The tent again

[GlennM]

Much of the investigation turns on the chance encounter of a seamstress seeing the reconstricted tent and choosing perhaps on of the many damaged pieces and says, " cut fron the inside". I propose an experiment where numerous squared  pieces of canvas are put to the test perhaps as follows. Common to all they mounted upright and in proximity  to each other

1. Square 1 is uncut and mounted ( this is the standard of comparison, or control piece)
2. Square 2 sliced with a blade front to back ( as if the tent were cut from outside)
3. Square 3  sliced,with a glade from back to front ( as if cut from,within the tent)
4. Square 4 is punched through and hand torn to make a ragged tear. ( as if cheap fabric wore out)
5. Square 5  is attached to a separate piece of canvas effectively becoming a flap which may beat the square,

What would it demonstrate? I predict that if these samples were subjected to the test conditions, then all would be frayed to the extent that a knife cut would undetectable.

Documant all photographically and then turn on the fan blowing all uniformly in one direction. In time, check for changes.

[Ziljoe]

I've got an old military polish canvas tent died green. I am totally against destroying it but you have got my juices flowing. I'm sorely tempted....

My thoughts are that it would show exactly as is reported. I might try it on a small piece to see if I can simulate a scratch that removes the dye.

I think that's the dilemma, all the other rips and cuts couldn't be identified as how they came to be ,so they was no definite conclusion to them , only the three cuts and scrapes that are photographed?

[GlennM]

Ziljoe, thanks for your interest in my post. Much time had passed before the tent was found on 1079. The condition it was in and how it was handled during salvage are indirect pointers to the unknown compelljng force., I wonder if what appears to be obvious in the criminal case about cuts on the canvas is not so obvious when canvas is looked at as a result of a controlled test.

If others in the forum like myself subscribe to the idea that the tent was abandoned on 1079 and not in the woods,  then perhaps ruined modern canvas has a secret to reveal about the hikers tent.

[Missi]

The idea is great.
I'm not sure, I understand correctly, what you suggest to do to piece 5.
And I'd suggest a piece 6, which would be left complete in a comparable surrounding and then hit with a snowpick or something, like the searchers suggested might have happened when finding the tent.

[Ziljoe]

This is a poor first attempt, it's the inside edge of a canvas gator. I'm not cutting them up !. The edge is frayed from manufacture and was probably cut with scissors. I've attempted to cut with a knife but it's difficult as I can't get any purchase without cutting my finger off.

The photos aren't great as it's my phone but we can see the white of the manufacturers cuts and the weave strands . My attempt can be seen very lightly as it scores the dye. About four attempts. For me this matches with what is shown in the case files. The case file closeups show more or less the same and are marked with red and blue ink. The reason we can see the red and blue ink is that it's a modern photo of an old photo. The red and blue seems to have been drawn on to the photo by the forensic people.










It's these white marks caused by the knife going across the weave  on the surface of the canvas be fore penetration  that lead to the conclusion that they were cuts as they eventually penetrated on the same score line. Additionally , I think there's the same angle of scrapes in the same area that don't penetrate . This suggests that there were several attempts. The argument as I understand it,is that rips do not occur diagonally, only at right angles to the weave. A cut can lead to a rip along the weave but a rip can't lead to a diagonal rip, or not easily.

[GlennM]

Nicely done Ziljoe! When added to the raised directional footprints in the snow, it can only mean that the hikers, and their tent were on 1079 on their last night. Any alternate theory is overly complicated.

[Ziljoe]

It's only an example but the logic of what's described and the photographs from the case files do seem to fit. I actually have some knowledge and experience on textiles and weaves along with sewing.

So with all the damage that was done to the tent post incident, the investigators know that out of many cuts  tears and rips , three of the "cuts" were done from the inside( or inner side)  of the tent . There may be other "cuts" in or on the ten but this does not get mentioned in the context that we are looking for. I would suspect that the other damage was verbally exchanged with the forensic people as being caused by the searchers.

  We can see ,as could the investigators, that the tent is in shreds . If the case files were a lie or manipulated then I think the photos of the shredded tent would have been removed.  For me it's a process of elimination as it would be for establishing the cuts in the tent .

The forensic explanation of the cuts makes sense and adds up , as does the next assumed movements of the hikers that occured. To cut a slack tensioned canvas sheet would take a few attempts, the cuts come from the side of where the tent was found still standing . This again fits the logic of a collapsed tent from the north side . Two of the guy ropes are broken on the north side as was the collapsed ski pole of the north side.

If there's a conspiracy and the case files are or were manipulated ( I do look at the case flies from a perspective as the total truth and / or manipulated ) , then it has been done so with an incredibly subtle form of intelligence where the narrative is unclear yet exists to form a logical sequence of events.

[sarapuk]

Much of the investigation turns on the chance encounter of a seamstress seeing the reconstricted tent and choosing perhaps on of the many damaged pieces and says, " cut fron the inside". I propose an experiment where numerous squared  pieces of canvas are put to the test perhaps as follows. Common to all they mounted upright and in proximity  to each other

1. Square 1 is uncut and mounted ( this is the standard of comparison, or control piece)
2. Square 2 sliced with a blade front to back ( as if the tent were cut from outside)
3. Square 3  sliced,with a glade from back to front ( as if cut from,within the tent)
4. Square 4 is punched through and hand torn to make a ragged tear. ( as if cheap fabric wore out)
5. Square 5  is attached to a separate piece of canvas effectively becoming a flap which may beat the square,

What would it demonstrate? I predict that if these samples were subjected to the test conditions, then all would be frayed to the extent that a knife cut would undetectable.

Documant all photographically and then turn on the fan blowing all uniformly in one direction. In time, check for changes.

The main problem we are faced with is that we no longer have the tent so that it could be investigated using all manor of modern devices. We don't even know the exact type of material or thickness of the material that was tested in the first place.

[GlennM]

Much of the investigation turns on the chance encounter of a seamstress seeing the reconstricted tent and choosing perhaps on of the many damaged pieces and says, " cut fron the inside". I propose an experiment where numerous squared  pieces of canvas are put to the test perhaps as follows. Common to all they mounted upright and in proximity  to each other

1. Square 1 is uncut and mounted ( this is the standard of comparison, or control piece)
2. Square 2 sliced with a blade front to back ( as if the tent were cut from outside)
3. Square 3  sliced,with a glade from back to front ( as if cut from,within the tent)
4. Square 4 is punched through and hand torn to make a ragged tear. ( as if cheap fabric wore out)
5. Square 5  is attached to a separate piece of canvas effectively becoming a flap which may beat the square,

What would it demonstrate? I predict that if these samples were subjected to the test conditions, then all would be frayed to the extent that a knife cut would undetectable.

Documant all photographically and then turn on the fan blowing all uniformly in one direction. In time, check for changes.

The main problem we are faced with is that we no longer have the tent so that it could be investigated using all manor of modern devices. We don't even know the exact type of material or thickness of the material that was tested in the first place.

I think a bigger problem is the unwillingness to try.