April 12, 2016 , , , , ,

An Expert Opinion

After scrutinizing the details of the Criminal Case of the Dyatlov group Natalia Sakharova, a Criminal expert whose very important comments I posted here and here, has come to her own conclusion. Here is what she said

“I let myself make an assumption based on the analysis of the photo of the tent we have. The area around the tent was intentionally covered with snow in order to disguise the possible prints (those of footwear, fight, dragging, and the real way of exit from the tent).

11 GD 25_1

With the way the snow covers the tent it was not possible to perform linear cuts of the tent side because it had to be straightened. So the cuts are performed before the snow was brought there. It seems that the actions had the following subsequence – first the standing tent was cut, the actions near the tent were hided under the snow brought there to cover the prints, than the tent was checked inside with the flashlight which was found on the lay of the snow, than the whole tent was covered with snow which caused sagging. Than the flash light was cast upon it.

“Resuming of all the above I reckon that on the height 1079 near the Otorten mountain at night 1-2 of February, 1959 there was murder. Prints next to the tent were destroyed intentionally, they were covered with snow. The murders approached the tent, made the group exit under the gunpoint and expected their freezing. It is almost always possible to figure out the type, kind, distance, and sometimes the manufacturer of the bullets, that is why they didn’t use their guns. After they made the group out, they searched the tent, or just viewed it with the flashlight.

“No notebooks of men were found by the rescue. There could be written some previous events or recording ongoing situation. These notebooks could have been destroyed immediately or removed.”

(I like to add that there is a certain proof that Sakharova is accurate in this assumption. If one reads Vladimir Aslinadaze’s testimony which can be found here it is pretty obvious that at least Zolotariov’s notebook was found at the scene. Askinadze was present there, he is the one who actually found the last 4 bodies. – S.O.)

Since the money, documents and valuables are not taken, the only reason for destruction of the group is their eyewitnessing of something.

“They were divided whether under coercion (it is harder to survive cold separated) or because they were hiding from the attackers. The first to die were Slobodin, Doroshenko, Krivonishenko. Second were half-undressed Zina and Dyatlov. The last were Dubinina, Kolevatov, Tibo, the very last was Zolotarev (very hardened and well dressed). It could be that him and Tibo were not in the tent at the moment of the attack and were brought to the group by attackers. All of them were searched – the pockets unbuttoned. The last four were killed next to the cedar and taken to the ravine hide their terrible injuries. After reviewing the trauma of the last four I can guess that the murderers were professionals. The ribs fractures were specific – they could have been the result of jumping on the victim’s chest. The scull injuries can’t be the result of falling upon rocks.”

I have to add that in general my understanding almost coincides with that one of Sakharova when it comes about the cause of their death which I believe was a murder. – S.O

─ Share ─

─ Follow ─


  • Please, please, please: read about Occam’s Razor (a concept in mathematics and philosophy) which basically states that the simplest explanation is more probable, and the more complex and convoluted explanation is far less likely.

    Google “Occam’s Razor” and read the simple English Wikipedia. If this is not enough, there is also a link to the regular Wikipedia for Occam’s Razor — but this goes into history and uses and much , much more.

    Following this principle, I would conclude that: if there was a cover-up of any kind, it is more likely to be a cover-up of incompetence of the investigators and not of the deaths themselves.

    I have so much trouble with the “expert Opinion” (as stated above)that it would require pages and pages of ultimately fruitless refutation — remember you can not prove a negative. That is why (for example) courts are required to prove guilt.

  • Following the “Occam’s Razor” philosophy, internet blogs shouldn’t exist at all… this is just a discussion group that ghaters all the known facts, investigations and discussions about the Dyatlov mystery in order to go as deep as possible. Let’s go on then.

Leave a Reply