some had matches.  They had a flashlight that was dropped during the decent.  The three cuts in the tent.  It seems very chaotic to me.  And then there's the injuries.  Flail chest equivalent of the force of a car crash.  How could those injuries be produced by a human?  Then there is Kolevatov who appears to have been the last of the rav 4 to die.  He had no apparent life threatening injuries.  Why was he spared the same fate as the others in terms of injuries?

I agree that the cold was not the greatest threat, particularly of the rav 4 who left clothes behind at the cedar.

It would be interesting to see how you would explain the flail chest injuries - a massive fracture across 7 ribs or more creating a straight fracture that lines up through all the broken ribs?

Regards
Star man

We must consider the relevant points one by one.

-The exit from the tent. Was it chaotic? In fact, no.

A quotation from this site:

"Unfortunately no one expected to find the hikers dead so there was no attempt to preserve or record the footprints of people around the Dyatlov Pass. To this day there has been a discussion of exactly how many people were in this pass on that fateful day. However judging by words of the people involved in the search and who took the lower right picture there were definitely 8-9 tracks of footprints left by hikers who wore almost no footwear. Their feet pressed the snow and this left a characteristic "columns" of pressed snow with a footprint on top. Members of the group walked in a single file with a tall men walking in the back. His footprints partially covered the footprints of his friends who walked in front of him. Overall the path gave an impression of organized and uneventful descent down the slope of the mountain. Several trails would deviate from the general direction, but then rejoin the group. Other footprints were also discovered and photographed. It is hard to say if these were left by someone else or rescuers themselves."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/1959-search)

Next, I will quote from Svetlana Oss' book "Don't go there." I recommend that book because Svetlana Oss is a Russian who has consulted the original material from the first investigations and translated them. She therefore has done an invaluable service in bringing forth much of the available evidence that the tragedy was indeed due to human attack, and the parts of the book where she demonstrates how the injuries would have been caused by a determined human attackers are very valuable together with much of the same material which is also available on this site. Let it be said that when Svetlana Oss concludes her book by forwarding her own theory about the identity of the attackers, I do not agree with her. In the first parts of the book, she presents the available material including documented witness testimonies in a factual way. However, when it comes to her theory of who were responsible she becomes sensational and has only hearsay evidence to offer, and that is a kind of evidence that could never be accepted in a court of law. This part of the book must be read with great care. Fortunately, it is the factual material and the testimonies that are the important parts - and they are very solid and documented. 

On page 183, Svetlana Oss refers to a three members of the first searches, Yuri Koptelov, Boris Slobtsov, and Aleksey Chernyshov. All three are also listed here: https://dyatlovpass.com/rescuers. I will quote from the book:

"Yuri Koptelov, the rescue team member who found the first two bodies, recently made a drawing of the footprints nearest to the tent as they appeared to him and Sharavin. It seemed that the people were not walking but standing in one row, shoulder to shoulder."

"Slobtsov's statement, taken from the criminal case file, is as follows: 'The footprints were not proceeding in single file, but were abreast in a horizontal line, sometimes closer and converging, sometimes not. I had the feeling that the hikers had left the tent in an organized state. It also seems that they were scared, possibly even holding each other by hand in the darkness.'"

"Captain Chernyshov stated in his testimony for the criminal case: 'For about thirty to forty metres I saw very good human footprints walking abreast in parallel chains, as if they were holding each other.'"

This gives a picture of an exit from the tent that was in no way disorderly and chaotic. On the contrary, the pattern which was observed by the first rescue teams is consistent with a situation where the nine were forced out from the tent at gunpoint and out in the cold wintery night. Only that this particular night was not very cold.

The first search and rescue team also found that heavy winter clothes and boots were lying in heaps inside the tent. This is consistent with determined assailants who wanted to make sure that their victims were not able to survive outside. The fact that some members of the group were a little better dressed than the others does not necessarily contradict this - they might have been outside of the tent at the moment of attack and simply had more clothes on them which the attackers did not take the time to worry about. All the big knives were later found in the tent, even if there was a later rumor that some of the victims had sheath knives with them this is not correct. That detail is also described by Svetlana Oss.

- The cuts in the tent are inconclusive. We cannot be sure who made them or when. Most significantly, no proper scientific examination was ever made of the tent.

- Then there are the injuries. Did Kolevatov really have no apparent life threatening injuries? In fact, he had very suspicious injuries, indicative of being attacked by a skilled close combat practitioner - a professional killer.

From this site:

"- open wound behind ear, size 3x1.5 cm
- deformed neck
- diffuse bleeding in the underlying tissues of the left knee (not shown on diagram)
- softened and whitened skin (maceration) of the fingers and feet, sign consisted with putrefaction in a wet environment
- overall skin had a gray green color with a tinge of purple"

"This autopsy had similar strange silence about the injuries of the victim. Broken nose, open wound behind the ear and deformed neck might be the result of a fight and be cause of death. On the other hand it could have been caused by natural elements since the body was exposed to nature for three whole months. Yet the doctor ignores this matter and doesn't try to explain the reason for these strange injuries. We should probably add that snapped neck and blow behind the ear is a common sign of killing performed by special forces. However we can't be sure about this since the autopsy report didn't specify any more details about the body. We are left guessing on the nature and origin of these injuries."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/death#Kolevatov)

There is little chance that any accidents or non-human causes would create all these injuries simultaneously - and leave the limbs unscathed. Judging from the above, it seems much more likely that Kolevatov was dispatched by a skilled professional.

- Lastly, there are the injuries of Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle. The first two had massive chest injuries. These injuries could not have been caused by a fall, because the slope where they were found did not have sufficient height to produce an energy that could break rib cages. An avalanche might do it, but there had demonstrably been no avalanches there and moreover falls and avalanches would typically also break or dislocate the limbs. The injury patterns are simply not consistent with natural causes. It has been said that the chest injuries of Dubinina and Zolotaryov must have been the result of a great force. True, it really takes great force to create such damage to human bones. There were however no avalanches in the area where the bodies were found, and the injuries cannot realistically have been caused by a fall. Now the interesting part comes. The injuries of Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle had damaged the bone, but not the skin. This is precisely what is expected when a force such as strong blows hit a person with clothes on, and that is why Thibeaux-Brignolle had a crushing injury to his skull with no damage to his skin. His head was covered by headgear which protected the skin while the skull absorbed the impact strongly suggestive of being caused by a blunt object like a rifle butt:

https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png

That injury looks very unlike a result from any natural cause or accident. It is the distinctive mark of a hard, pointed blow, which is rather likely to have been made by the butt of a rifle.

As for the injuries of Dubinina and Zolotaryov, since there were no realistic natural forces in operation we have to look at what could cause such damage. It has not been established that these injuries were caused by one single impact. There is nothing that contradicts the more likely possibility: The damages to the rib cages were created not by one single blow, but by several repeated blows. It is conceivable that these two were hit by repeated elbow strikes by their killers, and if so a possible scenario is that one attacker holds the victim upright with his/her arms forced behind the back while another strikes the victim.

When dead bodies are found, the correct approach is to examine them to find the cause of death. The local investigators of 1959 was evidently prevented by orders from above from performing a full forensic investigation. To produce more evidence today, the skeletons of the victims should all be exhumed and examined with modern forensic methods.

There are some things from the extracts that I agree with, some that I disagree with and some further questions:

I agree that they were probably forced from the tent.  The question is how, why and by what - human or animal

I also agree that they made an orderly retreat down the slope and that they were frightened.  An orderly retreat down the slope though could be explained by either frog marching by humans or a careful retreat from a dangerous animal, or it was dark and dangerous and there was no other way to do it safely.

I agree that the injuries appear not to have been the result of an accident.

What is difficult though is why they would let the group take a flashlight, matches and knives with them?  What does the book say about these?

Also the injuries - Thibo head injury doesn't resemble a blow from from the butt of a rifle or pistol.  It's not the right shape.  It is identical to the shape of the ball of a thumb in its proportions but bigger than a normal thumb shape.

I also struggle with the elbow strikes being the cause of Lyuda and Semyon chest injuries.  If you look at the fracture lines they are all aligned as if they have been hit with a low number of massive blows that have caused the ribs to break at the same place which the highest stress point.  Elbow strikes are unlikely to be able to cause such symmetrical breaks.  How does the book explain this?

One other thing.  If humans had been involved why did they leave Semyon's camera hanging in plain sight around his neck?

What was the motive for the attack?


Strangely I believe most of the events closely line up behind the Yeti theory.  Or some kind of large ape like a Gorilla.  Have a look at the “Exploring the Yeti Theory “ thread.  Yes it seems bonkers but after looking at it subjectively it closely fits the events and available evidence.  We just need the need the Yetis to come forward and admit they did it. 


Regards

Star man

[sarapuk]

One other thing.  If humans had been involved why did they leave Semyon's camera hanging in plain sight around his neck?

What was the motive for the attack?


Strangely I believe most of the events closely line up behind the Yeti theory.  Or some kind of large ape like a Gorilla.  Have a look at the “Exploring the Yeti Theory “ thread.  Yes it seems bonkers but after looking at it subjectively it closely fits the events and available evidence.  We just need the need the Yetis to come forward and admit they did it. 


Regards

Star man
« Last Edit: August 28, 2019, 11:46:11 PM by Star man »


Yes it is strange but all the different parts could fit together if we included a YETI or some such Being.

[Star man]

Yes, replace human with large ape like creature and it fits nicely.

Regards

Star man

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

We dont really have enough Evidence to say for certain that they were all walking down the slope side by side. Also I would have thought that if they were being escorted down the slope by other people then those people would prefer them more closely bunched together. And then it becomes even more of a Mystery!  What happens at the Cedar Tree? Where are the escorts? And then those Injuries on Bodies at the so called Ravine? Injuries highly unlikely to have been caused by another person or persons. And then how come 3 of the Dyatlov Group make it part way back up the slope or so it appears? Whats the escorts MODUS OPERANDI?

1. Remember that the first searchers also observed that the tracks closest to the tent strongly suggested that the nine victims were forced to stand in line. That is precisely what is to be expected, if attacked by armed men. What we can say with a high degree of certainty, is that there is no indication that the hikers left their tent in a disorderly or panicked state. There is no particular reason why the attackers, who must have initially relied on the cold to take care of the matter, would want their victims to be more closely bunched together. On the contrary, when they were forced out - almost certainly at gunpoint - it made the most sense to ensure that they were spread in a line. That way, it becomes easier for the attackers to control them. Later, they probably spread while the attacking squad ransacked their tent and waited for the cold to do the killing. This is a rather probable sketch of what happened.

2. We cannot possibly know the all the details of what violent actions took place at the cedar tree, but it would seem that the two first victims found there had tried to escape their assailants by climbing the tree, but were probably dragged down - and there is every indication that they had been subjected to violent action from other humans. Also, there is no other sensible explanation why they would try to climb that tree. The fact of their damaged hands showed the utter desperation of their failed attempt to escape.

3. The injuries - and in particular the injuries found on these in the not-so-steep slope - are precisely indicative of human evil involvement. There were evidently no avalanches, no snow slabs in the area, and the "ravine" was neither deep enough nor steep enough to crush human rib cages in a fall - in addition to the fact that these injuries were not at all typical of what is seen when people are falling from great heights which were also not present in the area. The injury of Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle is very telling - this is the result of a pointed impact to the head: https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png. The damage even has a shape similar to that of a rifle butt. Kolevatov was killed in a manner which strongly suggests that his laryngal area was crushed. I have learned about lethal striking against vital points in jiu jitsu training, and such an injury is suggestive of having been killed by someone trained in advanced close combat systems. The crushed rib cages, likewise. To me, it seems to be the result of repeated elbow strikes. It is surprisingly easy to crush a human rib cage with strikes, especially if you trained in close combat skills. The intercostals - the muscles that sit between the ribs and assist the diaphragm during breathing - are easily torn, and if the beating continues the ribs will break - and that is what happened to Dubinina and Zolotaryov. When the injuries are that serious, internal bleeding starts and death is likely. All of these injuries are consistent with human involvement, and human involvement only.

4. The three who apparently tried to go back to the tent probably did so because they froze, and there is every reason to infer that they were stopped. They were found with injuries consistent with being attacked by human assailants who wanted to hasten their deaths.

[Loose}{Cannon]

So....   they were ordered out of the tent at gunpoint at which they all came slicing and dicing out the side of the tent like a bunch of Jack the Rippers at their assailants?     Or would this narrative follow the idea they did not slash their way out of the tent?

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

There are some things from the extracts that I agree with, some that I disagree with and some further questions:

I agree that they were probably forced from the tent.  The question is how, why and by what - human or animal

I also agree that they made an orderly retreat down the slope and that they were frightened.  An orderly retreat down the slope though could be explained by either frog marching by humans or a careful retreat from a dangerous animal, or it was dark and dangerous and there was no other way to do it safely.

I agree that the injuries appear not to have been the result of an accident.

What is difficult though is why they would let the group take a flashlight, matches and knives with them?  What does the book say about these?

Also the injuries - Thibo head injury doesn't resemble a blow from from the butt of a rifle or pistol.  It's not the right shape.  It is identical to the shape of the ball of a thumb in its proportions but bigger than a normal thumb shape.

I also struggle with the elbow strikes being the cause of Lyuda and Semyon chest injuries.  If you look at the fracture lines they are all aligned as if they have been hit with a low number of massive blows that have caused the ribs to break at the same place which the highest stress point.  Elbow strikes are unlikely to be able to cause such symmetrical breaks.  How does the book explain this?

One other thing.  If humans had been involved why did they leave Semyon's camera hanging in plain sight around his neck?

What was the motive for the attack?

Strangely I believe most of the events closely line up behind the Yeti theory.  Or some kind of large ape like a Gorilla.  Have a look at the “Exploring the Yeti Theory “ thread.  Yes it seems bonkers but after looking at it subjectively it closely fits the events and available evidence.  We just need the need the Yetis to come forward and admit they did it. 

Regards
Star man

Yes, these are good questions that many would ask. Thanks!

- What could possibly have forced them out from the tent:

A fierce animal dangerous enough to force nine students out from a tent would most likely have injured several of them, and none among the nine showed any signs of injuries from teeth or claws. Also, the orderly manner in which the students seem to have left the tent is much more typical of being forced out by a disciplined human attacking squad than anything else. An animal would likely have caused another behavior, since the first tracks observed indicated that the nine were forced in a row this is the opposite of what would have happened if there was a pack of wolves or an aggressive wolverine who forced them out. In such a situation, people cling together seeking mutual protection unless they are forced to walk in a row. And that strongly suggests that the nine unfortunates were indeed marched out at gunpoint by humans. Moreover, these students were skilled hikers and mountaineers. They knew that the safest way to move through unknown terrain is to walk forward one after another - not side by side. Particularly if it is dark and cold and they are in unknown terrain. So these nine evidently were forced to leave their tent. Realistically, the responsible can only have been other humans.

- The injury to the head of Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle: https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png

Well, I will say that this looks very like the result of a hard blow with a rifle butt. The edges of the impacted area are wider than the size of a rifle butt, but the shape itself is typical of the butt of a rifle. I would not expect a crushing blow from a rifle butt to have the exact size of it, unless the blow has an extraordinary high velocity. Moreover, bearing in mind that Tibo's head was protected by headgear, it is also as expected that the force from the impact would have less sharp edges than if the impacting object had hit him on his bare head.

- The likelihood that the crushed rib cages were caused by elbow strikes:

In my opinion, it is very possible and even probable that the severe damage was done with elbow strikes. It is clear that the fracture lines are aligned in a way that indicates that the victims were stationary and even fixated when the force was applied. This is however what is to be expected when a person is attacked by several assailants, and one or more of these secure the victim in a tight grip while another deals the lethal blows.

- Semyon's camera:

The attackers may not have viewed the camera as a threat. In the middle of the dark night, the slow films of the 1950's would be of little use unless the subjects were very bright or the camera was placed on a tripod. Semyon at this point was probably in no condition to use it anyway.

- The motive for the attack:

We simply cannot know with certainty. When bodies are found, we should first and foremost try to find out how they died. In other words, the cause and mechanism of death is the most important thing to find out. If everything points to homicide, is is more likely homicide even if we do not yet know the motive. The precise motive is of course dependent on the identity of the murderers.

It is however a safe assumption that the Dyatlov group was murdered in an intelligently orchestrated attack carefully designed to make the whole thing look like an accident, and that the attack was executed because the orchestrators had determined that the nine had entered an area where they were not supposed to be - and that the nine students must therefore be eliminated without fail. 

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

So....   they were ordered out of the tent at gunpoint at which they all came slicing and dicing out the side of the tent like a bunch of Jack the Rippers at their assailants?     Or would this narrative follow the idea they did not slash their way out of the tent?

There is no evidence, absolutely no evidence whatsoever, that these nine students in fact cut open their own tent, and there is no evidence that they left the tent through these slashes.

[Loose}{Cannon]

 

[Star man]

There are some things from the extracts that I agree with, some that I disagree with and some further questions:

I agree that they were probably forced from the tent.  The question is how, why and by what - human or animal

I also agree that they made an orderly retreat down the slope and that they were frightened.  An orderly retreat down the slope though could be explained by either frog marching by humans or a careful retreat from a dangerous animal, or it was dark and dangerous and there was no other way to do it safely.

I agree that the injuries appear not to have been the result of an accident.

What is difficult though is why they would let the group take a flashlight, matches and knives with them?  What does the book say about these?

Also the injuries - Thibo head injury doesn't resemble a blow from from the butt of a rifle or pistol.  It's not the right shape.  It is identical to the shape of the ball of a thumb in its proportions but bigger than a normal thumb shape.

I also struggle with the elbow strikes being the cause of Lyuda and Semyon chest injuries.  If you look at the fracture lines they are all aligned as if they have been hit with a low number of massive blows that have caused the ribs to break at the same place which the highest stress point.  Elbow strikes are unlikely to be able to cause such symmetrical breaks.  How does the book explain this?

One other thing.  If humans had been involved why did they leave Semyon's camera hanging in plain sight around his neck?

What was the motive for the attack?

Strangely I believe most of the events closely line up behind the Yeti theory.  Or some kind of large ape like a Gorilla.  Have a look at the “Exploring the Yeti Theory “ thread.  Yes it seems bonkers but after looking at it subjectively it closely fits the events and available evidence.  We just need the need the Yetis to come forward and admit they did it. 

Regards
Star man

Yes, these are good questions that many would ask. Thanks!

- What could possibly have forced them out from the tent:

A fierce animal dangerous enough to force nine students out from a tent would most likely have injured several of them, and none among the nine showed any signs of injuries from teeth or claws. Also, the orderly manner in which the students seem to have left the tent is much more typical of being forced out by a disciplined human attacking squad than anything else. An animal would likely have caused another behavior, since the first tracks observed indicated that the nine were forced in a row this is the opposite of what would have happened if there was a pack of wolves or an aggressive wolverine who forced them out. In such a situation, people cling together seeking mutual protection unless they are forced to walk in a row. And that strongly suggests that the nine unfortunates were indeed marched out at gunpoint by humans. Moreover, these students were skilled hikers and mountaineers. They knew that the safest way to move through unknown terrain is to walk forward one after another - not side by side. Particularly if it is dark and cold and they are in unknown terrain. So these nine evidently were forced to leave their tent. Realistically, the responsible can only have been other humans.

- The injury to the head of Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle: https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png

Well, I will say that this looks very like the result of a hard blow with a rifle butt. The edges of the impacted area are wider than the size of a rifle butt, but the shape itself is typical of the butt of a rifle. I would not expect a crushing blow from a rifle butt to have the exact size of it, unless the blow has an extraordinary high velocity. Moreover, bearing in mind that Tibo's head was protected by headgear, it is also as expected that the force from the impact would have less sharp edges than if the impacting object had hit him on his bare head.

- The likelihood that the crushed rib cages were caused by elbow strikes:

In my opinion, it is very possible and even probable that the severe damage was done with elbow strikes. It is clear that the fracture lines are aligned in a way that indicates that the victims were stationary and even fixated when the force was applied. This is however what is to be expected when a person is attacked by several assailants, and one or more of these secure the victim in a tight grip while another deals the lethal blows.

- Semyon's camera:

The attackers may not have viewed the camera as a threat. In the middle of the dark night, the slow films of the 1950's would be of little use unless the subjects were very bright or the camera was placed on a tripod. Semyon at this point was probably in no condition to use it anyway.

- The motive for the attack:

We simply cannot know with certainty. When bodies are found, we should first and foremost try to find out how they died. In other words, the cause and mechanism of death is the most important thing to find out. If everything points to homicide, is is more likely homicide even if we do not yet know the motive. The precise motive is of course dependent on the identity of the murderers.

It is however a safe assumption that the Dyatlov group was murdered in an intelligently orchestrated attack carefully designed to make the whole thing look like an accident, and that the attack was executed because the orchestrators had determined that the nine had entered an area where they were not supposed to be - and that the nine students must therefore be eliminated without fail.

If they were ordered out of the tent at gun point would you not think it would be sensible to search them to ensure none of them had a gun or other weapon?  During such a search do you think they would have allowed the group to keep their knife/knives, their matches, their camera, and  their flashlight? 

You say there is no evidence that they left in a panic.  The state of dress of each of them is different, Slobodin had one boot on.  Were their assailants not bothered about each persons ability to survive the cold?   

Equally there is nothing that could be held up as evidence to conclude they left in an orderly way. 

The tent may not have been damaged by the hikers but it equally could have been. 

The injuries are the main difficulty.  There are multiple forensic reports on this site that conclude that the chest injuries were likely made by single massive blows like a car crash or major fall.  Elbow stiles are very unlikely. 

When you put it all together it doesn’t rack up as likely.

Regards

Star man

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

If they were ordered out of the tent at gun point would you not think it would be sensible to search them to ensure none of them had a gun or other weapon?  During such a search do you think they would have allowed the group to keep their knife/knives, their matches, their camera, and  their flashlight? 

You say there is no evidence that they left in a panic.  The state of dress of each of them is different, Slobodin had one boot on.  Were their assailants not bothered about each persons ability to survive the cold?   

Equally there is nothing that could be held up as evidence to conclude they left in an orderly way. 

The tent may not have been damaged by the hikers but it equally could have been. 

The injuries are the main difficulty.  There are multiple forensic reports on this site that conclude that the chest injuries were likely made by single massive blows like a car crash or major fall.  Elbow stiles are very unlikely. 

When you put it all together it doesn’t rack up as likely.

Regards
Star man

1. It is a matter of course that the victims must have been searched by their assailants before they were sent out in the cold. As could be expected, no one of the dead students had a knife with them. All the large knives of the expedition members were in the tent, and no one of the killed had a sheath knife. The attackers may have not bothered with a camera and a flashlight, these items would not be of much help to the victims. The valenki on Rustem Slobodin is fully explicable if he was outside of the tent at the moment of attack and the attackers did not care much about his footwear as he was otherwise improperly dressed.

2. As a matter of fact there is still no evidence that they left in a state of panic. On the contrary, eyewitnesses from the first search testified that the tracks they saw indicated an orderly retreat, and that it looked like that the nine hikers were standing still in a row before their walking away. There is no similar testimony that indicates panic or disorder.

3. The tent: There is no reason why the hikers would destroy their own tent. Why assume that such was the case? It is evident that the authorities wanted the conclusion that the tent was cut from the inside, but the point here is that the cuts in the tent was never scientifically examined. So, when and how these cuts were made cannot be said with certainty - but there is no indication and no reason why the students would destroy their own tent and even less reason why they would exit their tent through these cuts. It has been suggested by investigators who, at the time, were heavily pressurized by the authorities to build up to a conclusion that the whole Dyatlov Pass tragedy was due to unfortunate circumstances and a series of accidents and to close the investigation rapidly with that conclusion. This whole sequence of events is as close as one can come to a confirmation that this was something very different from the officially dictated conclusion.

4. The injuries. After the bodies were found, the first leader of the investigation was fired because he did not believe in the conclusion that the authorities wanted. The statements that the massive chest injuries looked like having been caused by a car crash or a major fall are of course worthless: There were no signs of avalanches having occurred, moreover the terrain was hardly steep enough to allow avalanches, and above all there were no precipices deep enough to have caused the injuries by falling. Nor are the injuries typical of what happens when people fall. The crushed skull of Tibo does fit the shape of a rifle butt. The injuries of Kolevatov could not be caused by a fall, and are very typical of what happens when someone is attacked by a skilled close combat practitioner.

None of the injuries - none - fit any natural causes.

Realistically, we can rule out all the avalanche and fall theories.

The patterns of the damage found on the bodies is not what is seen when people stumble around in the dark.

That means, the deaths were demonstrably not natural deaths or accidents. 

The long period between the attack on February 1 and the day where the dead were found on February 26 was almost a month, and together with the first rescuers' being unaware of the fact that they had entered a crime scene it fully explains why no traces of the attackers were found.

[sarapuk]

We dont really have enough Evidence to say for certain that they were all walking down the slope side by side. Also I would have thought that if they were being escorted down the slope by other people then those people would prefer them more closely bunched together. And then it becomes even more of a Mystery!  What happens at the Cedar Tree? Where are the escorts? And then those Injuries on Bodies at the so called Ravine? Injuries highly unlikely to have been caused by another person or persons. And then how come 3 of the Dyatlov Group make it part way back up the slope or so it appears? Whats the escorts MODUS OPERANDI?

1. Remember that the first searchers also observed that the tracks closest to the tent strongly suggested that the nine victims were forced to stand in line. That is precisely what is to be expected, if attacked by armed men. What we can say with a high degree of certainty, is that there is no indication that the hikers left their tent in a disorderly or panicked state. There is no particular reason why the attackers, who must have initially relied on the cold to take care of the matter, would want their victims to be more closely bunched together. On the contrary, when they were forced out - almost certainly at gunpoint - it made the most sense to ensure that they were spread in a line. That way, it becomes easier for the attackers to control them. Later, they probably spread while the attacking squad ransacked their tent and waited for the cold to do the killing. This is a rather probable sketch of what happened. 

2. We cannot possibly know the all the details of what violent actions took place at the cedar tree, but it would seem that the two first victims found there had tried to escape their assailants by climbing the tree, but were probably dragged down - and there is every indication that they had been subjected to violent action from other humans. Also, there is no other sensible explanation why they would try to climb that tree. The fact of their damaged hands showed the utter desperation of their failed attempt to escape.

3. The injuries - and in particular the injuries found on these in the not-so-steep slope - are precisely indicative of human evil involvement. There were evidently no avalanches, no snow slabs in the area, and the "ravine" was neither deep enough nor steep enough to crush human rib cages in a fall - in addition to the fact that these injuries were not at all typical of what is seen when people are falling from great heights which were also not present in the area. The injury of Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle is very telling - this is the result of a pointed impact to the head: https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolay-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png. The damage even has a shape similar to that of a rifle butt. Kolevatov was killed in a manner which strongly suggests that his laryngal area was crushed. I have learned about lethal striking against vital points in jiu jitsu training, and such an injury is suggestive of having been killed by someone trained in advanced close combat systems. The crushed rib cages, likewise. To me, it seems to be the result of repeated elbow strikes. It is surprisingly easy to crush a human rib cage with strikes, especially if you trained in close combat skills. The intercostals - the muscles that sit between the ribs and assist the diaphragm during breathing - are easily torn, and if the beating continues the ribs will break - and that is what happened to Dubinina and Zolotaryov. When the injuries are that serious, internal bleeding starts and death is likely. All of these injuries are consistent with human involvement, and human involvement only.

4. The three who apparently tried to go back to the tent probably did so because they froze, and there is every reason to infer that they were stopped. They were found with injuries consistent with being attacked by human assailants who wanted to hasten their deaths.

[1] When armed men attack in adverse weather conditions who can say what order the situation would take.  And we can not say for certain in what state of mind the Dyatlov Group were when they left the Tent. And how can you state that they were certainly forced out of the Tent at Gunpoint.  Was the Tent RANSACKED.

You seem to make an awful lot of ASSUMPTIONS given that there is not much Evidence available to us Investigators.