Why they abandon tent, clothes and objects ?

[anganontaolo]

Hello,

Experienced hiker can not leave tent with so lite clothes and walked by foot while they have ski. They abandoned valuable items such cameras and survival objects in the tent. Are they really skilled for such adventures.

Thanks

[Игорь Б.]

The unbearable stench forced them to leave their tent and clothes.

https://youtu.be/H-w1P549QTw?t=1
https://youtu.be/TQvu0-juKjk?t=813

[Ziljoe]

Hi Igor b.

I think you have a very strong case. How are you finding other people's reaction to your theory?

[anganontaolo]

The unbearable stench forced them to leave their tent and clothes.

https://youtu.be/H-w1P549QTw?t=1
https://youtu.be/TQvu0-juKjk?t=813

No matter if the force was very great, these toutists should be vigilant as they were experienced.
They were on a mountain where the wind blows very strongly (initially this place was not planned in advance). Their tent had to be attached to two trees but not with a pair of skis. In addition, they did not use their stove so it was very cold in this tent. So why haven't they already put warm clothes in this tent? Warm clothes should be near them where they sleep.
The risk was very great on this mountain and essential items should be ready if ever a problem arises: clothes, flashlight, ax, knife, etc ...
Have they ever thought of attacks and getting ready to defend themselves against it? or else they believed that indeed there is no crime in paradise (socialist paradise) as Stalin said.

[Игорь Б.]

Hi Igor B.

I think you have a very strong case. How are you finding other people's reaction to your theory?

Обычно нет никакой реакции. Отзывов единицы:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=107609

Я думаю это потому, что в версии уже нечего обсуждать. Всё или почти всё обсуждено в "Ответах на все вопросы...". И если у кого-то возникают какие-то вопросы это значит, что он не читал "Ответы на все вопросы...".

Например, многие думают, что происшествие случилось вечером или ночью.
Нет, оно случилось днём и это доказано.

Или что в момент происшествия было холодно.
Нет, было тепло, около нуля градусов и это тоже доказано.

Или зачем Кривонищенко откусил кожу с руки.
Это известное явление при замерзании.

В этом происшествии нет ничего таинственного или необъяснимого. Только недостаток информированности.

[Investigator]

I would like to know how warm it was in that tent, at least before it got torn open, if that is what happened.  Apparently, they were about to go to sleep or were slepping/trying to sleep when something happened that led to them deciding to secure the tent and go down to the tree line to start a fire, so it seems unlikely it was so cold that it was clearly dangerous, or else they would not have prepared to sleep (7 of the blankets were used, while two were not, apparently because the two who were better dressed were on some sort of guard duty).  I don't understand why a reconstruction of the incident has not been attempted yet, despite all the time, effort, and money that has been devoted to it by those with adequate resources.

[Manti]

A reconstruction would be useful, but what we know is they carried tent on top of their backpack, so the tent itself is ambient temperature when set up, and that they have not set up heating that night, so temperature in the tent will be the same as outside, plus or minus a few degrees. Yes it can be even colder, if the moisture from 9 people breathing condenses on the canvas and then evaporates in the wind, which produces a slight cooling effect.

Experienced hiker can not leave tent with so lite clothes and walked by foot while they have ski.

Their skis were under the tent, so they can't use those.

Я думаю это потому, что в версии уже нечего обсуждать. Всё или почти всё обсуждено в "Ответах на все вопросы...". И если у кого-то возникают какие-то вопросы это значит, что он не читал "Ответы на все вопросы...".

Could you please post the link to the "Answers to every question"? I haven't read this before but I am very curious

[Игорь Б.]

Could you please post the link to the "Answers

Ссылка в подписи под каждым моим сообщением.

[Manti]

Oh oops. 
Thank you!

[anganontaolo]

Their skis were under the tent, so they can't use those.

OK. But when the tent has become unusable, you have to take your skis back. But not only the skis but also take other objects. Even the torn tent can help.
None of them thought of taking a bag and putting something in it.
Who among the tourists had the idea of ​​having the minimum of organization and preparation to flee because there are always threats: fire, animals, wind, rescue someone.

Before sleeping you put something next to you at the case or something happens. Your reflex is to take this object in case of problem.

Even if they left this tent during the day, the reflex still remains the same. If they had any activities to do, they should take items related to that activity with them, including warm clothes. And you don't leave a tent that contains important items alone, so a few would have to stay to stand guard. Also, the reflex is to separate into two groups to minimize losses in the event of an accident.

[Ziljoe]

Igor B basically answers every question, from hand injuries to skull fractures, burns, time and weather conditions etc,  he notes the sloppiness of the investigation and the examination of the bodies( possibly due to it being a weekend and banquet going on) . He also shows a number of examples or experiments to many of our questions. It's worth a read and I have Google translate so I don't find it a problem.

If I understand him correctly, much of the evidence/ investigation was just poorly done. It's impossible for us to know the thoughts of those investigating at the time. It may have be a common thing for people to die in the cold or go missing.

The Dyatlov pass along with a couple of other mysterious group deaths have been brought to our attention by the media because these can't be explained easily but there may be many examples of groups of people dying out in the cold , just they had explanations so no mystery.

My point is, during the time of the investigation , everyone involved might of thought it's just one of those things that happens. It was an accident , they weren't investigating it from a forensic point of view.

Anyway I think Igor B work is worth a look,if you   read it with an open mind , you may find a new perspective.

Teddy's and Igor P book arrive tomorrow ,so I shall jump into that with an open mind, now that I have the time. For me it will be interesting to compare with Igor B.


 

This is a translation to Englishof what Igor B said Futher up this thread.

I think this is because the version has nothing to discuss. Everything or almost everything is discussed in "Answers to all questions ...". And if someone has any questions, it means that he has not read "Answers to all questions ...".

For example, many people think that the incident happened in the evening or at night.
No, it happened during the day and it has been proven.

Or that it was cold at the time of the incident.
No, it was warm, about zero degrees, and this is also proven.

Or why did Krivonischenko bite off the skin from his hand?
This is a known phenomenon when freezing.

There is nothing mysterious or inexplicable about this incident. Only a lack of awareness.

[anganontaolo]

This is a translation to Englishof what Igor B said Futher up this thread.

Here we speak in english, we do not have to go elsewhere to read in russian. If his job is so good he can come here and share it to all. There is online translator.

[Ziljoe]

This is a translation to Englishof what Igor B said Futher up this thread.

Here we speak in english, we do not have to go elsewhere to read in russian. If his job is so good he can come here and share it to all. There is online translator.

Hi anganontaolo,

I think it's because there's a lot of information with links. It would take considerable time to go back and forth translating every question, photo, research, quotes etc.

With regards to some of your questions about not taking stuff out of the tent is a good point.

I do think they were prepared and had done several other hikes in previous years, so had experience. I don't think they had much to fear from being attacked by anyone or bears . There is talk about 1 or 2 being on night duty but I think this would be to watch the wood stove when being used( not go out or cause a fire) and/or perhaps snow build up on the tent.

I'm not sure which theory you go with but as for explanations to why they left they way they did,  is the possibility of a wolverine using its spray. It is one of the explanations why they cut their way out and left the contaminated gear/clothes.

There is also the explanation that the tent was placed there by others and an accident happened in the forest area and much of what was found was actually staged .

What do you think might have happened?

[Manti]

So I have read the thread linked in Igor B.'s forum signature. Lots of good information there, some applicable not just to the wolverine theory.

I don't see any major flaw in the wolverine story. It requires an unlikely sequence of events... but that doesn't mean it's not viable.

New information for me:

• the tent's entrance was found buttoned up
• Semyon and Krivo, and possibly Tibo, weren't wearing coats, instead, they were covered with them like a blanket
• Semyon was found lying on his injured side, which is unlikely if he was conscious after the injury and could move
• the "flooring" made out of fir branches was right on top of the stream
• the dilated pupils of the hikers.. which is not expected in sober hypothermia victims
• that the fire at the cedar was to the east of the tree trunk, that is: downwind
• various animal tracks found in 2013 and 2015 expeditions to the pass, i don't know if these were identified on that forum, maybe i missed it (translator software isn't 100% when translating images)
• how high the cedar's position is, on the other side of of the slope of the lozva tributary's valley.. this is indicated by a signal rocket in one of the videos
• that Ortyukov described a yellow substance that transferred to his hand when he touched the "ravine 4"
• also one more I forgot, that it must have been 0C or close to it when they walked down to the forest, for the characteristic "column" footprints to form and last. if these form in cold, dry snow, they don't last more than a few days.
• and another, is that the incident happened around noon or early afternoon, not at night, based on the light conditions in the last photos. i don't know how this adds up with the flashlight that was found by the second(?) rocky ridge, which they must have dropped on the way down..

[anganontaolo]

Hi,

The topic is just a constation that tourists did not have a right behaviore for someone who are in hostile environnement. When you are alone in hostile place you take care of your items because they can save your life or they are so valuable for you. Even a photo can help you to survive.

What do you think might have happened?

I also think for a great force. An animal or humans. Suddenly, the threat came. May be after the tent was set and they start to change their clothes inside.

[Ziljoe]

[quote author=anganontaolo link=topic=978.msg16453#msg16453 date=162851


I also think for a great force. An animal or humans. Suddenly, the threat came. May be just after the tent was set and they change their clothes inside.
[/quote]

Igor B's theory that it was the wolverine animal. His theory explains a lot of questions. The concept is that the wolverine got into the tent and quite possibly, as you suggest, just when they were changing their clothes and sorting things out in the tent. The wolverine sprayed its chemical ,made the tent environment unbearable and thus ,they cut their way out. Discarding their equipment as they stood outside the tent. He also suggested there was a warm weather front at that time and the temperature was close to zero and daylight. He suggested this because of the raised footprints that lasted 3 weeks amougest other things. They need special conditions to exist and last that length of time.

He also mentions the reaction of the searchers dogs that came by helicopter. Apparently they did not want to get off the helicopter and when they were dragged off and on to the ground , they put their tails under their body and acted strangely. He is implying that the dogs could smell the remains of the wolverine odor.

The rest of the injuries are explained in detail. The first 5 being found died of the cold and the last 4 from a collapse of heavy snow in a snow cave. As Manti highlighted,Igor b suggests they were using the coats as blankets in the snow cave, he evidences this by a number of examples. The impact of the snow collapse caused broken ribs and skull fracture. It's all very plausible. 

If it was daylight and the temperature was close to zero , they may have thought to go to trees and the ravine to try and wash. Apparently if the spray is in the eyes it stings and water is of little help to get rid of the smell. Then the cold front came and things changed for the worse.

And thinking out loud , I now wonder if it was fading light , they actually laid the torch on the slope as an indicator to get back hoping the smell would have faded.

Obviously the evacuation of the tent and not taking other equipment ,  all revolves around the chemical spray being utterly unbearable.

 

[CR3012]

They were made to abandon.
Nobody in their sane mind would abandon the stuff, food, equipment, skis and walk down the slope for 2 miles.
Even if there were a thousand wolverines I'm not buying it.
It's either humans or something very creepy because it seems to me that the ravine team were dropped

[Manti]

I think something that Igor B's theory highlights is that all you need to really explain is why they abandoned the tent and seemingly essential equipment in there.

Once that is explained, everything else falls into place.

Maybe the weakest part of this for me is the same as with the book... how did Zina, Rustem, and Igor end up freezing on the slope? Why would they chose to return to the tent instead of maintaining the fire near the cedar, or starting another one in a place more protected from the wind? They had everything  needed for a fire there.

[CR3012]

There was something/someone at the tent that prevented them to do it earlier.

[CR3012]

The search dogs "as big a lions" were refusing to leave the helicopter, and seriously afraid of something.

[CR3012]

My theory is that there was something that scared the **** out of all of them before they dared to go back.
I did spend a night staring in the darkness a month ago in the woods waiting for something, alone it's weird but if I had 8 more people next to me nothing would make me worry

[Ziljoe]

They were made to abandon.
Nobody in their sane mind would abandon the stuff, food, equipment, skis and walk down the slope for 2 miles.
Even if there were a thousand wolverines I'm not buying it.
It's either humans or something very creepy because it seems to me that the ravine team were dropped

That is the big question..... Why did they leave the tent , 1 mile or 100 miles without their equipment. The wolverine spray is like tear gas by riot police using gas. 2 wolverine is enough.

Teddy's explanation/ theory is different as it her version the tent was never set up where it was found.

My theory is that there was something that scared the **** out of all of them before they dared to go back.
I did spend a night staring in the darkness a month ago in the woods waiting for something, alone it's weird but if I had 8 more people next to me nothing would make me worry

I've spent many a night being spooked on my own in a tent. That's just my imagination, just takes a sheep to step on a twig or rub the tent but I know if I put my head under the covers I'll be ok....

I think something that Igor B's theory highlights is that all you need to really explain is why they abandoned the tent and seemingly essential equipment in there.

Once that is explained, everything else falls into place.

Maybe the weakest part of this for me is the same as with the book... how did Zina, Rustem, and Igor end up freezing on the slope? Why would they chose to return to the tent instead of maintaining the fire near the cedar, or starting another one in a place more protected from the wind? They had everything  needed for a fire there.

I agree with this Manti. They should have been able to get enough equipment/ clothing to survive. Also if understand what I've read so far , it's an incredible tight window for the people to stage the scene. A day? The outsiders were against the clock and I would of assumed there would be much more foot prints with the amount of activity . It only leaves a couple of days , if not 24 hours for things to be covered by snowfall etc. I'll need to read it again as I may have missed something. I think I read that Dyatlov was last to be found, so his boots were removed to show that it was hypothermia. I don't think wearing boots saves one from hypothermia.

Also the plan to put the cache/ store there for the return journey goes against my intuition. What if on their return they couldn't find the store. Why would you decanter provisions on the side of an exposed slope. On return journey the group would still want hit the tree line for wood and shelter. It would be easier to make the cache at a point where you wanted to stop and camp. Perhaps even preparing the location with ready chopped wood etc. If the cache was on the mountainside you have to stop. Unpack gear, repack etc . Why waste the time?

[anganontaolo]

if I had 8 more people next to me nothing would make me worry

Alone, we are afraid and we die easily. Yes the resistance capacity and the chance of survival increase if you are 9.


In the event that the tent was actually set up by the tourists on this ridge and they really stayed there.
At the start of the tragedy everything was very calm. The tourists were confident and did not yet feel that their lives were threatened so they left the area peacefully with the hope of returning. They haven't prepared anything yet. The stove had not yet been installed and they were resting and changing their clothes. Their personal effects were scattered and messed up without a precise order of storage. Probably the weather was not that cold and it was daylight.
Animals or other people had come to this tent. The approaching threat was spotted very early and from afar and the tourists had time to calmly flee. May be people were very nice to put tourists in trust. Or that the hostility was extremely quick and precise to suppress any panic and any capacity to resist and the tourists became very docile.

That's I think the explanation why they did not take their stuff.

But it was much later and elsewhere that the real drama happened. From there many scenarios are possible.

[Manti]

Also the plan to put the cache/ store there for the return journey goes against my intuition. What if on their return they couldn't find the store. Why would you decanter provisions on the side of an exposed slope. On return journey the group would still want hit the tree line for wood and shelter. It would be easier to make the cache at a point where you wanted to stop and camp. Perhaps even preparing the location with ready chopped wood etc. If the cache was on the mountainside you have to stop. Unpack gear, repack etc . Why waste the time?

Yeah exactly and also, even if they wanted to store things on the slope, there is the Boot Rock nearby that creates a wind shadow on one side and is an unmissable landmark.

The searchers and also later expeditions stored equipment there next to the rock, it's the natural thing to do. In fact, I would even say that setting up the tent in the rock's wind shadow is the more rational choice if for some reason they didn't want to camp in the forest, rather than setting up on the slope.

[Jean Daniel Reuss]

anganontaolo  : General Discussion > Why they abandon tent, clothes and objects ? --> August 08, 2021, 01:37:35 AM  - Reply #3
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=978.msg16436#msg16436
...............
No matter if the force was very great, these tourists should be vigilant as they were experienced.
They were on a mountain where the wind blows very strongly (initially this place was not planned in advance). Their tent had to be attached to two trees but not with a pair of skis. In addition, they did not use their stove so it was very cold in this tent.
So why haven't they already put warm clothes in this tent? Warm clothes should be near them where they sleep.
Have they ever thought of attacks and getting ready to defend themselves against it? or else they believed that indeed there is no crime in paradise (socialist paradise) as Stalin said.

===> Why they abandon tent, clothes and objects ?

Because the 3 attackers (who can be qualified as murderers or mercenary killers) benefited from a total or almost total surprise effect.


===> No matter if the force was very great,

The hasty exit from the tent without adequate equipment could easily be explained by the atmosphere (air) inside suddenly becoming unbreathable: suffocating smoke pot - or wolverine according to the theory of Igor B.
(What is more difficult to explain is the descent - which seems to have been slow and calm - to the cedar, without the necessary equipment.)

===> these tourists should be vigilant as they were experienced.

Indeed, a good principle of security is to always remember that the greatest danger is the one that we did not, or could not, foresee.

Thus, for example, in the military field it is recommended, when possible, to launch a surprise attack on the enemy on the nights of festivities or during a storm.

Lupos, who is not a supporter of the criminal theories, presents good arguments to justify that the attack took place taking advantage of a local storm: temperature = -50 °C and wind = 35 m/s.
 See : Catabatic wind....
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=542.0

===> They were on a mountain where the wind blows....

Because they had taken several days to reach the slope of Kholat Syakhl (heavy bags, soft and deep snow, unknown route....) the hikers believed that they were far enough from inhabited places to no longer fear a human attack.

It was a mistake and a fatal illusion, because in fact the troika of the attackers took less than a day to reach the hikers by following their deep track from North-2.

===> So why haven't they already put warm clothes in this tent? Warm clothes should be near them where they sleep.
===> The risk was very great on this mountain and essential items should be ready if ever a problem arises: clothes, flashlight, ax, knife, etc ...
===> Have they ever thought of attacks and getting ready to defend themselves against it?

===> or else they believed that indeed there is no crime in paradise (socialist paradise) as Stalin said.

The illusion of living in « a socialist paradise » was maintained by the entire official state system (and in particular by the UPI route commission), which was trying to hide or minimize the internal unrest or difficulties of the USSR in 1959, during the Khrushchev thaw.

The period was characterized by the release of dangerous individuals caused by the uncontrolled dismantling of the Gulag, much to the displeasure of Stalinist officers in charge of the guarding of the camps ; (in this case the Ivdellag).

••• Remark N° 1 •••

I added effect of " almost total surprise " because it allowed to suppose that the 4 of the Den were a little mistrustful of the fact that they seem to have been the most warmly dressed at the time of the exit of the tent.

The 4 of Den were also probably the most educated and the most realistic in the field of the internal politics of the USSR.

  • Zolotariov had the experience of 4 years of war on the Eastern Front (in this case, it must be assumed that there was no substitution of identity).

  • Thibeaux-Brignole : In 1931 his father Vladimir Iosifovich Thibeaux-Brignolle and sent to SIBLAG,...In June 1933 Vladimir Iosifovich was reincarnated [rehabilitated ?] and transferred to the position of chief of the technical department in the mining area ....In 1938, Vladimir Iosifovich was sent to the deep taiga, to Gornaya Shoriya for heavy work... After all the trials, losses and humiliations, Vladimir Iosifovich's strength was undermined. He ... died... in September 1943.

  • Kolevatov : Stay in Moscow and indirectly witnessed discussions between some leaders or patrons of technological research programs.

  • Dubinina :Dispute or opposition in Vizhay (January 25 and 26) with the sponsor (client) of the February 1 attack by the troika of mercenary killers.

Thus it is probable that the 4 of the Den wanted to hide, while the 5 others, unaware of the inexorable exterminating will of the attackers, were quickly located by lighting a fire to warm up.

••• Remark N° 2 •••

The attentive reader of this forum will notice that this post, which wants to be an answer to anganontaolo , Reply #3, is in accordance with the TOK theory.

TOK theory = Eduard Tumanov + Per Inge Oestmoen + Aleks Kandr = surprise attack in order to kill or relentless "Altercation on the pass"

[MDGross]

"• Dubinina :Dispute or opposition in Vizhay (January 25 and 26) with the sponsor (client) of the February 1 attack by the troika of mercenary killers."

Jean Daniel: What evidence do you have that Lyuda had a dispute or argument with someone in Vizhay? And why would that person then send mercenary killers after the hikers? Motive?

[Jean Daniel Reuss]

                Reply #25
"• Dubinina :Dispute or opposition in Vizhay (January 25 and 26) with the sponsor (client) of the February 1 attack by the troika of mercenary killers."
Jean Daniel: What evidence do you have that Lyuda had a dispute or argument with someone in Vizhay? And why would that person then send mercenary killers after the hikers? Motive?

MDGross : Thank you for your stimulating questions. I am trying to answer you here in a way that is regrettably a bit abstract.

°°°°°°°°°

After 62 years, in spite of many efforts, no one has been able to find a really irrefutable scenario to explain the DPI.
At least if you are not convinced either by the official verdict of May 1959 or by the conclusion of Andrey Kuryakov in 2020 !

Thus, I endorse (agree with) an answer by Mihail Sharavin while being interviewed by Maya Piskareva in 2013.

But, alas, we learn the truth either from the state, or when we find ourselves in another world, where there are no diseases, sorrows and sighing ... In the meantime, it remains to intellectually entertain ourselves with a game of investigation.

While waiting for improbable revelations (but that it is allowed to hope) coming from the Russian archives two positions are possible:

 

Position number 1

To continue to search desperately for significant clues in the enormous amount of information currently available, (taking into account that some of it is more or less dubious).

    Then you are perfectly right and you are sure that you are not wrong.

The disadvantage of this cautious position is that you are not moving forward. That is to say that in a hundred years you will be at the same point and you will repeat indefinitely:
 No evidence - Just speculations - No evidence - Just speculations - No evidence - Just speculations - No evidence - Just speculations - No evidence  ..........

Position number 2

To imagine a complete and coherent reconstruction in accordance with the available information.
It is a method that is frequent in History whenever archives and other documents are insufficient to reach a certainty.

It is also the situation in all the hard sciences (Physics, Chemistry,...) in which it is a question of imagining complete explanatory theories from observations or experiments. But in these hard sciences theories can generally be strengthened and confirmed by the possibility of redoing numerous verifying experiments.

Solutions are obtained by mobilizing particular resources of the human mind: intuition, imagination, common sense that go beyond simple formal deductive reasoning (proof ---> solution).

For example, in fiction, experienced investigators such as Sherlock Holmes (Conan Dyole), Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple (Agatha Christie) know how to interpret subtle clues, often of a psychological nature, in order to intuitively find the right solution, i.e. the real culprit, despite misleading appearances or staging.

°°°°°°°°°

A great number of authors and forum members have proposed complete and coherent reconstructions that are almost completely written.
Of course I do not quote them all. Here are only a few examples to fix the ideas :

Teodora Hadjiyska and Igor Pavlov (1079 The overwhelming force of Dyatlov Pass) - Rakitin (meeting with American spies) - Svetlana Osadchuck (Mansi) - Igor B=Игорь Б (wolverine ?) - Lupos (Acute Stress Reaction + catabatic wind) - Nigel Evans - Investigator.................

Personally I have now become the self-proclaimed spokesman of the TOK theory as you can see in my previous posts.

According to the TOK theory a lot of questions are solved or lose their reason to exist; especially the motives of the cover up by Khrushchev and Putin (Yeltsin did not have time to deal with it).

 Thus, for example, it was the 3 attackers who cut the tent canvas, then still intact, on the morning of February 2, 1959, after having defeated and exterminated the 9 hikers by a long night fight.

I plan to write one day a more orderly presentation of the TOK theory in the topic "Altercation on the pass", but for the present I still have difficulties; for example :
" The fact that the evacuation from the tent to the cedar was apparently not executed in a rushed but rather in a fairly orderly fashion. "

°°°°°°°°°

MORE PRECISE ANSWER TO TWO QUESTIONS

...Lyuda had a dispute or argument with someone in Vizhay ?

Bottled Brunette understood how to explain easily that the change of mood of Dubinina which is a clue of psychological nature.
.
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=433.msg6905#msg6905

Dubinina clearly by her rigid moral conceptions had to express her dissatisfaction with the very bad reception at Vizhay, which was intended to humiliate and also to swindle Dyatlov's group.

Consequently one of the men on Vizhay tried to rape her, or manhandle her a bit or a lot, but either she fought him off or it was interrupted somehow.

 Sensitive young girls who are sexually assaulted by attempted rape or just being fondled, or harassed, then their personality change.

I have heard that in these circumstances, women then undergo a profound psychological changes in their personality...  Anger, lethargy, depression, self blaming,....

Motive?

The question of motive is indeed both important and interesting.   
To make people understand the complexity of what I also call the "WHY ?" question, I will start with a didactic introduction which is an analogy.

As Patrick has already pointed out, the DPI presents some analogies with an event, certainly much more important, which is the assassination of President Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in Dallas

One difference between the two incidents is obviously the cause(s) of death, the "HOW ?" question, which is not obvious in the case of the DPI (because JF Kennedy was incontestably mortally wounded by a rifle bullet or bullets).
An analogy between the two incidents is that some 60 years later, thousands of commentators around the world are still asking questions about these matters, (who, if anyone, was behind it ("WHO ?"), for what reasons ("WHY ?")

Mind you that I have read almost nothing about the assassination of President Kennedy (I remember mostly hearing the news of gunshots as the president passed by on French radio in 1963).  The DPI is more than enough for me.
But as your "country is United States", I can assume that you have some opinion on the assassination of President Kennedy.


      ••• Patrick is one of those who approve the official version

Patrick : Simplest Explanation is Often the Best > February 11, 2020, 05:51:26 PM     Reply #9
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=589.msg8451#msg8451

I offer you a few examples:

1) The American President Kennedy was assassinated by ONE gunman. All the proof points in that direction. Yet, any small discrepancy in the case is seized upon as evidence of a conspiracy, because there is no way (in the minds of many) that this great man could have been killed by a deranged "loser".

I don't understand this phenomenon, because my brain is not susceptible to fantasy.  I am a cynic in most things (except in my love for my family). But, it exists, is part of our collective condition, and must be endured.


      ••• But there are those who are doubtful or even contest the official version.

You can imagine that the answer to the simple "motive?" or "WHY ?" question, may require extensive knowledge of historical and political nature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theories

Regarding the possible sponsors (if Lee Ostwald is the author of the fatal shootings, then he would only be a mercenary executor), the Wikipedia article considers the following long list:

New Orleans conspiracy  - Secret Service conspiracy - Cuban exiles - Organized crime conspiracy
CIA conspiracy - Lyndon B. Johnson conspiracy - George H. W. Bush conspiracy
Shadow government conspiracy - Soviet government conspiracy - Cuban government conspiracy - Israeli government conspiracy - Federal Reserve conspiracy
Military-industrial complex

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theories

[Manti]

The murder of a head of state (president JFK).. most likely has a motive rooted in the political situation at the time.

The death of 9 civilians, students of a provincial technical university, why would that have a political motive?

[MDGross]

I agree, Jean Daniel, there are many tantalizing clues and well thought out theories, but no irrefutable proof. Your scenario is certainly valid as is Teddy's and Igor's. Does one turn to logic? Or were their deaths motivated by emotion from others – anger, mistrust, jealousy, hatred – and so defy logic? I favor the simple over the complex: a "perfect storm" of weather events, for example, or a period of confused or irrational thought caused by infrasound or some other naturally occurring phenomenon. But no convincing proof exists for these scenarios.

[Jean Daniel Reuss]

  Reply #27
..............................................
The death of 9 civilians, students of a provincial technical university, why would that have a political motive?

I realise that I have, at least partially, answered to these questions from my point of view which represents the TOK theory.
You may wish to read the following : topic=734.0 - Reply #20 ---> Could Zolotaryov be a saboteur?

https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=734.msg16702#msg16702