The Whodunnit

[CalzagheChick]

Dear Murder Campers,

It's inescapable to put Yuri Yudin as a prime suspect for murder. He was in the area. He presented the excuse to leave upon his pain of rheumatism. He did not go directly back to UPI in Yekaterinburg, but instead "took the opportunity to spend holiday time with various family until classes resumed." He'd have been oddly but no less suspiciously welcomed right into the tent had he "caught up" with his party later after yet ANOTHER "change of mind" to go ahead and "complete" the trip of a lifetime. By this time he would have well established with several parties that he was nowhere near the Dyatlov Party at the time of their demise. His alibi was solid at this point.

Obviously means and opportunity were there. Let's be honest with each other: his photo looks just like what you'd expect a serial killer to look like in the awkward college years.  Yes, there are many people in Camp Murder that believe Yudin got away with murder. specifically 9 murders.

I'm curious what the members/guests of THIS forum have to say about Yuri Yudin being involved in any way, shape or form to the Dyatlov Pass Incident. Humor me.

xoxo,
Tristan Q.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I'll bite...

If I had to pick 'whodunit'........   them shady loggers did it. 

[CalzagheChick]

It's funny you say that. I started thinking about the shady loggers and Grandpa Slava and all them... The Beard was written to have been very intelligent and could recite prose and poetry from memory and to me that seemed a little off for him to be a man of intelligence stuck in the middle of nowhere in a logging sector--a little too Hunger Games for me.

[Blkdahlia]

Whodunnit-
I’ll admit, the picture of Yudin gives me the creeps and I’ve often considered the possibility he was some sort of psychopathic killer. I can’t explain how he could take on the other 9 members though. If he was involved, he had help.
I’ve been suspicious of the Mansi and must express my dismay of the conclusion that the Mansi were not involved. They very well could have stumbled across some of the Mansi tribe, made friends then had a misunderstanding. For me, I’m not satisfied with the reasoning for ruling them out. One red flag for me is that a member of Mansi found the remaining 4. Criminal investigations involve suspecting the individual who discovered a body.
Also from the Dyatlov group journal on 31 Jan entry, it was documented that they came across a deer hunter. Not sure if they were Mansi or some other individuals.
The group announced their trip and many knew where they were going. Someone with a vendetta could have planned some sort of attack. The only question is, who had a vendetta and why would they want these guys dead?
What about the Blinov group? Was there some tension there?
Far fetched as it sounds, the alcoholic who accused them of stealing alcohol is worth considering.
Secret service could have shown up as a result of a secret experiment gone wrong.
The Beard... the loggers.
Did anyone ever confess to murdering them?
There is  no satisfaction in the statement “ a compelling unknown force”
It is so sad for the families of this tragedy. If it indeed was murder, those knowing of it should have came forward. It could have brought some closure to the families although not much.

[Morski]

        I am also interested why the only thing that seemed not in order, chaotic, were the shoes piled up?
One reason for that “shape” could be that the group was in a hurry to get in, and afterwards they just threw away their boots to get their feet dry faster. They had enough space inside, which doesn`t mean they should have used every inch to properly arrange the boots.
       How about if they were forced to leave their shoes in that manner? If we stick to the murderers/KGB/CIA/Military/Mansi/whoever theory, the group could have been forced to put their shoes aside as well as being forced to leave the tent barely dressed. About the "fact", that the tent had been cut from the inside - it would have been cut with a tool/weapon. I was wondering, (please correct me if I am wrong about that), but if all knifes (the “Finnish blades”) were found inside the tent, tucked in their sheaths (can`t recall anything about found inside the tent axe or something), how was the tent cut? Or they cut it inside-out in a state of panic, then calm down, put the knife back in the sheath, leave it in the tent, and then go for a barefoot walk 1,5km. There were no traces of mass running away, right? Missing tool/weapon (or hidden one) enigma occurs again under the cedar.
           The damage to the tent is a very important issue, and basically the whole mystery is based on that. But let`s not forget, the poor tent went through a lot before, but especially (during) after the incident. The searching party as well as the investigators did a good mess of it. Either they performed a really lame searching/investigation not on purpose, or they were simply told to do so. Or, someone was there before them to clean up.
           Anyway, the murderer`s theory sounds relevant, except for the fact that the way the students, especially some of them, die is exceptional. You can murder a human by so many ways, and yet doing it by depriving him from what he needs to survive (clothing, shoes, food, etc.) and therefore inflict death “in a natural” way (at least for some of the group) is scandalous. That is one step over murder. How twisted you must be? And leaving the bodies so everything becomes a decades old mystery. 
           So far I think, that someone or a group of people took care of the place after the “incident” and things were arranged at least to cause confusion. By that I mean moving of bodies, possessions, alignment of things. Probably intentionally slowing down of the investigation. Just a guess.

[Blkdahlia]

About the knife, the autopsy report of Slobodin claimed that he had a folding knife in his pocket.

Not sure how good it was but it could probably cut clothing.

[Loose}{Cannon]

About the knife, the autopsy report of Slobodin claimed that he had a folding knife in his pocket.

Not sure how good it was but it could probably cut clothing.

Or cut people.... surprised the 'killer's' let him keep it.  Along with a camera.

[sarapuk]

Innocent unless proven guilty. Or on this subject more like ; First establish if a crime has actually been committed.

[CalzagheChick]

Innocent unless proven guilty. Or on this subject more like ; First establish if a crime has actually been committed.

"Innocent unless proven guilty" is a constitutional right not recognized in MANY countries. On the contrary, many more countries follow a "Guilty until proven innocent" stance. And furthermore, many Americans would soundly argue that our judicial system treats defendants just that way: guilty until proven innocent.

I'm afraid that one-liner is a rather floating comment within this discussion as it's not clearly directed toward any thought?

[sarapuk]

FIRST ESTABLISH IF A CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED.

[Morski]

FIRST ESTABLISH IF A CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED.

That goes for pretty much any other theory. First establish if a Yeti was wandering around, killing some hikers, or first establish if avalanche started the events, etc. That is why we speculate. We accept a theory (more or less) and we speculate about the following events. I see no problem to talk about murder hypothesis even without 100% proof of a crime. 

[sarapuk]

A criminal investigation begins by establishing if a crime has actually been committed.

[[ The decision that a crime
has occurred, and the determination of what information will be collected
in order to make that decision, are normally police functions:
The police must make important judgments about what conduct
is in fact criminal ]]

In other words its extremely difficult for us modern day investigators of the 'Dyatlov Mystery' to try and establish if a crime has actually been committed, with no hard evidence [ except what has been reported already ] and events that happened about 60 years ago.