Diaries

[GlennM]

There were ten participants and ten diaries. Those diaries have not all been accounted for. This suggests that the missing diaries could provide additional meaningful insight regarding what really happened. Those diaries could have been confiscated, and they might be recoverable. Therefore, researchers could mail or otherwise contact surviving investigators, relatives and agencies to locate the texts. If the diaries were lost in the snow or burned for kindling, so be it. I would like to believe that they are in a personal collection to be discovered just like the recent discovery of the ravine photo.

[Hunter]

The fact that everyone was given notebooks for writing does not mean that everyone kept field diaries.

[GlennM]

I prefer the glass being half full.

[Missi]

The fact that everyone was given notebooks for writing does not mean that everyone kept field diaries.

I believe, I remember that those diaries were mandatory. So either they kept them on the track or they must forge them upon returning (which we all know students do in everyday life).

[GlennM]

Yes, whether filled now or later, there should be ten individual diaries plus a gouup diary. My point is that if and when discovered, we may get additional insight into the dynamics both inside and outside the last camp. It is also a prime opportunity for a DPI hoax.

It seemed customary to complete diaries after the daily duties were done. I wonder whether the combat leaflet, which was a nice but not necessary bit of composition, was written after the meal and before the diaries, or if it was a single person's effort and written not all at once, nor all on the same day. I think it had to be one person's work otherwise the humor would be spoiled if each contributor pre- read the unfinished work.

My point is that the diaries were not written to when the group left the tent and the missing diaries were not itemized with personal effects. This may help fix the desertion of the tent to a certain time frame. It begs the question of how the diaries were physically kept.  I, for one would not grab a diary when I could grab a knife. If however, the personal diaries were routinely kept on the person, then they could have gone to the forest, be at the morgue, found by Mansi, or be in the hands of some rescuer/collector. Everything has to be somewhere.

[Missi]

I don't know of course, but I'd suspect, that it differs from person to person. Some might have left the booklet at home, because they never wrote something down on the track anyway. They might have disappeared and disintegrated over the years somewhere in the wilderness.

I just don't think they are classified material somewhere. Yet, that's just an opinion, nothing more.

What do you mean by hoax? Do you think along the lines of diaries showing up, like the so called "Hitler Diaries" back somewhen?

I always believed the evening Otorten was some kind of group fun, maybe even meant for their friends back home. I've as well wondered, if the dates we have really are sufficient. I mean, the last diary date and the evening Otorten suggest, that they died in the night from Feb 1st to Feb 2nd. But maybe they predated the evening Otorten? Or they just missed one evening of diary writing, because everyone was too exhausted. That would give us complete other timelines.

[GlennM]

You are correct about the hoax, heaven forbid.

For me, there may be a link to be forged with the diaries and the absence of amfinal entry, the time of day this would be done and the weather conditions.

If the diaries were not written to because of a weather related collapse of the tent, or support rigging, then that is something to ponder. Of course the same could be said of the tent was in the woods and a tree fell at an unopportune time.

[Hunter]

Keeping a group diary was mandatory. Personal diaries were optional.

[Missi]

The tree theory only holds if the hikers were at least lying, probably sleeping. Else the recorded injuries wouldn't occur. So the tree wouldn't have stopped them from making their entries.

[GlennM]

The following are entries from Elena's perspective: Elena Koshkiva

"Someone – Yakimenko or Slobtsov (also a searcher) – said that a drunken military rescuer in a restaurant let it slip that his comrade had found Kolevatov's notebook, which listed the cause of the explosion and death. This notebook was passed on to the authorities. Where she is, and whether she really existed, is unknown.

Attempts were made to find out something. But! Yarovoy (Yuri Yarovoy, a journalist whom investigator Ivanov took as a witness in the search, - Author) and Maslennikov (Yevgeny Polikarpovich, head of the search headquarters, - Author) went to see the investigator. They were given cameras, film, and some other belongings. They signed non-disclosure agreements."

[Hunter]

In the USSR, there were several types of non-disclosure agreements. In this case, they signed a non-disclosure agreement regarding investigative secrets. It was valid until the case was closed or referred to court. The penalty for violating it was imprisonment for up to six months or a fine of 500 rubles (the average salary was around 700-800 rubles).

[GlennM]

And the missing notebook...

[sarapuk]

There were ten participants and ten diaries. Those diaries have not all been accounted for. This suggests that the missing diaries could provide additional meaningful insight regarding what really happened. Those diaries could have been confiscated, and they might be recoverable. Therefore, researchers could mail or otherwise contact surviving investigators, relatives and agencies to locate the texts. If the diaries were lost in the snow or burned for kindling, so be it. I would like to believe that they are in a personal collection to be discovered just like the recent discovery of the ravine photo.

I'm sure that many investigators have tried to ascertain the whereabouts of all the diaries. There may be lots of things that are hidden away. I suppose ultimately its the government of Russia that can decide on such matters.

[sarapuk]

The fact that everyone was given notebooks for writing does not mean that everyone kept field diaries.

I believe, I remember that those diaries were mandatory. So either they kept them on the track or they must forge them upon returning (which we all know students do in everyday life).

Well maybe it was not mandatory for everyone to keep a diary or record of events. If you are on an expedition of this kind it makes sense to keep a record.

[sarapuk]

Yes, whether filled now or later, there should be ten individual diaries plus a gouup diary. My point is that if and when discovered, we may get additional insight into the dynamics both inside and outside the last camp. It is also a prime opportunity for a DPI hoax.

It seemed customary to complete diaries after the daily duties were done. I wonder whether the combat leaflet, which was a nice but not necessary bit of composition, was written after the meal and before the diaries, or if it was a single person's effort and written not all at once, nor all on the same day. I think it had to be one person's work otherwise the humor would be spoiled if each contributor pre- read the unfinished work.

My point is that the diaries were not written to when the group left the tent and the missing diaries were not itemized with personal effects. This may help fix the desertion of the tent to a certain time frame. It begs the question of how the diaries were physically kept.  I, for one would not grab a diary when I could grab a knife. If however, the personal diaries were routinely kept on the person, then they could have gone to the forest, be at the morgue, found by Mansi, or be in the hands of some rescuer/collector. Everything has to be somewhere.

Diaries are a record of their adventure. Not necessary for everyone to keep a diary. And seeing as you mention that leaflet. I point out that it was fixed to the tent near the entrance and therefore may have been the last thing written.

[sarapuk]

I don't know of course, but I'd suspect, that it differs from person to person. Some might have left the booklet at home, because they never wrote something down on the track anyway. They might have disappeared and disintegrated over the years somewhere in the wilderness.

I just don't think they are classified material somewhere. Yet, that's just an opinion, nothing more.

What do you mean by hoax? Do you think along the lines of diaries showing up, like the so called "Hitler Diaries" back somewhen?

I always believed the evening Otorten was some kind of group fun, maybe even meant for their friends back home. I've as well wondered, if the dates we have really are sufficient. I mean, the last diary date and the evening Otorten suggest, that they died in the night from Feb 1st to Feb 2nd. But maybe they predated the evening Otorten? Or they just missed one evening of diary writing, because everyone was too exhausted. That would give us complete other timelines.

The Evening Otorten leaflet was found fixed to the tent near the entrance. That must be an important clue, surely.

[Hunter]

This leaflet, "Evening Otorten," is simply a tribute to the then (and later) fascination with wall newspapers - i.e., periodically changing posters that described the life of the enterprise, the team, world politics, often with humor.

[sarapuk]

The following are entries from Elena's perspective: Elena Koshkiva

"Someone – Yakimenko or Slobtsov (also a searcher) – said that a drunken military rescuer in a restaurant let it slip that his comrade had found Kolevatov's notebook, which listed the cause of the explosion and death. This notebook was passed on to the authorities. Where she is, and whether she really existed, is unknown.

Attempts were made to find out something. But! Yarovoy (Yuri Yarovoy, a journalist whom investigator Ivanov took as a witness in the search, - Author) and Maslennikov (Yevgeny Polikarpovich, head of the search headquarters, - Author) went to see the investigator. They were given cameras, film, and some other belongings. They signed non-disclosure agreements."

Where did you find this reference to Elena Koshkiva ?

[sarapuk]

In the USSR, there were several types of non-disclosure agreements. In this case, they signed a non-disclosure agreement regarding investigative secrets. It was valid until the case was closed or referred to court. The penalty for violating it was imprisonment for up to six months or a fine of 500 rubles (the average salary was around 700-800 rubles).

Where is the reference to it being a non-disclosure agreement regarding investigative secrets ?

[sarapuk]

This leaflet, "Evening Otorten," is simply a tribute to the then (and later) fascination with wall newspapers - i.e., periodically changing posters that described the life of the enterprise, the team, world politics, often with humor.

Simply a tribute ! But it was fixed near to the tent entrance for a reason don't you think ?

[GlennM]

The following are entries from Elena's perspective: Elena Koshkiva

"Someone – Yakimenko or Slobtsov (also a searcher) – said that a drunken military rescuer in a restaurant let it slip that his comrade had found Kolevatov's notebook, which listed the cause of the explosion and death. This notebook was passed on to the authorities. Where she is, and whether she really existed, is unknown.

Attempts were made to find out something. But! Yarovoy (Yuri Yarovoy, a journalist whom investigator Ivanov took as a witness in the search, - Author) and Maslennikov (Yevgeny Polikarpovich, head of the search headquarters, - Author) went to see the investigator. They were given cameras, film, and some other belongings. They signed non-disclosure agreements."

Where did you find this reference to Elena Koshkiva ?

DyatlovPass.com home page, then scroll down.

[Missi]

The fact that everyone was given notebooks for writing does not mean that everyone kept field diaries.

I believe, I remember that those diaries were mandatory. So either they kept them on the track or they must forge them upon returning (which we all know students do in everyday life).

Well maybe it was not mandatory for everyone to keep a diary or record of events. If you are on an expedition of this kind it makes sense to keep a record.

I was already corrected on this one, the group diary was mandatory, not the individual diaries.

[Missi]

I don't know of course, but I'd suspect, that it differs from person to person. Some might have left the booklet at home, because they never wrote something down on the track anyway. They might have disappeared and disintegrated over the years somewhere in the wilderness.

I just don't think they are classified material somewhere. Yet, that's just an opinion, nothing more.

What do you mean by hoax? Do you think along the lines of diaries showing up, like the so called "Hitler Diaries" back somewhen?

I always believed the evening Otorten was some kind of group fun, maybe even meant for their friends back home. I've as well wondered, if the dates we have really are sufficient. I mean, the last diary date and the evening Otorten suggest, that they died in the night from Feb 1st to Feb 2nd. But maybe they predated the evening Otorten? Or they just missed one evening of diary writing, because everyone was too exhausted. That would give us complete other timelines.

The Evening Otorten leaflet was found fixed to the tent near the entrance. That must be an important clue, surely.

Wasn't that fact uncertain, some saying it was fixed, others said it wasn't, when the tent was found? I read through some of the case files (discovery of tent site, survey of the scene, found items and the part on the leaflet itself), there's no mention of it being pinned. If it indeed is part of the case files, it must be part of a testimony. Anyone know, who reported the leaflet being pinned to the tent?

[GlennM]

Sort of reminds me of the party game, Telephone", yes?

[Missi]

Yes, it does. And it's not the only thing that does, if you ask me.

[Hunter]

The non-disclosure agreements were in the "second volume." Page five. It states that so-and-so has been warned of liability for disclosing investigative secrets. And the article under which the warning was given is listed: Article 96 of the Criminal Code.
Here's the text of the article:
96. Disclosing the results of a preliminary investigation, inquiry, or audit without the permission of the prosecutor, investigator, or official conducting the inquiry or audit is punishable by imprisonment for up to six months or a fine of up to five hundred rubles.

The combat leaflet could be hung anywhere, as long as it was convenient.

[Ziljoe]

The non-disclosure agreements were in the "second volume." Page five. It states that so-and-so has been warned of liability for disclosing investigative secrets. And the article under which the warning was given is listed: Article 96 of the Criminal Code.
Here's the text of the article:
96. Disclosing the results of a preliminary investigation, inquiry, or audit without the permission of the prosecutor, investigator, or official conducting the inquiry or audit is punishable by imprisonment for up to six months or a fine of up to five hundred rubles.

The combat leaflet could be hung anywhere, as long as it was convenient.

This is true also as into work place investigations even for the most stupid things . If someone is off sick at work it is not to be discussed, if someone is reported for misconduct , then those involved must not discuss the case with other colleagues for example. It is not strictly law but it is what's written on the paper work. In recorded meetings , the transcript is confidential, until it's not that is..

No prison or fines though. Just the loss of your job and career .

It is similar in court. The jury must not know the accused , previous convictions must not be put forward. The jury, when going home cannot discuss the case with the press or family whilst the case is still in process . In this instance, jail or fines could occur.

In this context , people being asked not to discuss the dyatlov pass incident during investigation makes perfect sense , especially if people like the Mansi are suspect's. They have gone from search and rescue to an investigation with the possibility of murder. Of course everyone must not talk !!!

[Hunter]

During an ongoing investigation, discussing it with anyone other than law enforcement officers is prohibited. Those being questioned are often required to sign similar non-disclosure agreements. It doesn't matter who the suspect is—Mansi, escaped prisoners... Simply testify, sign the document, and remain silent about what was asked. It's somewhat reminiscent of a non-disclosure agreement.

[GlennM]

A non disclosure becomes less relevant when the entire case files are in the public domain in Russia.

[Ziljoe]

I think that's two great points that have been highlighted.

Yes, the case files are out in the public( have been for years) yet , no one has come forward with one bit of information of any value. Not one , not even Ivanov although he's alleged to have hinted at a few things.

No one from the time of the incident has come forward to say anything. This includes any other people who could be involved like helicopter crews from staging , the crews that would have to collect crashed rockets or UFO 's .  The logistics needed to do anything on that slope in winter would involve a lot of people that would have come forward by now.

The casefiles are out , the investigation is over,everyone is free to tell their story but no one has a story to tell or sell?.