September 30, 2020, 03:37:20 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Ivdellag breaks in 1959  (Read 93 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

September 17, 2020, 09:40:20 AM
Read 93 times


Hakimov's interrogation
( Original title )

Author Galina Sazonova

The cooperation with the prosecutor's office, which began in September last year, made us look somewhat differently at the materials of the criminal case on the death of a group of hikers led by Igor Dyatlov in the Urals in the winter of 1959. We decided to try not to focus our opinion on riddles, but to try to find a simple and logical explanation for them.

The writer Oleg Arhipov found and studied the archives of the investigator Korotaev, and one document attracted particularly close attention. We are talking about the note of the Prosecutor Tempalov.

Instructions in this memo are not only to attend the trial in the case of Adam Reeb (and it was this fact that helped us figure out the true date of writing the note), but also a request to interrogate the head of the lag department Hakimov.

"In addition, on the instructions of the regional prosecutor to interrogate the chief of the logging branch of Vizhay Hakimovwhether the leader of the hikers group (who died) said that they will return to Vizhay not on 12.II. 59 but 15.II.59."

An examination carried out by the prosecutor's office established that this particular issue was the most important for Tempalov at the time of writing the note, and he continued to think about February and the deceased group, reflexively putting down the same dates further. And if this issue was so important for the prosecutor, it means that it deserves our close attention. Moreover, now many researchers of the mystery pose a legitimate question: "If there was an order to interrogate Hakimov, then why is there no protocol of his interrogation in the materials of the Criminal case?"

Hakimov Zakiy Gasimovich, born in 1923, participant in the Second World War, member of the CPSU, was a career soldier and was the head of the 8th camp department located in the village of Vizhay. It was from Vizhay that the Dyatlov group went on their last trek and had to return there, notifying the Sports club with a telegram about the end of the expedition. It is quite natural that when the group did not return at the appointed time, the first thing they did was call Vizhay. What if you forgot to send a telegram or the mail was closed?

Gordo's testimony:
"Blinov, a member of the hiking section bureau, told me that the Dyatlov group would return to Vizhay on about February 14-15, 1959, allegedly Yudin, who was also part of Dyatlov's group, had said so, when he returned due to illness on the way. Therefore, the Sports club started looking into the reason for the non-return of the hikers from the Dyatlov group only after February 15, 1959...

Searchers were not sent on February 16 this year because we got through to Vizhay only on the night of February 17... On February 18 he called Vizhay again. I was told that a group of the local population was getting ready, and that they saw a group of hikers."

Lev Semyonovich Gordo, the chairman of the UPI sports club, seems to be justifying himself before the investigation why the search was not started on February 16. He makes it clear that Vizhay has taken the lead. Gordo does not name Hakimov, but can such issues be resolved without the participation of the head of the log department, who controls the settlement?

However, calls to Vizhay did not bring the expected result and Lev Semyonovich, together with Yuri Blinov, a friend of Igor Dyatlov, fly to location on the morning of February 20.

Oddly enough, but it was precisely on the phrase "on the morning of February 20 of this year that Blinov and I flew to Ivdel." where the interrogation of Lev Semyonovich was interrupted. Yuri Blinov was not interrogated at all.

The next to arrive in Vizhay on February 22 is a group of students led by Boris Slobtsov. In the memoirs of Boris Slobtsov there is a story about the capture of fugitive prisoners, which gave rise to a number of versions associated with gulag convicts, aka zeks.

But there really was an escape! In the State Archives, they managed to find a book of escape registration for 1959, from which it follows that on February 19, a group of three prisoners escaped immediately after Gordo called Vizhay. They will only be caught on February 21, when Gordo and Blinov were already there. Does thsi have something to do with why the investigation doesn't ask them what exactly happened on the spot at that period?


Dyatlov Pass: Ivdellag escapes 1959

Date of
and entry №
Full name Year
of birth
From what
Regime From where
1.    19.II 21.II. №153 Madzhigatov Sultan Gamzabhanovich 1938 Art. 206-7,14 USSR
12 years
general   reg.
2.    19.II 21.II Ivanov Vasiliy Georgievich 1933 Art. 136, 182
25 years
   – " –      reg.
3.    19.II 21.II Nadvorny Yuri Yakovlevich 1931 Decree
6 years
   – " –      reg.


There should have been a large-scale search not for the Dyatlov group, but escaped convicts. After all, this is exactly what is included in the direct responsibilities of the colony leadership. And you can be sure that in accordance with the instructions, having notified Moscow about the group escape that took place, they deployed the search headquarters, informed the secretary of the Party Committee of the Party, police, transport police, interviewed the local population, geologists, flew around the territory, looked for and analyzed all tracks. And, for sure, they were happy when the search was successfully completed on February 21.

Prosecutor Tempalov's interrogation protocol:
"On February 21, 1959 I learned from the Secretary of the Ivdel CC CPSU comrade Prodanov that a group of nine hikers did not return to the Polytechnic Institute from a trip to Sverdlovsk."

On February 21, the final meeting of the headquarters of the search for the escaped convicts was supposed to take place and it was at this moment that the Prosecutor Tempalov first learned about the disappearance of the Dyatlov group.

On February 23, the Slobtsov group is flown to Otorten.

Who decides that a group of students should be dropped off there? After all, both Evgeniy Maslennikov and Colonel Ortyukov, who led the subsequent searches, are still in Sverdlovsk, and there is just a discussion about how to conduct the search operation. On February 21, Maslennikov still thinks "that one of the participants could have injured his leg, and the group had to help the hiker, which is slowing their movement. Or that one of the hikers fell ill with the flu and the whole group was sitting in a secluded place."

On February 23, a meeting at the UPI is just gathering and there is "a discussion about the details of the preparation of the group, about the route, about what, in my opinion, could have happened with the group and about my considerations for organizing the search."

Maslennikov compares the search area with the territory of Belgium and suggests sending several groups along the entire Dyatlov route, and the Slobtsov group is already just a few kilometers from the site of the tragedy.

But the Slobtsov group was the only group of students with whom two more local people went in search: the head of the fire department of the same log camp, an experienced hunter Aleksey Cheglakov and a forester of Vizhay Ivan Vasilyevich Pashin.

Cheglakov's testimony:
"on the orders of the Chief of the logging branch Hakimov, together with the forester Ivan Pashin I flew by helicopter to the site of the death of a group of hikers near Mount Otorten."

Much later, Mihail Sharavin, who happened to find a tent on the slope, analyzing the events of those days, came to the conclusion that the forester Pashin sent them to the tent, and he himself remained to wait aside. And this feeling is confirmed in the materials of the criminal case. All students are sure that the tent was found on the 4th day of the search, February 26, but Pashin and Cheglakov assure that they found the tent earlier, on the second day of the search.

Cheglakov's testimony:
"On the second day we found the tent of the hikers which was located in the upper reaches of rivers Auspiya and Lozva at the height of the mountain Verhuspiya. It was badly drifted by snow. We did not go inside."

Pashin's testimony:
"On the first day of the search, once descended into the Auspiya we found ski tracks from the hikers. Here we pitched a tent, spend the night, divided into three groups and went to look for the hikers, as a result of the search we found a tent with belongings that was not clearly seen since it was covered with snow, we did not go into the tent. The tent was found in the upper sources of Auspiya and Lozva at the height of the mountain Verhuspiya."

One can suspect that they were "lost" in the days of searching. But in order to dispel these doubts, both emphasize that if the tent was discovered on the second day (at Pashin's - after the first overnight stay), then the first bodies were discovered on the fifth day of the search.

"On the fifth day of our search we found 4 bodies covered with snow and on this day we were taken back home with helicopter to the village of Vizhay." (Pashin)

Cheglakov and Pashin assure that "they did go inside" the tent. But should they have tried to look into it? After all, the entrance withstood. This is not very convenient to do, especially when it is dark in the tent, but you can always try to shine a flashlight? And turn it off after that, because during the day it is not needed outside, and then accidentally forget it on the top. And then there will be snow under it, and above it there will be a little snow, which was swept in several days, until the students "found" the tent. The flashlight will work, since it has not been in the cold for a month, but only for a few days and the batteries would not have time to discharge.

Tempalov does not mention the flashlight in the protocol on the discovery of the campsite, although he was obliged. Maybe because Cheglakov and Pashin confessed to him that it was their flashlight? Maybe this explains the fact that Tempalov does not show much interest in inspecting the tent, knowing that since the tragedy many have already visited and examined it, which means the scene has been contaminated?

Ivdel is a small town, whose life is closely connected with the life of the gulag, and the escape of the prisoners was an important and unpleasant event. What if we assume that during the break, the convicts stumbled upon the scene of the tragedy and, fearing that the deaths of people could be associated with them, chose to surrender? Boris Slobtsov says that the escapees surrendered themselves. And then the local leadership, knowing the approximate area of ??the tragedy, directed their people to assess the situation and try to keep the situation under control.

But all this happens in February, and the need to interrogate Hakimov arises in April, two months later. The memo states the purpose of the interrogation:

"whether the leader of the hikers group (who died) said that they will return to Vizhay not on 12.II. 59 but 15.II.59."

This means that the investigation is concerned not so much with the organization of the searches but when it started.

On April 14, a few days before the memo was written, the parents of the deceased hikers sharply speak out against the institute and sports organizations.

Rustem Slobodin's father: "Knowing that Dyatlov’s group had to return on February 13th, after this period I called the sports club at UPI... The search for the group began 18 days after the disaster, and the place of death was found only 26 days after the accident that caused the death. Obviously, with such a time frame and pace of carrying out measures to find the group, it was impossible to count on the provision of assistance and the rescue of any of its participants."

Aleksander Kolevatov's sister: "I then called the city sports club comrade Ufimtsev. He assured me that there is nothing to worry about, that the group is delayed for a week and they are on their way back. A certain fact is indignant and criminal: Gordo informed UPI party committee that a telegram had been received from Vizhay on February 18 reporting a delay of the group."

Lyuda Dubinina's father: "These soulless and heartless leaders didn't express any concern for the fate of the group 8 days after the planned return date to Vizhay (12/II) and started looking for the group only after the intervention of the CPSU Regional Committee, namely 21/II."

In a telegram addressed to Khrushchev says the same
"Search began late only after 10 days had passed"

The parents of the deceased are clearly trying to hold representatives of sports organizations accountable for such a late start of the search, and they are trying to justify themselves, referring to information received from Igor Dyatlov about the postponement of the return.

Gordo: "it was allegedly said by Yudin who was a participant in Dyatlov group, but had to turn back due to illness."

On April 15 Yuri Yudin denied knowing about any changes in the return date of the trek.

"Question: When you parted with comrade Dyatlov, did he tell you that the return date will be moved from the February 2nd to February 15th of 1959?
Answer: No, there was no talk about the deadline being postponed to 15/II-59.

Who else could have Dyatlov discussed this with? The head of the logging camp department Hakimov is one of the last people to see Dyatlov alive. Immediately after Yuri Yudin's testimony Tempalov flies out to question Hakimov on the same issue. What was Hakimov doing at the time when he had to start looking for the Dyatlov group? How come the interrogation protocol is not in the case files?

The continuation of this article is published in Komsomolskaya Pravda –›

Text in Russian

« Last Edit: September 18, 2020, 09:21:00 AM by Teddy »

September 19, 2020, 10:12:00 AM
Reply #1

Jean Daniel Reuss

Hakimov's interrogation
( Original title )

   " But there really was an escape! In the State Archives, they managed to find a book of escape registration for 1959, from which it follows that on February 19, a group of three prisoners escaped immediately after Gordo called Vizhay. They will only be caught on February 21, when Gordo and Blinov were already there. Does thsi have something to do with why the investigation doesn't ask them what exactly happened on the spot at that period ?
.............There should have been a large-scale search not for the Dyatlov group, but escaped convicts...."

     •••   If I understand correctly, there is no relation between the 3 zeks who escaped on February 19 th, then recaptured on February 21 th, and the organization of the rescue for the disappearance of Dyatlov's group.

     •••  On the other hand a question remains : was the tent really seen on the slope of the Kholat Syakhl by Pashin and Cheglakov on February 24 th, 1959 ?

•  Cheglakov's testimony:
   " On the second day we found the tent of the hikers which was located in the upper reaches of rivers Auspiya and Lozva at the height of the mountain Verhuspiya. It was badly drifted by snow. We did not go inside...."

•  Pashin's testimony:
    " Here we pitched a tent, spend the night, divided into three groups and went to look for the hikers, as a result of the search we found a tent with belongings that was not clearly seen since it was covered with snow, we did not go into the tent..."

•  Teddy  on ( When was the tent found and why was it kept a secret for two days )
"...Unbelievable! Pashin and Cheglakov didn't tell anybody about this essential finding neither on February 24, returning to the base camp, nor on February 25, nor on the 26th, everybody else in the serach party is looking for this tent, and they both say nothing to nobody.
And, judging by the protocol, even the investigator doesn’t have any reaction to that.

Maybe someone gave instructions to Pashin and Cheglakov ahead of time not to tell anyone about the tent, and the investigator knows this ? This is where modern conspiracy theorists come in..."

   •••   Aïe !  Ouch ! Ouch ! I feel I'm going to be placed in the category of modern conspiracy theorists....


First possibility: There was an error somewhere.

Here are some answers:

    Theories Discussion  / General Discussion / When was the tent found and why was it kept a secret for two days [/b]
   •    Teddy   : April 10, 2019, 08:32:03 AM
   •    sarapuk : April 24, 2019, 12:51:19 PM      ;Reply #1
    " ...Well it is a bit of a mystery, but could Pashin and Cheglakov have made a mistake with their timing ! ?..."

   •    Loose}{Cannon   : April 24, 2019, 03:25:08 PM   ; Reply #2
     " ...He does not state what date, or that is was the first following day after being dropped off on the 23rd.  All it says is "as a result of the search..."

   •    Glacon   : April 25, 2019, 08:52:37 AM  ;  Reply #3
    " ...I don't know that there's anything suspicious about this...besides, what are 2 guys gonna do in 2 days with regard to restaging a tent and bodies, etc. etc.
We don't really know how many hours at a time they were unaccounted for by the other searchers either, right ?"


Second possibility: There was absolutely no error at all.
In truth, on February 24, Pashin and Cheglakov actually saw the tent on the slope of Kholat Syakhl.

 •••  without entering it and without talking about it to anyone other than the KGB investigator. •••

As you will understand in this paragraph, this hypothesis (tent spotted on February 24th) fits (and complements) perfectly with my hypothesis N°3 - which is largely inspired by the sites in Russian of Aleks Kandr   - "Date Registered: October 29, 2019, 01:06:21 / Posts: 0", and top ligne of :

Before going further, I point out that WAB supports other entirely different explanations.

   •    WAB : Murdered / Murder Indead December =>  08, 2018, 02:26:55 PM -> Reply #37
   " ...Conversation on that that they wanted to devote travel to party congress is very strongly exaggerated. They wrote about it only in 2 places: in a note for this purpose that Rustem Slobodin would grant leave in due time and in the leaflet “Evening Otorten” (in the playful form). It was time when for officials that was necessary that to mention such event, and among themselves on this theme they did not conduct any conversations. They had other interests and themes for conversations. As they were at all normal people in all countries. Participation in this sports and difficult travel and that defines interest in any sports was the main thing for a bottom: to test itself and aspiration to self-improvement. Therefore to do a strong emphasis on a political component in this group will be an error."

   ••• The XXI° Congress of the CPSU (27 January 1959-5 February 1959) was of no importance for the 9 depoliticized hikers, but on the contrary terribly feared by the Stalinist agents of the NKVD, who gradually lost all their privileges with the dismantling of the Gulag as wanted by Khrushchev by using of the KGB.

   •    WAB : New Press Conference =>  July 12, 2020, 11:53:46 AM    ;  Reply #13
   " Don't pay attention to this article, it's fake.
2 days before Sharavin and Slobtsov found the tent, Pashin and Cheglakov were in his (Boris Slobtsov was the leader of the group) group together with all the others and did not go far away. They were constantly seen by all the other group members. It takes almost 2 days for the whole group (11 people) reach the tent from the place the journalists are thinking about.  This is exactly as long as the whole group needs go there. And they had to go back and move on with the group.
Or are you a supporter of alien tragression?
There are no miracles in nature, and what illiterate journalists write (about the movement and possibilities of people) does not exist in life.
In addition, this is understandable because everyone in the group, who said something about this search, claimed that Pashin and Cheglakov were very badly oriented on the ground in the place where they landed from the helicopter.
They did not report it just because they found nothing. There was nothing to report."

   •    WAB : Photo number 14 from the searching party  =>  July 17, 2019, 08:38:21 AM     ;    Reply #10
   " Ivan Pashin and Alexey Cheglakov did not concern KGB. KGB had no in search participation, because there was no reason for this purpose. It is well warmed up hearings. For this purpose, what speak about KGB participation it would be necessary have very considerable reason of their interest to this case. Such reason anybody find (or prove even it as good) cannot till now. However there are many such people, which else in the childhood have not stopped play as spies.
It is possible continue search for black cat in dark room still very long. And wait when there will be archives which simply does not exist. "

   •    WAB :   Photo number 14 from the searching party  =>  August 01, 2019, 01:14:13 PM    ;  Reply #20
   "   If tell about this forum then all is very traditional for this theme (about Dyatlov pass). It is lot of conversations on themes which cannot be seen on place of events. And they do not concern events. Very often all constantly repeats. Same theories are discussed with different variations permanently. At us it is called “To go on circle” and “To attack the same rake”. Here is playful illustration about this concept:..."

  •••  Needless to say that my hypothesis N°3 is in total disagreement with the theories of WAB , but at least, it seems to me that I am not going on the same circle nor that I do not attack with the same rake.

The DPI, which took place during the period of the Khrushchevian thaw (1953-1964), was associated with the KGB's attempts to purge the NKVD, which in 1959 was still employing a large number of Stalinist sadistic torturers, to the great shame of all Soviet patriots who were aware of it.

The KGB had been warned (of the return of 3 suspects to the area around Vizhay) at the beginning of February and had and consequently proceeded to arrest and then interrogate ( in an effective manner) the three murderers as early as February 6 th, or perhaps later, around February 20 th.

There was thus, as early as February 1959, an important investigator of the KGB, mandated by Moscow, to find the murderers of the 9 hikers and this KGB investigator
already suspected that the origin of the attack came from an NKVD officer.

This KGB investigator, of course, as WAB wisely points out, was working in a comfortable heated office, with a telephone in one hand, and with the collaboration and help of many other functionaries.

So to explain that the tent had been seen as early as February 24 th, here is the outline of a dialogue of which you must retain only the meaning.

 --->  The KGB investigator to  Pashin and Cheglakov, february 22 th, 1959 :
I have been informed that you are part of one of the Dyatlov Group's research teams. Go and check if on the slope of the Kholat Syakhl you see a tent about 1 km above the tree line, but do not touch anything.

 --->   Pashin and Cheglakov to the KGB investigator,  february 24 th, 1959 :
Yes sir. At the place that you indicated to us, on the slope of the Kholat Syakhl, we have indeed seen an abandoned tent.

 --->   The KGB investigator then thought of receiving this confirmation :
I am happy because my reasoning was correct. I do not need to know any more details at this time. Now here is what I am going to do :

    1) I am waiting for the statements of the other rescuers who will soon find the tent, and then the corpses in a few days - (This happened on February 26th with the discovery of the tent by Slobtsov and Sharavin).
    2) I am waiting for instructions from Moscow.
    3) I am going to put the morgue in Ivdel under surveillance because NKVD partisans (mercenaries, agents..) would risk entering without proper authorization and would insinuating themselves into the morgue with the aim of disguising the corpses in order to falsify the results of the autopsy of the hikers (Aleks Kandr's idea).


To concretize the promising lead found by Aleks Kandr (1 commander and attack by 3 mercenaries), here are some key points that remain to be developed.


The commander ( mastermind, client..) was a Stalinist officer of the NKVD whose situation had some similarities with that of Boris Rodos (1905-1955).

The commander was an NKVD officer with a role in the leadership of the Uchtchinsky Colony No. 64 / 349-Ivdellag and who had had contacts with Dyatlov's group in the village of Vizhay.

The 3 mercenaries were former guards of the Gulag camps specialized in the pursuit and neutralization of the (few) zeks who managed to escape from the NKVD-run camps.


The Gulag system, maintained and strengthened by Joseph Stalin between 1929 and 1953, not only martyred and killed millions of zeks but also, so to speak, created a certain number of sadistic torturers among the personnel who did not accept the dismantling of the Gulag ordered by Khrushchev.

Ainsi, par exemple,  Danzig Baldaev (1925-2005) etait un officier du NKGB en fonction dans le Gulag
"...Atrocities of Gulag are wellknown - a lot of evidence by eyewitnesses and victims of the Gulag themselves - mentioned here in this article may have happened indeed as individual episode as obviously there was some persent of sadists among NKVD personell ( law enforcement, army and service in penetenciary system attract more % of sadists then ordinary professions as it is proved by psychologists).

The hikers (or only some of them), who were well secured in the UPI, were not aware of the political and security situation in their motherland.

All it took was the voucher and Dubinina's justified protests to unleash the revenge of the commander, who was a sadistic and cruel sociopath.


   1) Total surprise, good tactics and mental preparation played in favour of the 3 attackers. A military maxim is :
" History teaches us that the most serious risk is the one we cannot imagine (often due to ignorance or lack of information). "
And the hikers, as well as the "route commisssion" at the DPI, had a false illusion of solitude and security on the slope of the Kholat Syakhl.

2) The exit of the tent without the axes can only be explained by cunning (trickery, deception, false flag...):
The attackers won the hikers' trust and recognition (during the first few minutes) with many kind and compassionate words.

A famous example of a ruse to succeed in killing a victim on his guard is the murder of Leon Trotsky by Ramon mercader, who for several months managed to convince Trosky of his  deep friendship (in order to be in a position to hit him mortally with a short-handled ice axe).

3)   Then the explanations are quite simple   ===> No firearms - Cold for the hikers knocked out - Blunt objects or slaughter axe wrapped in rags (silent blows) for the skulls - Fun trampoline exercises or demonstrations to break the ribs - Small knife to extract the 4 eyeballs and the tongue.


As my DPI studies progress, my explanatory hypothesis becomes more accurate,  for the future continuation go to the starting point launched by Eduard Tumanov :

Theories Discussion / Altercation on the pass / Altercation on the pass

   •    Teddy April 08, 2019, 10:51:59 PM

   My hypothesis N°1 -  Read starting from  Reply #15 ==>  fight between them + testing of a military psychostimulant drug.
   My hypothesis N°2 -  Read starting from  Reply #18 ==>  fight against outsiders = ex-Zeks.
   My hypothesis N°3 -  Read starting from  Reply #44 ==>  fight against outsiders = NKVD officers on the Gulag defying the KGB.

Jean Daniel Reuss

Rational guidance =

• There is nothing supernatural and mysterious about the injuries suffered by the Dyatlov group. They are all consistent with an attack by a group of professional killers who wanted to take the lives of the nine  [Per Inge Oestmoen].

• Now let us search for answers to: WHO ? WHY ? HOW ?

• The scenario must be consistent with the historical, political and psychological  contexts.

• The solution takes in consideration all known findings.