Interview with Nurse Pelageya Ivanovna

[mk]

I'm reading this interview (https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter?rbid=18461) for the first time.  It's rather confusing because I don't quite understand the roles of the persons involved.  Could someone please enlighten me?

Who is this Victor Konstantinovitch and why does he do so much talking if the interview is supposed to be with nurse Pelageya Ivanovna?  Does she need an interpreter?  Is he her caretaker?  When she is asked the first question, before she can answer, he interrupts, "You know, she can be mistaken, her memory is not the same ... But I remember them." Why does he prime the interviewers to discount what she says?  He seems to interrupt a lot and answer by reporting what he's read rather than what he saw.

There seem to be at least two people doing the questioning:  NAVIG and Tuapse.  Are they working together?  Do they represent two different groups that have just decided to share the interview time with Pelageya Ivanovna?  They sometimes seem to be working at odds with each other, pursuing different questions before she has a chance to answer the first.

If there is already a place where all this is discussed, could someone please just post the link?  Thanks!

[mk]

Ha. Exactly a year later, by coincidence.

Anyway, in case anyone is confused like I was, I've learned that Victor Konstantinovitch was her husband.  I surmise that he did so much of the talking because he enjoyed the sound of his own voice, had developed a habit of taking care of Pelageya and sort of filtering her life for her as she aged (like a "helicopter mom"), and because he was enthusiastically eager to help solve the DPI mystery.

Pelageya Ivanovna seemed certain of a few things:
1)At the time of the Dyatlov tragedy, several young people were brought into the morgue in "batches" (3 at a time) and she was called to help Prudkov deal with them. 
2) She washed the bodies while Prudkov examined & described them ("describe" = make notes, I suppose).
3) No autopsies were done on these bodies.
4) The bodies were very dirty.  One girl had burned hair on one side of her head, and a burned sleeve, and a little burning on her foot.
5) After the bodies were clean and described, they were dressed in new clothes which had been bought for them, and then put into caskets.  From the morgue, they were immediately sent to Sverdlovsk for burial.

The body count is a little questionable: In the interview she says eleven, and her husband confirms that some years earlier she had told authorities that there were eleven.  In a 2006 letter to Yuri Yudin, she seems to indicate that there were 9 (three groups of three), but perhaps I have misunderstood her writing.  In the interview she says that there were six brought in first, and a girl was part of the group.  Then a second girl was brought in with others a few days later.  She is firm that it was only a few days, not a month or more.

Personally, I believe she is telling the truth and that she remembers enough to be accurate in these statements.  Her stubborn repetition reminds me of talking to my grandmother when she was in her 90s.  She told me her mother's maiden name and how to spell it.  I thought she couldn't possibly be right, because the spelling didn't match the pronunciation.  Later, I found the marriage license with the spelling exactly like she said, and talked with other old-timers who pronounced it the same.

So what are your thoughts?  Was her mind wandering completely?  Were the autopsies invented?  Were there other bodies found about the same time? 

[RidgeWatcher]

I reread this today and reread all the links. I believe the nurse when she is describing the groupings and the time. I was very surprised at some of the things she said.
She kept saying how dirty the bodies were, yet it must have still been in the dead of the Siberian winter, if anything they should have been had windswept, ice clean bodies. The photos taken of the SAR groups finding and digging up the frozen corpses, they all looked clean. My question is why would she clean the bodies and dress them and then watch them put into the zinc coffins for a flight to Sverdlovsk?
Was there some communication by the local doctor with some other chain of command representative that forced the local doctor to go back and perform actual autopsies with appointed onlookers, on the Dyatlov Pass hikers?

She is sure about number of the grouping and the females.

[mk]

Exactly: Why would she?

It seems to me that if we accept her statements as true, then either these bodies weren't the Dyatlov 9, or the autopsies are fabrications.

The autopsies describe the clothing that the bodies were wearing, piece by piece and layer by layer, then the external condition of the bodies, then the internal condition of the bodies. The problem is that Nurse Solter washed and dressed the bodies in clean clothes.  She specifically states that the bodies were in one piece, whole, so she didn't wash them after the autopsies.  And if the autopsies are plain and simple truth, she didn't wash them before, either.

The bodies were described in their frozen positions first.  If they were described from observing in person, then there would have to be a wait after that first series of observations while the bodies thawed and the clothing could be examined and carefully removed.  It MAY be that Prudkov wrote the descriptions of the clothing and external states of the bodies and then the internal examinations were done later, after they were washed.  That would mean that the autopsies were written in phases, and there was no indication of that in the case files that I can find, but perhaps it wasn't deemed important.

Even then, I see no reason to go out and purchase burial clothes & dress the corpses if they will just be going on to be autopsied.

But even if we overlook this problem, there are still several others:
-No where in the autopsies is there mention of a female with singed/burned hair or head, which Nurse Solter describes.
-She states that the second female was brought in a few days later; she rejects the idea that it was several weeks or months later.
-She washed the corpses and says that they were all whole.  If she did indeed wash the two Dyatlov females, there is no way on earth someone would wash the face of poor Lyuda and describe it as whole.  If one washes a body whose face is half missing, it's the missing face, not the dirt on the missing face that one remembers.

And yet we have the photos, so someone was missing a face.


ETA: Besides, when bodies are in the state of decomposition that the Rav 4 were in, you wouldn't be washing them at all or you'd "wash off" the skin and hair.

[Nigel Evans]

Well the rav4 would have been very dirty..
Just to add to the confusion, Zinaida's autopsy https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-127-134?rbid=17743 states :-
"on the head is a red wool hat tied at the chin with a bow. Under the hat is a blue knitted hat attached to the hair with a clip.".
"On the head is dark blond hair tied in two braids connected with two red silk ribbons.".

 

[sarapuk]

I think these few words sum it up here,  ''You know, she can be mistaken, her memory is not the same''. As people age its not unusual to forget things or mix things up. So unfortunately she can not be described as a reliable witness.  60 years since an Event like the Dyatlov Incident brings all sorts of problems. 

[Star man]

Whats interesting is that if she did accurately recall the events, then 90% of the dpi mystery is revealed, which is an interesting thing in itself.  But, it is just one person's account of events that happened a long time ago.  I actually think it is likely she is accurate.  It answers many questions.

Regards

Star man

[Nigel Evans]

My vote would be that there is sufficient correlation between the morgue photos and the autopsies that the latter are genuine. Also that the autopsies contain big surprises which are central to the mystery (e.g. Lyudmila's and Nicolai's fractures) adds to their authenticity. Lets remember that it was the autopsies of the ravine4 that drove a coach and horses through the initial coverup of death by freezing. Why fabricate something like that?


However i like the observations about being dirty and singed hair, the yuri's hands and forearms were black when discovered (as in the photos) but have been cleaned up in the morgue photos. Zinaida's hair might also have received some similar attention.

[mk]

So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?

[Star man]

My vote would be that there is sufficient correlation between the morgue photos and the autopsies that the latter are genuine. Also that the autopsies contain big surprises which are central to the mystery (e.g. Lyudmila's and Nicolai's fractures) adds to their authenticity. Lets remember that it was the autopsies of the ravine4 that drove a coach and horses through the initial coverup of death by freezing. Why fabricate something like that?


However i like the observations about being dirty and singed hair, the yuri's hands and forearms were black when discovered (as in the photos) but have been cleaned up in the morgue photos. Zinaida's hair might also have received some similar attention.

If Solter is right, I think it is more likely that Lyuda's hair and face were singed/burnt.

Regards

Star man

[Star man]

So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?

If Solter is correct in her account then I suspect there is missing info in the autopsy reports.

Regards

Star man

[sarapuk]

Whats interesting is that if she did accurately recall the events, then 90% of the dpi mystery is revealed, which is an interesting thing in itself.  But, it is just one person's account of events that happened a long time ago.  I actually think it is likely she is accurate.  It answers many questions.

Regards

Star man

Well I think that there is no reason to doubt that the Autopsies actually took place even if they left a lot to be desired. So the witness who has made some startling claims can not be considered as a reliable witness under the circumstances.

[sarapuk]

My vote would be that there is sufficient correlation between the morgue photos and the autopsies that the latter are genuine. Also that the autopsies contain big surprises which are central to the mystery (e.g. Lyudmila's and Nicolai's fractures) adds to their authenticity. Lets remember that it was the autopsies of the ravine4 that drove a coach and horses through the initial coverup of death by freezing. Why fabricate something like that?


However i like the observations about being dirty and singed hair, the yuri's hands and forearms were black when discovered (as in the photos) but have been cleaned up in the morgue photos. Zinaida's hair might also have received some similar attention.

As far as Iam aware we dont know exactly what the process was from the recovery of the bodies in situ up to the actual examination. Presumably at some point the bodies would have been cleaned  !  ?

[sarapuk]

So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?

Any ones guess. But the Autopsies took place thats for sure. And that witness can not be considered as a reliable witness.

[Nigel Evans]

We know from the case files that Zinaida was found "face in blood". Also she was wearing braided hair as described in the autopsy in photos whilst alive. So it seems probable that she's been cleaned up before the morgue photos (still frozen though) including her hair. So it's a reasonable assumption that the autopsy isn't being literal as to her appearance.
Thinking further there could an innocent explanation for singed hair - the stove.

[Nigel Evans]

My vote would be that there is sufficient correlation between the morgue photos and the autopsies that the latter are genuine. Also that the autopsies contain big surprises which are central to the mystery (e.g. Lyudmila's and Nicolai's fractures) adds to their authenticity. Lets remember that it was the autopsies of the ravine4 that drove a coach and horses through the initial coverup of death by freezing. Why fabricate something like that?


However i like the observations about being dirty and singed hair, the yuri's hands and forearms were black when discovered (as in the photos) but have been cleaned up in the morgue photos. Zinaida's hair might also have received some similar attention.

If Solter is right, I think it is more likely that Lyuda's hair and face were singed/burnt.

Regards

Star man

Lyudmila's face seems to be sporting a sun tan except for the chin. The autopsy describes her face as "yellow/brown". If you use the side of both breasts facing the camera as a reference you can see that the chin is her natural colour but the rest of the face is considerably darker. Imo she has a mild version of the skin darkening seen at the funerals of Zinaida and YuriD.

[Nigel Evans]

So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?

I'd have a lot more respect for the Solter interview if for instance they showed her the morgue photographs to help her memory instead of all this vagueness.

[Star man]

So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?

I'd have a lot more respect for the Solter interview if for instance they showed her the morgue photographs to help her memory instead of all this vagueness.

Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times.  One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives.  So how were the bodies formally identified?  I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies?  It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field?  Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found?  Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense.  Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy.  This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.

Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense.  But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.

Regards

Star man

[mk]

Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times.  One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives.  So how were the bodies formally identified?  I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies?  It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field?  Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found?  Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense.  Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy.  This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.

Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense.  But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.

Regards

Star man

So what about the bodies that were found not quite clean?  Not exactly dirty, but with traces of blood still evident.  For example, autopsy of Dyatlov states, "The lips are of bluish purple color and covered in clotted blood."  Slobodin's autopsy states, " On the end of the nose a part of the soft tissue is under a dry brown-cherry-red crust with a size of 1.5 x 1 cm. The lips are swollen. The mouth is closed. There is a trail of caked blood coming from the opening of the nose".  Several other autopsies mention things like that: nothing that would be called really dirty, but certainly something that ought to have been cleaned away if Nurse Solter had seen them first.

The autopsies themselves seem somewhat cursory, as though going through the basic procedure without really searching for anything.  Are you suggesting that the autopsies were "doctored" to some extent?

All of the autopsies state that rigor mortis had resolved--which is to be expected--so doesn't that mean that the description of the position of the person is based on their frozen position?  But they would have to wait until the body thawed in order to remove the clothing and examine it, so any autopsy must have been done in stages: examination and report of the position/state of the frozen body and another examination after it was thawed.  (Am I understanding this right?) Which means that it would have been easier for one person to do the "frozen examination" and another to do the "thawed examination". 

I'm wondering because it seems like a very tedious job to position the bodies down to the curl of the toes in the socks and hold them in that position while they freeze in place in order to fool the person doing the autopsy.  On the other hand, putting arms and legs into a basic position might be simpler and then just add to the autopsy report as needed.

Not really trying to make a point--just thinking through what would have been involved in an undertaking you suggest.  I can imagine someone doing that.  And putting the bodies in the ravine so that the would have time to decompose and hide evidence is a good idea.  And if you were dressing bodies, you might get some of the clothing on the wrong person, which makes it look like they traded on purpose.  It does seem rather extravagant to tear up clothing of one person and wrap it around parts of another person; it's not like that plays an important role in the "story".

I was reading the radiograms yesterday and was struck by Maslennikov's report (sent in a radiogram while he was on site conducting the search): The victims were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane without footwear, some without trouser and jackets. The direction of the hurricane is northeastern east, so all of them are on the same line from the discovered tent the farthest approximately two kilometers from the tent. In the sources of the stream flowing into Lozva, a fire is burning burned logs dead. The nearest neighbor Kolmogorov's head is broken tomorrow the survey will continue...  It just seems like a premature conclusion at that point.

Sulman responds by asking why the tent stayed put if the hurricane blew the hikers down the hill. 

In a later radiogram, Maslennikov gives basic theory we are all familiar with: In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00. They again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspia to the ravine ascended to the crest, and the Chamovs decided to break camp at this place, driven by a hurricane wind. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks of quilted jackets from one side stacked products with other shoes, here not all the blankets are all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top of the group the supper in the tent left the food and began to change clothes to take off the wet clothes of the shoes and put on a dry one. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to recover and he was sleeping. Jumped to the scream - were also demolished tent installed in the most dangerous place in the wind place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back meters from fifty since the tent was torn down, the lower ones could command her off to go into the woods, counting on the slope towards the XXXXXXXXXXXXX Auspya where the forest next to them they wanted to hide here can be found the place of their previous overnight but very stony and up to the forest 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire, they went back to look for clothes but were not dressed well enough and fell. Not enough and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this.

If we go with the theory that all the evidence was planted, I believe that Maslennikov was in on it.  He made sure the right bodies were found, and fed everyone the approved interpretation of the evidence.

[Star man]

Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times.  One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives.  So how were the bodies formally identified?  I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies?  It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field?  Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found?  Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense.  Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy.  This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.

Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense.  But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.

Regards

Star man

So what about the bodies that were found not quite clean?  Not exactly dirty, but with traces of blood still evident.  For example, autopsy of Dyatlov states, "The lips are of bluish purple color and covered in clotted blood."  Slobodin's autopsy states, " On the end of the nose a part of the soft tissue is under a dry brown-cherry-red crust with a size of 1.5 x 1 cm. The lips are swollen. The mouth is closed. There is a trail of caked blood coming from the opening of the nose".  Several other autopsies mention things like that: nothing that would be called really dirty, but certainly something that ought to have been cleaned away if Nurse Solter had seen them first.

The autopsies themselves seem somewhat cursory, as though going through the basic procedure without really searching for anything.  Are you suggesting that the autopsies were "doctored" to some extent?

All of the autopsies state that rigor mortis had resolved--which is to be expected--so doesn't that mean that the description of the position of the person is based on their frozen position?  But they would have to wait until the body thawed in order to remove the clothing and examine it, so any autopsy must have been done in stages: examination and report of the position/state of the frozen body and another examination after it was thawed.  (Am I understanding this right?) Which means that it would have been easier for one person to do the "frozen examination" and another to do the "thawed examination". 

I'm wondering because it seems like a very tedious job to position the bodies down to the curl of the toes in the socks and hold them in that position while they freeze in place in order to fool the person doing the autopsy.  On the other hand, putting arms and legs into a basic position might be simpler and then just add to the autopsy report as needed.

Not really trying to make a point--just thinking through what would have been involved in an undertaking you suggest.  I can imagine someone doing that.  And putting the bodies in the ravine so that the would have time to decompose and hide evidence is a good idea.  And if you were dressing bodies, you might get some of the clothing on the wrong person, which makes it look like they traded on purpose.  It does seem rather extravagant to tear up clothing of one person and wrap it around parts of another person; it's not like that plays an important role in the "story".

I was reading the radiograms yesterday and was struck by Maslennikov's report (sent in a radiogram while he was on site conducting the search): The victims were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane without footwear, some without trouser and jackets. The direction of the hurricane is northeastern east, so all of them are on the same line from the discovered tent the farthest approximately two kilometers from the tent. In the sources of the stream flowing into Lozva, a fire is burning burned logs dead. The nearest neighbor Kolmogorov's head is broken tomorrow the survey will continue...  It just seems like a premature conclusion at that point.

Sulman responds by asking why the tent stayed put if the hurricane blew the hikers down the hill. 

In a later radiogram, Maslennikov gives basic theory we are all familiar with: In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00. They again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspia to the ravine ascended to the crest, and the Chamovs decided to break camp at this place, driven by a hurricane wind. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks of quilted jackets from one side stacked products with other shoes, here not all the blankets are all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top of the group the supper in the tent left the food and began to change clothes to take off the wet clothes of the shoes and put on a dry one. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to recover and he was sleeping. Jumped to the scream - were also demolished tent installed in the most dangerous place in the wind place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back meters from fifty since the tent was torn down, the lower ones could command her off to go into the woods, counting on the slope towards the XXXXXXXXXXXXX Auspya where the forest next to them they wanted to hide here can be found the place of their previous overnight but very stony and up to the forest 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire, they went back to look for clothes but were not dressed well enough and fell. Not enough and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this.

If we go with the theory that all the evidence was planted, I believe that Maslennikov was in on it.  He made sure the right bodies were found, and fed everyone the approved interpretation of the evidence.

I have looked at many of the theories in a fair amount of detail and I try to look at each one objectively.  On this I am just speculating at the moment as it all hinges on Solters recollection of the events.  However, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense.  I had considered the possibility  that the whole scene had been fabricated previously, but thought the chance was low, because there are lots of little details that hang together, and it didn't seem likely that anyone would go to that level of detail.  But, it is possible that the people involved were professional scene creators, and in a way artists at what they do.

If Solter's account is correct, then Its possible that some of the details of the autopsies were not true?

There have always been things that have not made sense to me, like why the fire could not be kept going to sustain them, or why Yuri D climbed the cedar with severe frost bite on his hands and feet.  How the Yuris died of the cold while the fire was still hot enough to burn their legs, The more you think about it the more you realise, that none of it makes any sense.  Cutting the tent, leaving without adequate clothes,   pitching the tent in a really bad spot, away from the planned route.  Then there are the errors and obvious omissions.  The flashlight on 10 cm of snow at the tent.  The missing knife.  The position of the rav 4 bodies in relation to the so called den.  The lack of detailed forensic analysis of the foot prints.  Missing toxicology report.  The untidy way the boots were stored in the tent. The orderly way everything else is described in the tent, even though they have just cut the tent in panic and decended to their doom.

It is interesting that the case files state that there was no evidence of other people there, such as human or animal foot prints.  What if the opposite is true, and the only evidence of people there is from other people and none of the prints are from the Dyatlov group?  You travel there on skis, set up the tent, create the scene, air lift the bodies in by helicopter, plant the bodies, and then winch yourself up into the helicopters to leave the area?

Regards

Star man

[sarapuk]

We know from the case files that Zinaida was found "face in blood". Also she was wearing braided hair as described in the autopsy in photos whilst alive. So it seems probable that she's been cleaned up before the morgue photos (still frozen though) including her hair. So it's a reasonable assumption that the autopsy isn't being literal as to her appearance.
Thinking further there could an innocent explanation for singed hair - the stove.

I guess the following is a similar procedure that has always been taken in such cases  !  ? [[  Once the evidence is all collected, the body is removed from the bag or sheet and undressed, and the wounds are examined. This is done before the body is cleaned up.
After the body is cleaned, the body is weighed and measured before being placed on the autopsy table  ]]

[sarapuk]

My vote would be that there is sufficient correlation between the morgue photos and the autopsies that the latter are genuine. Also that the autopsies contain big surprises which are central to the mystery (e.g. Lyudmila's and Nicolai's fractures) adds to their authenticity. Lets remember that it was the autopsies of the ravine4 that drove a coach and horses through the initial coverup of death by freezing. Why fabricate something like that?


However i like the observations about being dirty and singed hair, the yuri's hands and forearms were black when discovered (as in the photos) but have been cleaned up in the morgue photos. Zinaida's hair might also have received some similar attention.

If Solter is right, I think it is more likely that Lyuda's hair and face were singed/burnt.

Regards

Star man

Lyudmila's face seems to be sporting a sun tan except for the chin. The autopsy describes her face as "yellow/brown". If you use the side of both breasts facing the camera as a reference you can see that the chin is her natural colour but the rest of the face is considerably darker. Imo she has a mild version of the skin darkening seen at the funerals of Zinaida and YuriD.

And this is hardly likely to be due to Decomposition.

[sarapuk]

So is it possible for both the autopsies/photos and Nurse Solter to be unmistaken?

I'd have a lot more respect for the Solter interview if for instance they showed her the morgue photographs to help her memory instead of all this vagueness.

Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times.  One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives.  So how were the bodies formally identified?  I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies?  It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field?  Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found?  Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense.  Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy.  This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.

Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense.  But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.

Regards

Star man

Which adds to the unreliableness of the Witness. As you say ; It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  But cleaning up bodies is usually done before the actual Autopsy anyway.  1959 is not that long ago re Medicine Procedures.

[sarapuk]

Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times.  One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives.  So how were the bodies formally identified?  I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies?  It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field?  Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found?  Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense.  Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy.  This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.

Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense.  But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.

Regards

Star man

So what about the bodies that were found not quite clean?  Not exactly dirty, but with traces of blood still evident.  For example, autopsy of Dyatlov states, "The lips are of bluish purple color and covered in clotted blood."  Slobodin's autopsy states, " On the end of the nose a part of the soft tissue is under a dry brown-cherry-red crust with a size of 1.5 x 1 cm. The lips are swollen. The mouth is closed. There is a trail of caked blood coming from the opening of the nose".  Several other autopsies mention things like that: nothing that would be called really dirty, but certainly something that ought to have been cleaned away if Nurse Solter had seen them first.

The autopsies themselves seem somewhat cursory, as though going through the basic procedure without really searching for anything.  Are you suggesting that the autopsies were "doctored" to some extent?

All of the autopsies state that rigor mortis had resolved--which is to be expected--so doesn't that mean that the description of the position of the person is based on their frozen position?  But they would have to wait until the body thawed in order to remove the clothing and examine it, so any autopsy must have been done in stages: examination and report of the position/state of the frozen body and another examination after it was thawed.  (Am I understanding this right?) Which means that it would have been easier for one person to do the "frozen examination" and another to do the "thawed examination". 

I'm wondering because it seems like a very tedious job to position the bodies down to the curl of the toes in the socks and hold them in that position while they freeze in place in order to fool the person doing the autopsy.  On the other hand, putting arms and legs into a basic position might be simpler and then just add to the autopsy report as needed.

Not really trying to make a point--just thinking through what would have been involved in an undertaking you suggest.  I can imagine someone doing that.  And putting the bodies in the ravine so that the would have time to decompose and hide evidence is a good idea.  And if you were dressing bodies, you might get some of the clothing on the wrong person, which makes it look like they traded on purpose.  It does seem rather extravagant to tear up clothing of one person and wrap it around parts of another person; it's not like that plays an important role in the "story".

I was reading the radiograms yesterday and was struck by Maslennikov's report (sent in a radiogram while he was on site conducting the search): The victims were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane without footwear, some without trouser and jackets. The direction of the hurricane is northeastern east, so all of them are on the same line from the discovered tent the farthest approximately two kilometers from the tent. In the sources of the stream flowing into Lozva, a fire is burning burned logs dead. The nearest neighbor Kolmogorov's head is broken tomorrow the survey will continue...  It just seems like a premature conclusion at that point.

Sulman responds by asking why the tent stayed put if the hurricane blew the hikers down the hill. 

In a later radiogram, Maslennikov gives basic theory we are all familiar with: In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00. They again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspia to the ravine ascended to the crest, and the Chamovs decided to break camp at this place, driven by a hurricane wind. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks of quilted jackets from one side stacked products with other shoes, here not all the blankets are all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top of the group the supper in the tent left the food and began to change clothes to take off the wet clothes of the shoes and put on a dry one. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to recover and he was sleeping. Jumped to the scream - were also demolished tent installed in the most dangerous place in the wind place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back meters from fifty since the tent was torn down, the lower ones could command her off to go into the woods, counting on the slope towards the XXXXXXXXXXXXX Auspya where the forest next to them they wanted to hide here can be found the place of their previous overnight but very stony and up to the forest 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire, they went back to look for clothes but were not dressed well enough and fell. Not enough and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this.

If we go with the theory that all the evidence was planted, I believe that Maslennikov was in on it.  He made sure the right bodies were found, and fed everyone the approved interpretation of the evidence.

But you are turning an Autopsy Report into a potential Conspiracy Theory  !  ?  A theory with absolutely no Evidence.

[sarapuk]

Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times.  One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives.  So how were the bodies formally identified?  I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies?  It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field?  Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found?  Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense.  Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy.  This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.

Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense.  But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.

Regards

Star man

So what about the bodies that were found not quite clean?  Not exactly dirty, but with traces of blood still evident.  For example, autopsy of Dyatlov states, "The lips are of bluish purple color and covered in clotted blood."  Slobodin's autopsy states, " On the end of the nose a part of the soft tissue is under a dry brown-cherry-red crust with a size of 1.5 x 1 cm. The lips are swollen. The mouth is closed. There is a trail of caked blood coming from the opening of the nose".  Several other autopsies mention things like that: nothing that would be called really dirty, but certainly something that ought to have been cleaned away if Nurse Solter had seen them first.

The autopsies themselves seem somewhat cursory, as though going through the basic procedure without really searching for anything.  Are you suggesting that the autopsies were "doctored" to some extent?

All of the autopsies state that rigor mortis had resolved--which is to be expected--so doesn't that mean that the description of the position of the person is based on their frozen position?  But they would have to wait until the body thawed in order to remove the clothing and examine it, so any autopsy must have been done in stages: examination and report of the position/state of the frozen body and another examination after it was thawed.  (Am I understanding this right?) Which means that it would have been easier for one person to do the "frozen examination" and another to do the "thawed examination". 

I'm wondering because it seems like a very tedious job to position the bodies down to the curl of the toes in the socks and hold them in that position while they freeze in place in order to fool the person doing the autopsy.  On the other hand, putting arms and legs into a basic position might be simpler and then just add to the autopsy report as needed.

Not really trying to make a point--just thinking through what would have been involved in an undertaking you suggest.  I can imagine someone doing that.  And putting the bodies in the ravine so that the would have time to decompose and hide evidence is a good idea.  And if you were dressing bodies, you might get some of the clothing on the wrong person, which makes it look like they traded on purpose.  It does seem rather extravagant to tear up clothing of one person and wrap it around parts of another person; it's not like that plays an important role in the "story".

I was reading the radiograms yesterday and was struck by Maslennikov's report (sent in a radiogram while he was on site conducting the search): The victims were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane without footwear, some without trouser and jackets. The direction of the hurricane is northeastern east, so all of them are on the same line from the discovered tent the farthest approximately two kilometers from the tent. In the sources of the stream flowing into Lozva, a fire is burning burned logs dead. The nearest neighbor Kolmogorov's head is broken tomorrow the survey will continue...  It just seems like a premature conclusion at that point.

Sulman responds by asking why the tent stayed put if the hurricane blew the hikers down the hill. 

In a later radiogram, Maslennikov gives basic theory we are all familiar with: In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00. They again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspia to the ravine ascended to the crest, and the Chamovs decided to break camp at this place, driven by a hurricane wind. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks of quilted jackets from one side stacked products with other shoes, here not all the blankets are all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top of the group the supper in the tent left the food and began to change clothes to take off the wet clothes of the shoes and put on a dry one. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to recover and he was sleeping. Jumped to the scream - were also demolished tent installed in the most dangerous place in the wind place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back meters from fifty since the tent was torn down, the lower ones could command her off to go into the woods, counting on the slope towards the XXXXXXXXXXXXX Auspya where the forest next to them they wanted to hide here can be found the place of their previous overnight but very stony and up to the forest 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire, they went back to look for clothes but were not dressed well enough and fell. Not enough and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this.

If we go with the theory that all the evidence was planted, I believe that Maslennikov was in on it.  He made sure the right bodies were found, and fed everyone the approved interpretation of the evidence.

I have looked at many of the theories in a fair amount of detail and I try to look at each one objectively.  On this I am just speculating at the moment as it all hinges on Solters recollection of the events.  However, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense.  I had considered the possibility  that the whole scene had been fabricated previously, but thought the chance was low, because there are lots of little details that hang together, and it didn't seem likely that anyone would go to that level of detail.  But, it is possible that the people involved were professional scene creators, and in a way artists at what they do.

If Solter's account is correct, then Its possible that some of the details of the autopsies were not true?

There have always been things that have not made sense to me, like why the fire could not be kept going to sustain them, or why Yuri D climbed the cedar with severe frost bite on his hands and feet.  How the Yuris died of the cold while the fire was still hot enough to burn their legs, The more you think about it the more you realise, that none of it makes any sense.  Cutting the tent, leaving without adequate clothes,   pitching the tent in a really bad spot, away from the planned route.  Then there are the errors and obvious omissions.  The flashlight on 10 cm of snow at the tent.  The missing knife.  The position of the rav 4 bodies in relation to the so called den.  The lack of detailed forensic analysis of the foot prints.  Missing toxicology report.  The untidy way the boots were stored in the tent. The orderly way everything else is described in the tent, even though they have just cut the tent in panic and decended to their doom.

It is interesting that the case files state that there was no evidence of other people there, such as human or animal foot prints.  What if the opposite is true, and the only evidence of people there is from other people and none of the prints are from the Dyatlov group?  You travel there on skis, set up the tent, create the scene, air lift the bodies in by helicopter, plant the bodies, and then winch yourself up into the helicopters to leave the area?

Regards

Star man

But this also is going down the Conspiracy Theory road. A road strewn with what Evidence we have. The Missing Evidence has to be taken into account.

[Star man]

Solter seems quite confident in her words, and repeats things several times.  One thing that strikes me is that she says there were no relatives.  So how were the bodies formally identified?  I would have thought that it is usual to ask close relatives to formerly identify the bodies?  It would be very unusual, to remove clothing, clean up bodies, dress them in new clothes and place them in coffins for immediate burial before even an autopsy is done?  Unless of course they weren't flown back to the city for burial, and they were taken somewhere else from the air field?  Somewhere, where their clothes were replaced again, but this time with some clothes similar to what they were wearing when they found?  Now one could take them to a different place, away from the hikers planned route and fabricate a new scene that is bizarre and makes no sense.  Then you can find the bodies again, and this time formerly identify them and do an autopsy.  This way you can remove any evidence of what actually happened, but still have the bodies of 9 of your finest young citizens for the families to say their goodbye to and pay respects.

Thing is fabricating a new scene - even if you are really good is likely to result in some mistakes, as well as a few things that might not make any sense.  But it would probably be enough to keep people guessing for over 60 years.

Regards

Star man

So what about the bodies that were found not quite clean?  Not exactly dirty, but with traces of blood still evident.  For example, autopsy of Dyatlov states, "The lips are of bluish purple color and covered in clotted blood."  Slobodin's autopsy states, " On the end of the nose a part of the soft tissue is under a dry brown-cherry-red crust with a size of 1.5 x 1 cm. The lips are swollen. The mouth is closed. There is a trail of caked blood coming from the opening of the nose".  Several other autopsies mention things like that: nothing that would be called really dirty, but certainly something that ought to have been cleaned away if Nurse Solter had seen them first.

The autopsies themselves seem somewhat cursory, as though going through the basic procedure without really searching for anything.  Are you suggesting that the autopsies were "doctored" to some extent?

All of the autopsies state that rigor mortis had resolved--which is to be expected--so doesn't that mean that the description of the position of the person is based on their frozen position?  But they would have to wait until the body thawed in order to remove the clothing and examine it, so any autopsy must have been done in stages: examination and report of the position/state of the frozen body and another examination after it was thawed.  (Am I understanding this right?) Which means that it would have been easier for one person to do the "frozen examination" and another to do the "thawed examination". 

I'm wondering because it seems like a very tedious job to position the bodies down to the curl of the toes in the socks and hold them in that position while they freeze in place in order to fool the person doing the autopsy.  On the other hand, putting arms and legs into a basic position might be simpler and then just add to the autopsy report as needed.

Not really trying to make a point--just thinking through what would have been involved in an undertaking you suggest.  I can imagine someone doing that.  And putting the bodies in the ravine so that the would have time to decompose and hide evidence is a good idea.  And if you were dressing bodies, you might get some of the clothing on the wrong person, which makes it look like they traded on purpose.  It does seem rather extravagant to tear up clothing of one person and wrap it around parts of another person; it's not like that plays an important role in the "story".

I was reading the radiograms yesterday and was struck by Maslennikov's report (sent in a radiogram while he was on site conducting the search): The victims were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane without footwear, some without trouser and jackets. The direction of the hurricane is northeastern east, so all of them are on the same line from the discovered tent the farthest approximately two kilometers from the tent. In the sources of the stream flowing into Lozva, a fire is burning burned logs dead. The nearest neighbor Kolmogorov's head is broken tomorrow the survey will continue...  It just seems like a premature conclusion at that point.

Sulman responds by asking why the tent stayed put if the hurricane blew the hikers down the hill. 

In a later radiogram, Maslennikov gives basic theory we are all familiar with: In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00. They again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspia to the ravine ascended to the crest, and the Chamovs decided to break camp at this place, driven by a hurricane wind. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks of quilted jackets from one side stacked products with other shoes, here not all the blankets are all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top of the group the supper in the tent left the food and began to change clothes to take off the wet clothes of the shoes and put on a dry one. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to recover and he was sleeping. Jumped to the scream - were also demolished tent installed in the most dangerous place in the wind place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back meters from fifty since the tent was torn down, the lower ones could command her off to go into the woods, counting on the slope towards the XXXXXXXXXXXXX Auspya where the forest next to them they wanted to hide here can be found the place of their previous overnight but very stony and up to the forest 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire, they went back to look for clothes but were not dressed well enough and fell. Not enough and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this.

If we go with the theory that all the evidence was planted, I believe that Maslennikov was in on it.  He made sure the right bodies were found, and fed everyone the approved interpretation of the evidence.

I have looked at many of the theories in a fair amount of detail and I try to look at each one objectively.  On this I am just speculating at the moment as it all hinges on Solters recollection of the events.  However, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense.  I had considered the possibility  that the whole scene had been fabricated previously, but thought the chance was low, because there are lots of little details that hang together, and it didn't seem likely that anyone would go to that level of detail.  But, it is possible that the people involved were professional scene creators, and in a way artists at what they do.

If Solter's account is correct, then Its possible that some of the details of the autopsies were not true?

There have always been things that have not made sense to me, like why the fire could not be kept going to sustain them, or why Yuri D climbed the cedar with severe frost bite on his hands and feet.  How the Yuris died of the cold while the fire was still hot enough to burn their legs, The more you think about it the more you realise, that none of it makes any sense.  Cutting the tent, leaving without adequate clothes,   pitching the tent in a really bad spot, away from the planned route.  Then there are the errors and obvious omissions.  The flashlight on 10 cm of snow at the tent.  The missing knife.  The position of the rav 4 bodies in relation to the so called den.  The lack of detailed forensic analysis of the foot prints.  Missing toxicology report.  The untidy way the boots were stored in the tent. The orderly way everything else is described in the tent, even though they have just cut the tent in panic and decended to their doom.

It is interesting that the case files state that there was no evidence of other people there, such as human or animal foot prints.  What if the opposite is true, and the only evidence of people there is from other people and none of the prints are from the Dyatlov group?  You travel there on skis, set up the tent, create the scene, air lift the bodies in by helicopter, plant the bodies, and then winch yourself up into the helicopters to leave the area?

Regards

Star man

But this also is going down the Conspiracy Theory road. A road strewn with what Evidence we have. The Missing Evidence has to be taken into account.

As stated above, it is more speculation based on Solters witness statement.  Her statement should be considered.   Most conspiracy theories have little or no basis to them, and are fabrications of  the mind.  Often, fabrications of people with problems.   If Solters statement is accurate, and there is additional evidence out there then it could reveal what really happened.  If there is no other evidence then all you can do is speculate this scenario as a possibility.

Regards

Star man

[mk]

But you are turning an Autopsy Report into a potential Conspiracy Theory  !  ?  A theory with absolutely no Evidence.

I suppose you could put it that way if you want to. Except that I feel like some of the things you dismiss offhand might actually be considered Evidence.

Do you never engage in “what if” in order to sort through ideas? It’s like trying on clothes to see whether they fit and go together into a good outfit. Just because you put it on in your bedroom doesn’t mean you think it looks great and will wear it to work tomorrow.

Star Man proposed an idea and acknowledged that it might be wrong. I basically said, “ok, pretend for a minute that that’s right. What would that mean for other information we have?” And then I made speculative comments based on other things I’d read.

Does this bother you?

[sarapuk]

But you are turning an Autopsy Report into a potential Conspiracy Theory  !  ?  A theory with absolutely no Evidence.

I suppose you could put it that way if you want to. Except that I feel like some of the things you dismiss offhand might actually be considered Evidence.

Do you never engage in “what if” in order to sort through ideas? It’s like trying on clothes to see whether they fit and go together into a good outfit. Just because you put it on in your bedroom doesn’t mean you think it looks great and will wear it to work tomorrow.

Star Man proposed an idea and acknowledged that it might be wrong. I basically said, “ok, pretend for a minute that that’s right. What would that mean for other information we have?” And then I made speculative comments based on other things I’d read.

Does this bother you?

Well I kind of see your point. I guess we all have different ways of working. Its just that there are so many potential twists and turns in this particular mystery.  Just been discussing something elsewhere in this Forum re the Route Itinerary. The Dyatlov Route Itinerary like many such expedition Itinerarys obviously didnt stick completely to plan. But its useful nonetheless.

[Star man]

But you are turning an Autopsy Report into a potential Conspiracy Theory  !  ?  A theory with absolutely no Evidence.

I suppose you could put it that way if you want to. Except that I feel like some of the things you dismiss offhand might actually be considered Evidence.

Do you never engage in “what if” in order to sort through ideas? It’s like trying on clothes to see whether they fit and go together into a good outfit. Just because you put it on in your bedroom doesn’t mean you think it looks great and will wear it to work tomorrow.

Star Man proposed an idea and acknowledged that it might be wrong. I basically said, “ok, pretend for a minute that that’s right. What would that mean for other information we have?” And then I made speculative comments based on other things I’d read.

Does this bother you?

I agree with your analogy mk.  Sorting through ideas and presenting them to a group is one way of testing them.  A person could speculate different ideas and never present them, until they believe they have the solution.  But, that is not the quickest way to solving any problem.  Progress is often made through trial and error, and bouncing ideas between people.  But any idea has to be backed up by evidence in the end, or otherwise it is just an unsubstantiated hypothesis.

Also, if nobody presented their ideas and thoughts (right or wrong) there would not be much of a forum here to discuss the dpi.

 On conspiracies- Conspiracy theories can be very damaging imo.  I don't like them, or the term.  Most of them are just misinformation and fake news.

Regards

Star man

[Star man]

But you are turning an Autopsy Report into a potential Conspiracy Theory  !  ?  A theory with absolutely no Evidence.

I suppose you could put it that way if you want to. Except that I feel like some of the things you dismiss offhand might actually be considered Evidence.

Do you never engage in “what if” in order to sort through ideas? It’s like trying on clothes to see whether they fit and go together into a good outfit. Just because you put it on in your bedroom doesn’t mean you think it looks great and will wear it to work tomorrow.

Star Man proposed an idea and acknowledged that it might be wrong. I basically said, “ok, pretend for a minute that that’s right. What would that mean for other information we have?” And then I made speculative comments based on other things I’d read.

Does this bother you?

Well I kind of see your point. I guess we all have different ways of working. Its just that there are so many potential twists and turns in this particular mystery.  Just been discussing something elsewhere in this Forum re the Route Itinerary. The Dyatlov Route Itinerary like many such expedition Itinerarys obviously didnt stick completely to plan. But its useful nonetheless.

There are many possibilities and variables DB.  But only one truth.  You are right though .  Evidence is needed to find the truth and solve the mystery.
Regards

Star man