- CASE FILES
interrogation of a witness The
On April 13, 1959, the prosecutor of the Investigative Department of the Prosecutor's Office of the Sverdlovsk Region, Romanov, the adviser of justice Romanov, interrogated this question in the prosecutor's office of the region as a witness, in compliance with Article 162-168 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR
1. Surname, first name and patronymic Valery M. Ufimtsev
2. Year of birth 1915
3. Birthplace of the mountains. Krasnoturinsk of the Sverdlovsk region
5.PartyNost: a member of the CPSU since 1946.
6. education (which school graduated and when: secondary - technical school of physical education in Perm in 1938. The
7. Occupation: a) Currently - the place of work and position: Instructor of the educational and sports department since 1947 b) at the time to which the testimony refers: the same. The
8. Criminal record: does not.
9. Permanent residence (exact address and telephone number): Sverdlovsk, ul. Pedagogical, 2, Apt. 317. The
10. Passport: does not have a passport The
11. What is the relationship with the accused: -.
On the responsibility for the first part of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR for refusing to testify and under Art. 95 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR for giving knowingly false testimony is forewarned.
The witness showed According to the instructions of the Committee for Physical Culture and Sports under the Council of Ministers of the USSR, the granting of the right to develop the route is authorized by any organization and institution and voluntary sports societies, which was done and prepared by the section of tourism UPI. The group of Dyatlov in approximately the same composition made hikes of the highest category of difficulty, and earlier, comrade. Dyatlov himself was in this area in 1957, but not along this route. The terms of the route to the group were known, and the route was approved by a route committee consisting of Koroleva V., Maslennikova E.P. and Comrade. Novikova, the group also had a map of this area, equipment and food for the entire duration of the journey.
Requirements for participants who were admitted to the group are fully consistent. instruction on tourism, art. 26-28. In the case of Category III difficulty, participants should have experience of participating in a Class II cruise of difficulty in this type of tourism, the leader should have the experience of heading a hike in category II of difficulty and the experience of participating in a Category III cruise for this type of tourism.
??. All participants met these requirements. Comrade. Dyatlov has the II sports category in tourism and a number of other comrades have ranks in tourism and a very strong group was formed. The group was prepared by the UPI Institute and financed by the trade union of the UPI, which was supposed to check its equipment before going on a campaign.
The deadline was set for the group on February 12, when it should
was to send a telegram from Vizhaya after returning from the route, more the group from nowhere could not give news about itself because of the lack of settlements on the route route and only 12 days after the release we could know about its well-being. Communication with the radio group was not carried out due to the absence of short-wave radio stations that are not allowed to be used for this purpose and are not provided for by any instructions. On February 16 the Committee telephoned comrade. Blinov and asked whether there were any news of the group and immediately ordered the phone of Vizhay and talked with the worker Laga. Khakimov, who said that they had driven a group of Dyatlov to a North mine on December 27, and they said they promised to return to Vizhay not earlier than February 15 and said that the group had not returned. After that, a search group from the UPI was immediately sent, we were informed in the regional committee of the CPSU Comrade. Zhuravlev about the lost group, filed a telegram to Vizhay, but they did not receive a reply, because they talked on the phone, as it became known that the group did not go back. When the UPM trade union committee was established, the headquarters for the search for this group, which was engaged in subsequent work on all searches.
All the requirements provided by the instructions for approval of routes were met, control of the preparation of equipment for the campaign should be carried out by the sports club UPI, as they collected the group on a campaign and it was funded, as well as all the necessary ?? food and footwear. Written by own hand.
(See on the back)
Question:Who specifically from the city committee for physical culture and sports had to watch the movement along the route of the group Dyatlov?
Answer:The movement of the tourist group of Comrade Dyatlov directly under the instruction was to be carried by the sports club UPI, but at the same time, the city committee should monitor the movement of tourist groups according to the telegrams, specifically this is entrusted to me. Comrade Dyatlova's search was started within 24 hours after receiving a report that the group did not return to the planned point.
According to the route this group of tourists 12 /II 59 g. was supposed to return to the village. See, but the worker of the camp, Comrade Hakimov, told us on the phone that the tourists at the time of their departure promised to return only 15 /II. 59. Why did not I take measures to search for the lost tourists since February 12, I can not say. This is to blame both the sports club UPI, and the committee on physical culture and sports.
Question:What violations of the instructions were made while preparing, equipping and sending this group along the route?
Answer:I believe that no violations of the instruction or omissions were allowed during the preparation, equipment and dispatch of this group.
The record of my words is written correctly, I read: the signature