Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I don't think no external injury means other people wernt involved. Imagine you are in sub 0 weather in snow without shoes. How much resistance do you think you'd put up if a guy had a gun on you?

How would you connect being held at gunpoint until death by freezing with evidence some tried to build a camp fire or the injuries some did suffer? They let some freeze to death for giggles, threw some down a ravine and then left the others alive to build a fire. Why? What could the possible motivation be for those actions in the first place let alone the three different varieties.

I think some of the group escapes and a few got captured. The ones that were captured were tortured in some not obvious way that involved crushing injuries at the tent site itself. The ones that escaped hovered around for a little but were unable to attempt a rescue -a few tried to make a fire to survive but were unable in the conditions without the right tools.

I think the key here is that something was keeping them from the tent. An animal wouldn't linger that long. A poisonous gas wouldn't scare me as much as freezing to death - I'd hold my breath run and get my survival gear. Pretty obvious that an avalanche didn't happen after a few minutes out of the tent. Like...what else could it be? Something was keeping them from getting back to the tent. Had to be a human.

But this is starting to reach for it. If these attackers had firearms how did some escape in the first place? On a flat snow plain how do you outrun a gun? Plus the ones with the crushing injuries were found in a ravine, so unless they were taken to be dumped there the torture angle seems out. Again no visible external trauma like you would expect from torture, as well as the fact that those with the injuries were the most well dressed. So either they were surprised and had time to get dressed to run away or their attackers let them get dressed? If they really wanted to kill the group why not just pursue? And if they had to cut open the tent to escape (indicating the front exit was out of the question) how would they have been able to evade people with guns that were already close enough to block the front door so to speak.

Again, why not make sure they all died and leave no witnesses? Why not hide all the bodies? The attacker theory makes no sense, it has way too many holes. There doesn't seem to be any motive or possible attacker as the local tribe had no such violent history.

Aye. The tribe could have hidden those bodies so no one would ever find them for decades.

Caves etc. Other far more concealed places. Not leave bodies where they lay..

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I don't think no external injury means other people wernt involved. Imagine you are in sub 0 weather in snow without shoes. How much resistance do you think you'd put up if a guy had a gun on you?

How would you connect being held at gunpoint until death by freezing with evidence some tried to build a camp fire or the injuries some did suffer? They let some freeze to death for giggles, threw some down a ravine and then left the others alive to build a fire. Why? What could the possible motivation be for those actions in the first place let alone the three different varieties.

I think some of the group escapes and a few got captured. The ones that were captured were tortured in some not obvious way that involved crushing injuries at the tent site itself. The ones that escaped hovered around for a little but were unable to attempt a rescue -a few tried to make a fire to survive but were unable in the conditions without the right tools.

I think the key here is that something was keeping them from the tent. An animal wouldn't linger that long. A poisonous gas wouldn't scare me as much as freezing to death - I'd hold my breath run and get my survival gear. Pretty obvious that an avalanche didn't happen after a few minutes out of the tent. Like...what else could it be? Something was keeping them from getting back to the tent. Had to be a human.

But this is starting to reach for it. If these attackers had firearms how did some escape in the first place? On a flat snow plain how do you outrun a gun? Plus the ones with the crushing injuries were found in a ravine, so unless they were taken to be dumped there the torture angle seems out. Again no visible external trauma like you would expect from torture, as well as the fact that those with the injuries were the most well dressed. So either they were surprised and had time to get dressed to run away or their attackers let them get dressed? If they really wanted to kill the group why not just pursue? And if they had to cut open the tent to escape (indicating the front exit was out of the question) how would they have been able to evade people with guns that were already close enough to block the front door so to speak.

Again, why not make sure they all died and leave no witnesses? Why not hide all the bodies? The attacker theory makes no sense, it has way too many holes. There doesn't seem to be any motive or possible attacker as the local tribe had no such violent history.

And to add a bit more to the above:


1. The injuries would have taken more than just some guys stomping the hell out of them, based on the medical examiner's conclusions.

2. The depression where the last four members were found was turned into a makeshift emergency shelter, by making bedding out of spruce branches.

3. 75 meters from the ravine shelter, was a cedar tree with the brushwood broken off as high a five meters. There was no evidence that it was for the purpose of fueling the fire pit that Yuri Doroshenko and Yuri Krivonischenko were found next to, at the edge of the forest. It was as if somebody had climbed the tree to get a better look up the slope.

4. Igor Dyatlov, Zina Kolmogorova and Rustem Slobodin tried to make it back to the tent. Kolmogorova came the closest to making it. They all died of hypothermia. Slobodin had a fractured skull and some abrasions, but they were determined not to be fatal.

5. There are accounts that the livor mortis in some of the bodies were not on the side of the body pressed against the ground, indicating the possibility that someone, or something, had moved the bodies sometime between death and them being found by authorities.

The obvious answer is that Manbearpig leaves no survivors...

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

And to add a bit more to the above:

1. The injuries would have taken more than just some guys stomping the hell out of them, based on the medical examiner's conclusions.

2. The depression where the last four members were found was turned into a makeshift emergency shelter, by making bedding out of spruce branches.

3. 75 meters from the ravine shelter, was a cedar tree with the brushwood broken off as high a five meters. There was no evidence that it was for the purpose of fueling the fire pit that Yuri Doroshenko and Yuri Krivonischenko were found next to, at the edge of the forest. It was as if somebody had climbed the tree to get a better look up the slope.

4. Igor Dyatlov, Zina Kolmogorova and Rustem Slobodin tried to make it back to the tent. Kolmogorova came the closest to making it. They all died of hypothermia. Slobodin had a fractured skull and some abrasions, but they were determined not to be fatal.

5. There are accounts that the livor mortis in some of the bodies were not on the side of the body pressed against the ground, indicating the possibility that someone, or something, had moved the bodies sometime between death and them being found by authorities.

I think its safe to conclude it was a bear. The initial injuries may have even been what triggered the panic and for them to leave the tent in a opposite direction of the bear.

If attacked by a brown bear, your best option is to play dead and hope he loses interest and moves on. If a black bear attacks you, you fight to the death. But that isn't to say that everyone will act the same way or as recommended either. Its fight or flight, and if a few people are starting to run off, do you want to be the last one left behind? You don't have to be the fastest, just not the slowest. Maybe the bear hung around the campsite sniffing for food and that was what the hikers were waiting on. Time just ran out.

KTG17 wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

And to add a bit more to the above:

1. The injuries would have taken more than just some guys stomping the hell out of them, based on the medical examiner's conclusions.

2. The depression where the last four members were found was turned into a makeshift emergency shelter, by making bedding out of spruce branches.

3. 75 meters from the ravine shelter, was a cedar tree with the brushwood broken off as high a five meters. There was no evidence that it was for the purpose of fueling the fire pit that Yuri Doroshenko and Yuri Krivonischenko were found next to, at the edge of the forest. It was as if somebody had climbed the tree to get a better look up the slope.

4. Igor Dyatlov, Zina Kolmogorova and Rustem Slobodin tried to make it back to the tent. Kolmogorova came the closest to making it. They all died of hypothermia. Slobodin had a fractured skull and some abrasions, but they were determined not to be fatal.

5. There are accounts that the livor mortis in some of the bodies were not on the side of the body pressed against the ground, indicating the possibility that someone, or something, had moved the bodies sometime between death and them being found by authorities.

I think its safe to conclude it was a bear. The initial injuries may have even been what triggered the panic and for them to leave the tent in a opposite direction of the bear.

If attacked by a brown bear, your best option is to play dead and hope he loses interest and moves on. If a black bear attacks you, you fight to the death. But that isn't to say that everyone will act the same way or as recommended either. Its fight or flight, and if a few people are starting to run off, do you want to be the last one left behind? You don't have to be the fastest, just not the slowest. Maybe the bear hung around the campsite sniffing for food and that was what the hikers were waiting on. Time just ran out.

Yeah no. If a bear attacks I am going to shoot the ever living gak out if it. I came across a bear in Cali and carried hopped up .44 rounds for that. I am surprised they didn't have a rifle if that was an issue.

 Frazzled wrote:

KTG17 wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

And to add a bit more to the above:

1. The injuries would have taken more than just some guys stomping the hell out of them, based on the medical examiner's conclusions.

2. The depression where the last four members were found was turned into a makeshift emergency shelter, by making bedding out of spruce branches.

3. 75 meters from the ravine shelter, was a cedar tree with the brushwood broken off as high a five meters. There was no evidence that it was for the purpose of fueling the fire pit that Yuri Doroshenko and Yuri Krivonischenko were found next to, at the edge of the forest. It was as if somebody had climbed the tree to get a better look up the slope.

4. Igor Dyatlov, Zina Kolmogorova and Rustem Slobodin tried to make it back to the tent. Kolmogorova came the closest to making it. They all died of hypothermia. Slobodin had a fractured skull and some abrasions, but they were determined not to be fatal.

5. There are accounts that the livor mortis in some of the bodies were not on the side of the body pressed against the ground, indicating the possibility that someone, or something, had moved the bodies sometime between death and them being found by authorities.

I think its safe to conclude it was a bear. The initial injuries may have even been what triggered the panic and for them to leave the tent in a opposite direction of the bear.

If attacked by a brown bear, your best option is to play dead and hope he loses interest and moves on. If a black bear attacks you, you fight to the death. But that isn't to say that everyone will act the same way or as recommended either. Its fight or flight, and if a few people are starting to run off, do you want to be the last one left behind? You don't have to be the fastest, just not the slowest. Maybe the bear hung around the campsite sniffing for food and that was what the hikers were waiting on. Time just ran out.

Yeah no. If a bear attacks I am going to shoot the ever living gak out if it. I came across a bear in Cali and carried hopped up .44 rounds for that. I am surprised they didn't have a rifle if that was an issue.

Shooting bears is for weak, decadent Westerners. We Russians fight bears by wrestling them into submission.

Anyone seen the movie Citizen X?

It painted a pretty grim picture of the Soviet police and detective force. I think it's possible that poor investigative techniques - and outright false reporting of events play a huge roll in this.

Massive internal injuries do not occur without external injuries (unless you are hit with some kind of pressure wave from a bomb - but bombs leave a lot of evidence behind...craters, ect.) People don't run from their shelter unclothed and not return unless something is preventing them (avalanches that didn't happen, and hearing sounds that aren't there don't cause this.) Professional winter outdoor survivors can make a fire in a cave. If you can make a fire you don't die on hypothermia. Nothing makes sense here.

 Frazzled wrote:

Yeah no. If a bear attacks I am going to shoot the ever living gak out if it. I came across a bear in Cali and carried hopped up .44 rounds for that. I am surprised they didn't have a rifle if that was an issue.

I don't think they had any guns on them, at least I have never read or seen any pictures of them with any. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else does. Plus this was on Soviet times, probably difficult to have one then if you were a law abiding comrade. I've hiked in Wyoming and never carried a gun. I do carry Bear spray tho.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Anyone seen the movie Citizen X?

It painted a pretty grim picture of the Soviet police and detective force. I think it's possible that poor investigative techniques - and outright false reporting of events play a huge roll in this.

Massive internal injuries do not occur without external injuries (unless you are hit with some kind of pressure wave from a bomb - but bombs leave a lot of evidence behind...craters, ect.) People don't run from their shelter unclothed and not return unless something is preventing them (avalanches that didn't happen, and hearing sounds that aren't there don't cause this.) Professional winter outdoor survivors can make a fire in a cave. If you can make a fire you don't die on hypothermia. Nothing makes sense here.

Soviet police was generally quite competent, but they did have some massive mess-ups. Not noticeably more or less than in other European countries at the time though.
There is no reason to assume poor investigative techniques here, because the same investigators have proven competent in other cases. There is also no reason why they would have needed to falsely report on this. If they had wanted to conceal something, they would have made it into some common mountaineering accident, they would not have turned it into a mystery that generated massive attention. Also, the search and investigation had so many people involved that it would have taken a pretty massive cover-up, which also means that someone would have started talking by now. But there is nothing in the official documents that have been released after the fall of the Soviet Union and the the investigators involved have said that this case was a complete mystery to them.

Of course, technology and techniques at the time were very primitive by modern standards, and the bodies as far as I understand weren't in a very good state due to exposure to the elements (the bodies of the last, injured group were only found in may, more than 2 months after they died). It is very much possible that investigators have missed injuries or that the search party never found some pieces of evidence in the snow. But there is no evidence for that, so as a theory that isn't any more or less valid than any other theories.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Anyone seen the movie Citizen X?

It painted a pretty grim picture of the Soviet police and detective force. I think it's possible that poor investigative techniques - and outright false reporting of events play a huge roll in this.

Massive internal injuries do not occur without external injuries (unless you are hit with some kind of pressure wave from a bomb - but bombs leave a lot of evidence behind...craters, ect.) People don't run from their shelter unclothed and not return unless something is preventing them (avalanches that didn't happen, and hearing sounds that aren't there don't cause this.) Professional winter outdoor survivors can make a fire in a cave. If you can make a fire you don't die on hypothermia. Nothing makes sense here.

Soviet police was generally quite competent, but they did have some massive mess-ups. Not noticeably more or less than in other European countries at the time though.
There is no reason to assume poor investigative techniques here, because the same investigators have proven competent in other cases. There is also no reason why they would have needed to falsely report on this. If they had wanted to conceal something, they would have made it into some common mountaineering accident, they would not have turned it into a mystery that generated massive attention. Also, the search and investigation had so many people involved that it would have taken a pretty massive cover-up, which also means that someone would have started talking by now. But there is nothing in the official documents that have been released after the fall of the Soviet Union and the the investigators involved have said that this case was a complete mystery to them.

Of course, technology and techniques at the time were very primitive by modern standards, and the bodies as far as I understand weren't in a very good state due to exposure to the elements (the bodies of the last, injured group were only found in may, more than 2 months after they died). It is very much possible that investigators have missed injuries or that the search party never found some pieces of evidence in the snow. But there is no evidence for that, so as a theory that isn't any more or less valid than any other theories.

"There is also no reason why they would have needed to falsely report on this. If they had wanted to conceal something, they would have made it into some common mountaineering accident, they would not have turned it into a mystery that generated massive attention."
True - though it is possible that not everyone involved was on board with a cover up and so certain things that were released could not be undone. It actually makes sense given the information we have doesn't make any kind of sense. Internal injuries without external, survival experts freezing to death, the group being scattered all over the place?

The reason I brought up citizen X was because in the movie there was a high up party guy who was deliberately disrupting a serial killer investigation because "There are no serial killers in the Soviet Union - It is a western phenomenon." This could be something similar - a terrible murder that the party leaders didn't want people to know was a terrible murder. It just makes a cover-up seem more believable to me. Also - what theory do you think holds the most weight ?

This is interesting indeed! I doubt we will ever know but it's fun to think about on lunchbreaks.

It doesn't make sense that there was any kind of coverup. Because anybody with a motive to cover up would have made effort to hide the bodies, yet no effort at all was made.

Yeah, I agree, if this is a cover-up it's the worst cover-up bungle in history.

I blame wormholes.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeah, I agree, if this is a cover-up it's the worst cover-up bungle in history.

Or the best ever!! It's what "THEY" want you to think!

These guys do a good explaation on it.
Just ignore The Henry guy, he always thinks it aliens.

 Grey Templar wrote:
It doesn't make sense that there was any kind of coverup. Because anybody with a motive to cover up would have made effort to hide the bodies, yet no effort at all was made.

Heres what I was thinking.

Unknown Killers killed everyone in the group.
Local peoples found the bodies - called the police.
People in the town started talking - local police release some information.
State police (party police) show up - take over the investigation.
The group that was killed is well known - the people are asking questions.
Party mantra is Soviet is best - Only vile capitalist pigs have mass murders - we can't release that to the public.

The public already knows they are dead though - they know they suffered injuries - they know they weren't wearing all their clothing. So what do they do? They muck up the details and play dumb? Ehhh...we can't really figure it out - maybe they heard an avalanche and fell off a cliff or something? Key is - it couldn't have been murder because we found no tracks.

ehhh - terrible cover up I agree but terrible cover ups do happen.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
It doesn't make sense that there was any kind of coverup. Because anybody with a motive to cover up would have made effort to hide the bodies, yet no effort at all was made.

Heres what I was thinking.

Unknown Killers killed everyone in the group.
Local peoples found the bodies - called the police.
People in the town started talking - local police release some information.
State police (party police) show up - take over the investigation.
The group that was killed is well known - the people are asking questions.
Party mantra is Soviet is best - Only vile capitalist pigs have mass murders - we can't release that to the public.

The public already knows they are dead though - they know they suffered injuries - they know they weren't wearing all their clothing. So what do they do? They muck up the details and play dumb? Ehhh...we can't really figure it out - maybe they heard an avalanche and fell off a cliff or something? Key is - it couldn't have been murder because we found no tracks.

ehhh - terrible cover up I agree but terrible cover ups do happen.

The problem I have with this though is all the Soviet Union/Russia needs to do to satisfy the salivating masses is say "yeah. It was a parachute bomb series we were testing, y'know, like that one theory. Pity the group strayed so far off course and into the testing ground."
And that would completely obviate the entire thing.

The fact that they didn't do that means that 1) they either started giving a gak about all the Russian government's awful things, and this one was even an accident or 2) they aren't trying to cover anything up and would like it if the case could be solved, too.

Explain the radiation.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Explain the radiation.

Thorium oxide lantern mantles.

Or even better: a quote from the official report:
“The radiation referred to has been identified as beta-radiation with the characteristics of isotope K-40. This is very weak contamination and certainly superficial.”

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Explain the radiation.

Thorium oxide lantern mantles.

Oh that is so cool. Radioactive lanterns??

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Explain the radiation.

Thorium oxide lantern mantles.

Oh that is so cool. Radioactive lanterns??

Yeah, they were quite common in the past. The radioactive coating helped them to glow more brightly.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Explain the radiation.

Thorium oxide lantern mantles.

Oh that is so cool. Radioactive lanterns??

Yeah, that's literally a thing. They only stopped making them in the 1990's.

People used to think radioactive water was good for you to drink too.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

KTG17 wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

And to add a bit more to the above:

1. The injuries would have taken more than just some guys stomping the hell out of them, based on the medical examiner's conclusions.

2. The depression where the last four members were found was turned into a makeshift emergency shelter, by making bedding out of spruce branches.

3. 75 meters from the ravine shelter, was a cedar tree with the brushwood broken off as high a five meters. There was no evidence that it was for the purpose of fueling the fire pit that Yuri Doroshenko and Yuri Krivonischenko were found next to, at the edge of the forest. It was as if somebody had climbed the tree to get a better look up the slope.

4. Igor Dyatlov, Zina Kolmogorova and Rustem Slobodin tried to make it back to the tent. Kolmogorova came the closest to making it. They all died of hypothermia. Slobodin had a fractured skull and some abrasions, but they were determined not to be fatal.

5. There are accounts that the livor mortis in some of the bodies were not on the side of the body pressed against the ground, indicating the possibility that someone, or something, had moved the bodies sometime between death and them being found by authorities.

I think its safe to conclude it was a bear. The initial injuries may have even been what triggered the panic and for them to leave the tent in a opposite direction of the bear.

If attacked by a brown bear, your best option is to play dead and hope he loses interest and moves on. If a black bear attacks you, you fight to the death. But that isn't to say that everyone will act the same way or as recommended either. Its fight or flight, and if a few people are starting to run off, do you want to be the last one left behind? You don't have to be the fastest, just not the slowest. Maybe the bear hung around the campsite sniffing for food and that was what the hikers were waiting on. Time just ran out.

Yeah no. If a bear attacks I am going to shoot the ever living gak out if it. I came across a bear in Cali and carried hopped up .44 rounds for that. I am surprised they didn't have a rifle if that was an issue.

Shooting bears is for weak, decadent Westerners. We Russians fight bears by wrestling them into submission.

Respect! Isn't wrestling bears just part of a light morning workout for grandmothers in Russia? I thought a hard work out was going back in time to WW2 and punching Tiger tanks.

(me yesterday at the Wine Store carrying a bottle of Stoli)
"Here wife, let me introduce you to the drink of my people. My people do not need bread, only vodka."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KTG17 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Yeah no. If a bear attacks I am going to shoot the ever living gak out if it. I came across a bear in Cali and carried hopped up .44 rounds for that. I am surprised they didn't have a rifle if that was an issue.

I don't think they had any guns on them, at least I have never read or seen any pictures of them with any. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean everyone else does. Plus this was on Soviet times, probably difficult to have one then if you were a law abiding comrade. I've hiked in Wyoming and never carried a gun. I do carry Bear spray tho.

I beleive this is Ukraine in wilderness, so simple rifles or shotguns of local variety would be permitted.

Were still on the random killer thing? How do those dots connect? I'll just repost all the holes:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
If these attackers had firearms how did some escape in the first place? On a flat snow plain how do you outrun a gun? Plus the ones with the crushing injuries were found in a ravine, so unless they were taken to be dumped there the torture angle seems out. Again no visible external trauma like you would expect from torture, as well as the fact that those with the injuries were the most well dressed. So either they were surprised and had time to get dressed to run away or their attackers let them get dressed? If they really wanted to kill the group why not just pursue? And if they had to cut open the tent to escape (indicating the front exit was out of the question) how would they have been able to evade people with guns that were already close enough to block the front door so to speak.

Again, why not make sure they all died and leave no witnesses? Why not hide all the bodies?

Motivation wise? The 'killers' did it for the laughs? Just cause, only once and went after 9 people at once?

Dont forget the fact that one women had her eyes cut out, and her tngue cut out too. while she was alive(Because she had blood in her stomach, which meant her heart was still pumping when the tongue was cut out.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Dont forget the fact that one women had her eyes cut out, and her tngue cut out too. while she was alive(Because she had blood in her stomach, which meant her heart was still pumping when the tongue was cut out.

I don't believe it. That screams post mortem animals.

Has anyone attempted to contact agents Mulder and Scully to check this out. The Truth is Out There!

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Dont forget the fact that one women had her eyes cut out, and her tngue cut out too. while she was alive(Because she had blood in her stomach, which meant her heart was still pumping when the tongue was cut out.

I don't believe it. That screams post mortem animals.

Has anyone attempted to contact agents Mulder and Scully to check this out. The Truth is Out There!

There is also the part saying she was lying face down in a stream and that the loss of her features was due to putrefaction.

They Are FBI agents, why would they help the Ruskies?