The Dyatlov Pass. The Hike of the Doomed through the Forbidden Areas. Book 1. The conclusions of Kochetkov
Tekst- Maht: 120 lk. 23 illustratsiooni
- Žanr: Raamatud seiklustest, Kaasaegsed detektiiviromaanidMuuda
© Aleksander Kochetkov, 2022
ISBN 978-5-0056-4255-4 (т. 1)
ISBN 978-5-0056-4256-1
Created with Ridero smart publishing system
Foreword
«The most important thing in research is not the amount of the information you have, but the skill how you use it.»
After careful studying the criminal case files, I have made a disappointing conclusion regarding the investigation findings. They proved to be not only erroneous, but deliberately falsified. But this was not the main thing in this tragedy, but the fact that the researchers of the past, as if not noticing the obvious mistakes of the investigation, for many decades not only used the conclusions of the investigation, but in some cases, raised them to the rank of axioms. And, as you know, the thinking people profit by the other people’s mistakes, and do not use them in their reasoning’s. That was why so many versions of the tragedy appeared and none of them corresponded to reality. The thing is that it’s impossible to build a plausible version of the events on the erroneous conclusions, however hard you may try. Therefore, unlike the others, I have completely rejected the investigation conclusions and, comparing the available facts, drawn my own conclusions, which, in my opinion, are more consistent with reality than the previous ones.
Chapter 1. Who cut a ski pole, and what for?
As is known from the criminal case files, a ski pole cut into several pieces, was found in the tent, belonging to the hikers from Igor Dyatlov’s group, which was evidenced by the participants of the search and rescue operations, Vadim Brusnitsyn and Vladimir Lebedev. This looks very odd, especially with respect to what happened to the Dyatlov group on the slope of the height «1079».
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Vladimir Aleksandrovich Lebedev, April 20, 1959
«In the tent, we found a ski pole, whose upper end was cut off along a neat end notch, and another notch was made. This suggests that someone seemed to stay in the tent much later than the others, maybe for a day, because no one would cut a pole, which might still be useful, out of sheer idleness.»
A criminal case file, sheet 315
Indeed, why cut a ski pole, which may still come in handy. Suppose the hikers needed just a cut pole, which, in their opinion, could no longer be useful for one reason or another. To hunt down this complicated issue, one should review the testimony on this point of another witness, which is available in the criminal case files.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Vadim Dmitriyevich Brusnitsyn, May 15, 1959
«On top of all the things, a ski pole cut into several pieces lay, whereon the northern ridge of the tent seemed to be fixed. To resolve upon rendering a ski pole unusable, taking into account that the group had no extra ones, was possible only on extraordinary occasions.»
A criminal case file, sheet 368
Hence, Vadim Brusnitsyn also confirmed the presence of a cut ski pole in the tent of the hikers, found on the slope of the height «1079», which lent this important information some credibility, since the students had no need to lie and mislead the investigation. Moreover, prior to the interrogation, they were made aware of Article 95 of the RSFSR Criminal Code on the responsibility for perjury.
To figure out a secret of a cut ski pole is not an easy task, though it is all the same achievable. And unlike others, I will not read tea leaves, I will rather use what is available in the criminal case files. Thus, if the testimony of Vadim Brusnitsyn is taken as the basis for solving this issue, the two options for the development of the events are possible:
1) the group should have had an extra pair of ski poles;
2) some special events should have occurred, compelling the hikers to resolve upon rendering the ski pole unusable.
Let’s start with the first case scenario, which, in my opinion, is easier than the second one. And, as is usually the case in the investigations, to find an answer to a difficult question one should sift the whole lot of materials through, before the answer comes to fruition, which will correspond to reality, i.e. be based on the reliable facts, confirming its correctness.
Indeed, this matter is so intricate that it won’t be quite so easy to come to its understanding. Sometimes, the same people provide conflicting testimonies, which leads the researchers astray. And yet, if one does not jump to conclusions, but methodically compares the facts, it is possible «to separate the wheat from the chaff», as the saying runs.
The Protocol of discovery of the Dyatlov group’s camp site, February 28, 1959
«The overnight camp represents a snow-leveled site with 8 pairs of skis on the bottom. The tent is stretched out on the ski poles, fixed with the ropes. 9 backpacks, with various personal belongings of the group members, are laid down at the bottom of the tent, the quilted jackets, windbreakers are placed on their top, 9 pairs of ski boots are found where the heads should have been..»
Junior Counsellor of Justice, Tempalov
Witnesses: 1) Brusnitsyn, 2) Sharavin, 3) Kurikov, the Head of the detachment 4) Maslennikov.»
A criminal case file, sheet 2
It is strange, the Dyatlov group numbers 9 people, and there are only 8 pairs of skis, whereas 9 pairs of ski boots are found. Herewith, one pair of ski boots is found in the cache. Why do the hikers need 10 pairs of ski boots, having 8 pairs of skis? Something does not quite add up in the Protocol drawn up by Tempalov. To get to the bottom of the circumstances, one should review the testimonies of the witnesses, who were present during the inspection of the items in the tent.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Vadim Dmitriyevich Brusnitsyn, May 15, 1959
«8 pairs of skis were laid under the tent with their bindings facing down. Thanks to the dense snow cover, the tent was set up very firmly. Everything was covered with the packed snow, except for the southern ridge, fixed on a ski pole and tied to a pair of skis. No ski pole was under the northern ridge.»
A criminal case file, sheet 367
Now it becomes clear why Tempalov mentions 8 pairs of skis, rather than 9 pairs. The thing was that one pair was not under the tent, but next to it, as reported by Vadim Brusnitsyn. But he says nothing of the ski boots, so one should review the testimony of another witness, who was present during the inspection of the items.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Yevgeniy Polikarpovich Maslennikov, March 10, 1959
«In the Dyatlov group’s tent there were 9 backpacks, 10 pairs of skis, of which 9 pairs under the tent bottom, 8 pairs of ski boots, 3.5 pairs of felt boots (7 pcs.), several quilted jackets and other property. When the inspection of the tent was over, we dragged it to a helipad at a distance of 600—700 meters.»
A criminal case file, sheet 70
Actually, Yevgeniy Maslennikov reports of the 8 pairs of ski boots in the tent, rather than 9 pairs, which, in my opinion, is closer to the truth for a number of reasons, whereof I will tell you, but a little bit later. But the story with the skis has taken an unexpected turn. And now it is not clear who should we believe and who not. It turns out that on the slope of the height «1079» there were 10 pairs of skis, rather than 9 pairs. But one should not jump to conclusions, for, as a rule, this can mislead even an experienced researcher, without saying of those, who take only initial timid steps in this direction. So, please, arm yourselves with patience and hold onto your hat.
Indeed, the events have taken an unexpected turn, and it proves that on the slope of the height «1079», there were 10 pairs of skis instead of 9 pairs. This seems to be fantastic, despite the fact that the hikers did have an extra pair of skis, which was left in the cache, as you know. And, nevertheless, Vassiliy Tempalov agreed with the opinion of Yevgeniy Maslennikov, which is supported by the information, available in the criminal case files.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Vassiliy Ivanovich Tempalov, April 18, 1959
«An ice-axe and an extra pair of skis were found near the tent. An unlit Chinese flashlight lay on the tent. 9 backpacks, 9 pairs of skis, all of them lying under the tent bottom, 8 pairs of ski boots, 3.5 pairs of felt boots, quilted jackets, and a lot of rusks, a half-bag of sugar, a large amount of concentrated food, porridges, soups, etc., cocoa, axes, a saw, cameras, the students’ diaries, documents and money were found in the tent.»
A criminal case file, sheet 310
According to the Protocol of Tempalov’s interrogation, 10 pairs of skis were found on the slope of the height «1079», i.e. 9 pairs under the tent and 1 pair at the entrance. Moreover, Vassiliy Ivanovich said that 8 pairs of ski boots were in the tent, not 9 of them, as he had previously stated. I wonder what made Tempalov change his mind in respect to the discovered skis and boots? After all, it was not for nothing that he suddenly supported the opinion of Maslennikov, thereby admitting his own mistake.
The Protocol of discovery of the Dyatlov group camp site, February 28, 1959
«All found items were transferred for the inventory and delivery to… the base of the Head of the search and rescue detachment, Maslennikov Yevgeniy Polikarpovich, wherefore this Protocol was drawn up. Junior Counsellor of Justice, Tempalov.»
A criminal case file, sheet 2
What a striking picture! Did Tempalov, Brusnitsyn and Lebedev really make a mistake in counting? And Yevgeniy Maslennikov, who the items were handed over to «for the inventory and delivery», after their inspection, found that the inventory did not correspond to reality. But how could this have happened? The three persons could not make a mistake just like that. Something is wrong here. Undoubtedly, an explanation for this strange event should be found somewhere in the criminal case files.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Aleksei Alekseyevich Chernyshov, March 11, 1959
«The tent was set properly. The snow was trampled and a flat site was prepared, the skis were lying on the snow with their sliding surface up, the tent bottom was already put on them. The quilted jackets were laid at the bottom in the tent itself (away from the slope), the empty backpacks were laid out in the tent. On the same side of the tent (towards the slope), the personal things of each hiker lay. In the right corner, near the entrance, there was some food: cans of condensed milk, concentrated food, etc., 8 pairs of ski boots and 7 felt boots were lying along the length of the tent, on the side of the slope.»
A criminal case file, sheets 89 and 90
Hence, the Deputy Head of the united search and rescue detachments, Captain Chernyshov, on the one hand, confirms the fact that there were really 8 pairs of ski boots in the tent, but on the other hand, he does not say a word of the number of skis. And the situation with the actual number of skis starts to look hopeless, remaining one more contradictory piece of information, which is, most likely, to remain unexplained.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Georgiy Vladimirovich Atmanaki, April 7—8, 1959
«There was no sense in continuing the further inspection of the items, and so, they put everything back in its place until the investigator’s arrival, having first raised the tent and pulled out the three pairs of skis, since the dog handlers were walking on foot, and the rest of the skis were used by us to mark the places where the bodies of the dead were found.»
A criminal case file, sheet 215
Here is an answer why those, who were sorting out the items in the tent, were mistaken with the actual number of skis. The thing was that at the time of drawing up the Protocol by Vassiliy Tempalov, the searchers took several pairs of skis for their needs. A fair question arises: «Why did they not share this important information with the Head of the united search and rescue detachments, Yevgeniy Maslennikov, and he, in turn, with Vassiliy Tempalov?»
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Yevgeniy Polikarpovich Maslennikov, March 10, 1959
«Brusnitsyn was the one who was mostly engaged with the tent, and he would tell of the location of the items in it better than me. Considering that a prosecutor, Comrade Tempalov, and a sufficient number of people were near the tent, I went down to the search and rescue detachment, because it was necessary to activate the search for the people.»
A criminal case file, sheet 70
That was why Tempalov changed his mind concerning the number of skis, found on the slope of the height «1079». But, as is often the case with the investigations, after answering one question, there arises another, no less important one: «Where did the extra pair of skis, which had not been there at the beginning of the hike, come from?»
The Protocol of inspection of the items, found at the scene, March 5—7, 1959
«The clothes, found on the body of Igor Dyatlov, were listed in the autopsy report: a fur sleeveless jacket, trimmed with blue satin. Yura Yudin said that that sleeveless jacket belonged to him and he handed it over to Sasha Kolevatov on January 28, 1959».
A criminal case file, sheet 13
It turns out that Yura Yudin gave Sasha Kolevatov not only «a fur sleeveless jacket, trimmed with blue satin», but also the skis and ski poles. And this event took place in the 2nd Severnyi village on January 28, 1959. But how then did Yura Yudin get to the 41st Kvartal, having lost not only his fur jacket, but also the means of transportation across the terrain, covered with deep snow? And why did the group leader let the sick comrade go alone, without being accompanied? I will provide the answers to these fair questions in the next chapter of my work, dedicated to Igor Dyatlov’s group.
Chapter 2. What Yura Yudin was silent about
Previously, it was assumed that the sick Yura Yudin left the hikers on January 28, 1959, which corresponded to reality. But the question arises, how did he get from the village of geologists to the village of lumberjacks? And if one cannot give the right answer to this question, one can go astray, already at the start of the research, and this, in turn, will lead to a sad ending, rather than an understanding of what, in reality, happened to the hikers on that unfortunate day, when they were on the slope of the height «1079».
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Yuriy Yefimovich Yudin, April 15, 1959
«My leg ached, I could not participate in the hike, so on January 28, 1959, from the 2nd Severnyi village, I returned back to the city of Ivdel, and the other 9 people went on skis and with all the equipment along the route.»
A criminal case file, sheet 294
Yura Yudin himself does not explain how he got from the 2nd Severnyi village to the 41st Kvartal, moreover, from the village of geologists he immediately appears in the city of Ivdel, missing in his narration the two settlements at a time, i.e. the 41st Kvartal and the Vizhai village, as if he wanted to conceal this important information from the investigation. And this fact alone already raises suspicion of Yura Yudin’s desire to cooperate fully with the prosecutor’s office. And accordingly, the researchers of the past had to solve this difficult issue themselves, relying on the meager information, available both in the criminal case files and in the diaries of the hike participants.
The diary of Zina Kolmogorova, January 28, 1959
«Uncle Slava is leaving today with his horse, and Yura Yudin is leaving too. He took a few core samples. I saw this type of ore for the first time after drilling.»
Coming from the diary of Zina Kolmogorova, indeed, Yura Yudin left the hikers on January 28, 1959, and allegedly went on ski after Uncle Slava. And, as if in confirmation of this fact, there is reliable information, which was shared by Uncle Slava himself.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Stanislav Aleksandrovich Valyukyavichus, March 7, 1959.
«I spent the night in the hut with the hikers, had breakfast together with them the next morning. One of the hikers put a drilling core sample in the backpack and asked me to take it to the 41st Kvartal. At the same time, he said that I should head back slowly, and he would catch up with me, since he could not go on a hike further due to illness, his leg ached.»
A criminal case file, sheet 53
So far, it all fits and there is no doubt that Yura Yudin really went on skis after Uncle Slava, especially since he had no other choice. As you know, from the diaries of the hikers, the 2nd Severnyi village was abandoned back in 1953, accordingly, no one cleared the road to an uninhabited village, since it made no sense.
The copy of the Dyatlov group diary, January 27, 1959
«The 2nd Severnyi village is an abandoned geological site, comprising 20—25 houses. Only one of them is suitable for living. Late at night, in complete darkness we found the village and house, and only guessed through the ice-hole where the hut was.»
A criminal case file, sheet 25
And, as if in confirmation of this fact, there is reliable information, which Uncle Slava shares with the prosecutor’s office. Everything seems to be coherent, if not a slight problem, which previously the researchers of the past did not pay due attention to, and how wrong they were! It was namely this slight problem, that should have raised a doubt among the researchers if Yura Yudin really went along the Lozva river after Stanislav Valyukyavichus.
The Protocol of interrogation of the witness Stanislav Aleksandrovich Valyukyavichus, March 7, 1959
«I left the village about 10 o’clock in the morning, the hikers stayed behind. I arrived at the 41st Kvartal about 15 o’clock in the afternoon and after a while one hiker came, who collected the rock.»
A criminal case file, sheet 53
Indeed, coming from the Protocol of interrogation of Uncle Slava, Yura Yudin came and took the core sample. It seems that all checks out, which means that one has no reasons to doubt the correctness of the investigation conclusions. However, some understatement remains, which should be excluded in such a confusing matter. Firstly, why did Yura Yudin conceal under the interrogation that his leg ached in the 41st Kvartal, and secondly, why did he not tell how he got to the village of lumberjacks?
The copy of the Dyatlov group diary, January 27, 1959
«It took a long time to pack off: we waxed the skis, adjusted the bindings. Yurka Yudin is leaving home today. It’s a pity, of course, to part with him, especially for me and Zina, but nothing can be done about it.»
A criminal case file, sheet 26
It turns out, that despite the fact that the village of geologists was abandoned, Yura Yudin could leave, respectively, by car. But what about the words of Uncle Slava, that after a while one tourist came. Exactly, he came, but from where it was not known, since Vyacheslav Vylyukyavichus did not give the exact information where Yura Yudin came from. He could come both from the direction of the Lozva river and from the lumberjacks’ hut, where he had his things.
The diary of Zina Kolmogorova, January 27, 1959
«Yes, Yura Yudin is leaving us today. His sciatic nerves inflamed again and he is leaving. Such a pity. We distributed his load in our backpacks.»
It turns out, that as early as on January 27, the hikers distributed the load to their backpacks, leaving for Yudin only his things. Accordingly, he did not need to carry his backpack to the 2nd Severnyi village and he left it in the lumberjacks’ hut. That was why the hikers were not worried that the lame friend might not reach the 41st Kvartal, since he left by car. But a fair question arises: «Whence did the road, suitable for cars in winter appear, since the village was uninhabited, which meant that no one had cleaned it of snow?» Indeed, no one would clean the road to an uninhabited village, everyone knows that. But there is one fact, which the researchers of the past have forgotten. The road to an abandoned village would also be cleaned if it were located on the way to another village, i.e. behind the 2nd Severnyi village there was another settlement, which, at that time, was an operating mine.