Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about Russian History => Rasputin => Topic started by: investigator on January 28, 2004, 09:24:06 PM

Title: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: investigator on January 28, 2004, 09:24:06 PM
Rasputin's murder was very gruesome and strange.  First he was poisoned and he did not die and then he was shot several times but he was still alive and then finally he was thrown in a  freezing river.  His cause of death was drowning.  That means he survived the poison and bullets.  I mean what was he, was he human or something evil.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Nikolai04 on February 01, 2004, 02:45:50 PM
Is it true that the british secret service MI6 played a role in the murder?
I heard it recently on a Discovery channel/BBC tv documentary...
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: investigator on February 02, 2004, 01:10:03 AM
It is possible because Rasputin was a clear danger and they could have been involved.  I am not sure about what benefit they will get out of it.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: insight on February 02, 2004, 08:47:44 PM
Did this come from declassified files? This is the first I've heard of this.

Given the events prior to and during the civil war, you could see that there would be quite a few different hands in many different cookie jars.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Theresa DeMeo on February 05, 2004, 02:00:12 PM
Hello, in Edvard Raszinsky's excellent book "The Last Tsar", the author posits that one of the assassins lost his nerve at the crucial moment and could not bring himself to poison the cakes and wine that were offered to Rasputin to eat.  (This doesn't explain the seeming immunity to the gunshots though.)  I highly recommend reading "The Last Tsar".
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: BobAtchison on February 05, 2004, 10:50:05 PM
I think there are other reasons for the murder of Rasputin.  I'll try and take the time this weekend to write up my own theory.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: James Hogland on February 13, 2004, 02:26:28 PM
I read in some account of the murder that Rasputin's daughter, Maria, scoffed at the attempt to poison her father. She said he did not like sweet wine and rarely ever drank wine lie maderia, not did he like pastry cakes and did not eat them either. This is all from memory and I can't verify the facts. One must remember that the only account of what went on in that basement room comes from Yusupov, and he changed his story several times. There is some indication that other members of the imperial family were present and took part besides GD Dimiti, namely several of the Konstanovich princes, John (Ioann) and Igor, and that other family members supported the conspiracy.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: BeenaBobba on February 17, 2004, 01:09:01 PM
I personally don't think the British secret service was involved.  Frankly, the murder was too "sloppy" and inefficient to have been an offical execution - but maybe they wanted it to look like that.  Can you say conspiracy?  I'm only joking.  I haven't seen any evidence to back up that claim.  But perhaps it's possible.

I think the accounts of his murder (by poisoning, etc.) were exaggerated to some degree or another by Yussupov.    Rasputin had this larger-than-life persona that had people gossiping left and right even before he died.  I think this persona (while probably exaggerated) was not wholly unfounded.  I think it's possible that Felix Yussupov more or less told the people what they wanted to hear; I think he might have made Rasputin's death seem much eerier than it probably was so that it's accounts confirmed everyone's deep suspicions.  So, in a way, his playing up to that would have justified his murderous actions in the eyes of the public.  And indeed it did.

But, of course, Rasputin truly was an evil man.  I just don't know if killing him was the only option.  I think there could have been non-violent means of keeping him away from the Imperial Family.  

I've actually heard speculations that Rasputin was possessed by the devil.  That certainly would explain his superhuman strength and "hypnotic powers" if that were true.  As a believing Roman Catholic Christian, I don't think this can be rejected outright, especially if one believes Rasputin was directly related to the fall of the Romanov dynasty who, while I dislike their methods of ruling, did protect the Orthodox Church and its believers to some degree or another - only to be replaced by atheistic and oppressive Commies.  I don't agree with the Russian Tsarist regime, but Communism was far worse.

I certainly love speculating and hearing theories on this.  They're all interesting.

Take care,

Jennifer Benjamin
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Greg_King on February 18, 2004, 12:47:04 AM
Quote
I read in some account of the murder that Rasputin's daughter, Maria, scoffed at the attempt to poison her father. She said he did not like sweet wine and rarely ever drank wine lie maderia, not did he like pastry cakes and did not eat them either. This is all from memory and I can't verify the facts. One must remember that the only account of what went on in that basement room comes from Yusupov, and he changed his story several times. There is some indication that other members of the imperial family were present and took part besides GD Dimiti, namely several of the Konstanovich princes, John (Ioann) and Igor, and that other family members supported the conspiracy.


Through my research it seems (and this from a number of official documents including the original Petrograd police report) that those present were not the Konstantinovichii but rather at least two of the sons of Xenia and Sandro-Feodor and another.  The actress Vera Karelli was also, I believe, present, as were several other woman.  This would have given the affair more the appearance of the "party" Felix says he suggested to Rasputin.  But then in this murder-as with many things in his life and in his memoirs-Felix lied-he is notoriously unreliable on a number of things, and I don't for a minute believe his version of the murder itself.

Greg King
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Greg_King on February 18, 2004, 01:02:26 AM
Hi Jennifer-

Your points about Felix being unreliable are well-founded, but I have to say I strongly disagree with the characterization of Rasputin as "an evil man."  This probably isn't a popular position to take, but of anyone involved in the last years of the Dynasty and even the murder of the Romanovs, I think Rasputin's got the worst of it, for nearly a hundred years now.  There's nothing supernatural about his murder, nor about his having studied and learned hypnosis, which he did in Petersburg around 1912.  But his study of hypnosis had, I don't think, anything to do with his ability to alleviate Alexei's symptoms-it happened too many times, and a distance, when there was no interaction.  And while the idea that Bob Massie proposed in his book of Rasputin's assurances having a calming effect on Alix that she then transmitted to Alexei might have some support, in many cases Alexei wasn't conscious and would not have been subject to this kind of influence.

There have been far too many myths built up round Rasputin and while there is a lot of information and evidence that helps correct them and put things into proper perspective no one has yet done so-Radzinsky's book was worthless in that respect.  I have no problem believing that which was most obvious-that he had certain powers-certainly what Nicholas and Alix themselves believed.  It always amazes me that so many of those who later wrote memoirs and were Russian-and thus raised in a Church that recognized the supernatural and miracles-should deny this basic tenet of the faith when it came to Rasputin-from resentment, jealousy, and belief in rumor and innuendo.  Rasputin was, no doubt, a complex but simple man who found himself in over his head, and nothing in his life indicates any intentional evil.  He-like the rest of humanity-succumbed to temptations-which in his case-being surrounded by power-seeking sycophants-often took the form of reprehensible behavior.  His drinking (often exaggerated) was responsible for much of this-but it helps explain how he acted-he was, after all, a peasant, uneducated, moving through this strange world and being offered things at every turn.  While not innocent, he certainly wasn't evil in the sense that I think you mean.

Greg King
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: BeenaBobba on February 18, 2004, 05:57:40 AM
Quote
Rasputin was, no doubt, a complex but simple man who found himself in over his head, and nothing in his life indicates any intentional evil.  He-like the rest of humanity-succumbed to temptations-which in his case-being surrounded by power-seeking sycophants-often took the form of reprehensible behavior.  His drinking (often exaggerated) was responsible for much of this-but it helps explain how he acted-he was, after all, a peasant, uneducated, moving through this strange world and being offered things at every turn.  While not innocent, he certainly wasn't evil in the sense that I think you mean.


Hi Greg,

You make an excellent point.  That Rasputin may have had a dual nature seems a probable and balanced opinion.  When I use "evil man," however, I'm referring to his deceitfulness in having the Empress, particularly, believing him to be practically a saint.  Had she known about his "other side" (and maybe she did to some  degree or another), I think she would have been far more selective when it came to his advice.  I don't think the fall of the Empire can be chalked up entirely to Rasputin and his influence on the Empress; frankly, I think it was nearly inevitable, i.e., almost a time bomb, by the time Nikolai came to the throne.  But I do, however, think the whole Rasputin ordeal (and how it was perceived by the public) certainly served as a catalyst.  Perhaps, had there been no Rasputin, the dynasty could have survived long enough for the last Imperial family to have survived.  Who knows?

Also, while I understand Rasputin's struggles (heck, I'm a sinner myself), I can in no way justify them morally.  If he did study hypnotism and did in fact use it on Alexei, he should have been more honest about it - instead of claiming that he held powers from God.  His so-called "powers from God" are what endeared him to Alexandra.  The study of the occult, to the best of my knowledge, is sinful in the Orthodox Church.  And if his "powers" were based on the occult, and if he was deliberately deceitful about them to the family, I most certainly think he was an evil man.

When I say evil, I'm not referring to Rasputin being evil to the core, i.e., I don't think that his very essense was evil.  Of course, it's hard to paint anyone as completely evil, and I realize that.  But I do think that he was closer to evil than he was to saint.

Take care, Greg, and thanks for your thoughtful reply,

Jennifer Benjamin
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: BeenaBobba on February 18, 2004, 06:00:58 AM
Btw, I really don't have any set opinion on Rasputin yet.  I'm more or less exploring different theories about him and am trying to find the most probable.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Janet_Ashton on February 18, 2004, 07:22:00 AM
Jennifer wrote:

"When I use "evil man," however, I'm referring to his deceitfulness in having the Empress, particularly, believing him to be practically a saint.  Had she known about his "other side" (and maybe she did to some  degree or another), I think she would have been far more selective when it came to his advice.  I don't think the fall of the Empire can be chalked up entirely to Rasputin and his influence on the Empress; frankly, I think it was nearly inevitable, i.e., almost a time bomb, by the time Nikolai came to the throne.  But I do, however, think the whole Rasputin ordeal (and how it was perceived by the public) certainly served as a catalyst. "

Hello Jennifer - re. your good points above - I think there's little doubt that Alix DID know about Rasputin's "other side" to some degree, and that she chose not to ignore this (as some claim) but to accept it. Her letters include such comments as "He was very merry, though not tipsy", and even Olga Alexandrovna agreed in her memoirs that both the Emperor and Empress were fully aware of the dark side of his nature. I'm no expert on Orthodox theology, but I have the impression that Russian Church tradition places a greater than usual emphasis upon the redemptive power of suffering, and there was a certain cultural tendency in Russia to view sinning and self-humiliation as a form of suffering. Alix owned a book called "Holy fools of the Russian Church", which she leant to a friend with a sentence underscored. That sentence declared that great saintliness was often accompanied by sexual dissolution for one thing. I think she viewed Rasputin as a sort of voluntary Holy Fool and interpreted his behaviour in that light.  The best book currently available about Rasputin is in my opinion Joseph Fuhrmann's "Rasputin", published by Praeger in 1990. It may be out of print but you can probably pick up a copy online.
Also iluminating but probably only if you get really into this subject is "The slave soul of Russia: moral masochism and the cult of suffering" by Daniel Rancour-Laferriere. It's not about Rasputin but certainly helped me put him into context.

Janet
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: LisaDavidson on February 23, 2004, 12:29:06 AM
Excellent points, all, Janet.

I don't know of a mother or father who would not do all they could to help their child if he or she were ill. I agree that Alix probably knew how bad GIR was when away from the palace. But, since he was helping her son, she chose to overlook his excesses.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: RobMoshein on February 23, 2004, 09:18:15 AM
We know for a fact that three official investigations were undertaken on Rasputin and presented to Nicholas and Alexandra, the final one ordered and presented by Stolypin himself.  The problem was that they were sloppy reports, with some of the worst accusations not researched for accuracy.  Each report wanted to present Rasputin in the worst possible light to the Emperor, so as to discredit Rasputin totally in his eyes.  Unfortunately, each report relied more heavily on gossip, half-truths and innuendo than on actual facts, and so when Nicholas himself had these official accusations against Rasputin investigated, it turned out they were mostly not true. So the  true stories about him suddenly did not seem so "bad" in their eyes when compared to the outrageous lies also reported to them at the same time.

To me, the most logical answer is simply this: N and A knew that Rasputin was no "pure" man...yes he drank, yes he chased loose women...but beyond that, anything worse they heard about him they chalked up as a lie told to them out of jealousy, envy, spite or malice against Rasputin.  And remember, many other good and decent men around the Imperial Family also drank, and chased women.  Don't forget Admiral Tchagine, the commander of the Standardt, one of their closest and dearest friends, shot himself in the head because he had been having a sexual affair with a 16 year old girl from Yalta, who followed him back to Petersburg with her parents, who demanded he marry her for "soiling her virginity and reputation"....

I feel sure that after those "official" reports, Alexandra would have rejected the worst tales about him altogether, and as for the tamer stories she would have said "Judge others not lest ye be judged yourself" when it came to much of Rasputin's behavior.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Sarai on March 02, 2004, 02:34:20 PM
investigator,
Regarding the poisoning of Rasputin and his apparently miraculous survival of it, there is an interesting explanation in The Life and Tragedy of Alexandra Feodorovna by Baroness Sophie Buxhoeveden: "It is enough to say that Rasputin was first offered poisoned wine, the amateur murderers not knowing that for the poison they chose alcohol is an antidote. Their victim survived what appeared to be a deadly dose."

I have also read in a statement on a website that: "In the Rasputin poisoning, one reason that he seemed not to be affected by the ingestion of KCN [potassium cyanide] was that it might have decomposed to HCN [hydrogen cyanide] which subsequently evaporated." So, there are two possible explanations for his seemingly supernatural survival of the poisoning.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: BobAtchison on March 04, 2004, 09:16:34 AM
I agree with what Rob wrote and also with what Greg has written above....

Regarding Rasputin I think Alexandra would have remembered how Christ Himself was criticized for consorting with tax collectors and people of low repute - even women of bad reputation and this would have allowed her to gloss over some of his activities.

I think the idea that Rasputin used hypnosis on Aleksey or Anna Vyrubova when they were ill is not accurate, and we must attribute his obvious powers to something else.  Let me make a bad comparison - has anyone read the bio of Aimee Semple McPherson by Robert Epstein (I think I got that right)?  He writes that many people were really healed at Aimee's services - but she ended up tarnished by some of the things she did later.  (Some people of the time made comparisons between her and Rasputin)  Even so the healings seemed to have continued.  If there is a 'gift of healing' I don't profess to understand it and why some people have it and others don't.

I believe completely that Aleksey's recoveries are miraculous.  Where this came from is not clear to me.  Perhaps it was the prayers of his family and the Russian people;  perhaps it was God's pity for this poor child;  perhaps it was Rasputin....

Bob
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Todd on April 18, 2004, 09:54:59 PM
Here is some information you might find useful:

"The autopsy did not reveal the presence of any poison," writes Major-General Alexander Spiridovich, assistant to the palace commander.

Spiridovich, Alexander I., Raspoutine, Paris: Payot, 1935, p. 402

Many contradictory reports have been cited describing Rasputin's corpse when it was recovered from the waters of the Little Nevka. Some writers claim that Rasputin was still alive when he was thrown in the water and that his right hand had frozen in making the sign of the cross. The author of one book also claimed that Rasputin had been castrated by Yussupov when the latter flew into a rage following the murder. The official autopsy, performed by Professor Dimitry Kosorotov on December 20th, denied both reports:

On December 19th (O.S.) I was alerted and invited by a letter from the investigator to conduct an autopsy on the body of Rasputin which was to begin on the morning of December 21st in the chapel of the Chesmenskaya Hospice...

During the autopsy quite a number of injuries were found, many of which were caused posthumously. The entire right side of the head was shattered and flattened as a result of a contusion to the body during its fall from the bridge.* Death followed resulting from an abundant loss of blood from a gunshot wound to the stomach. The shooting took place, as I concluded, at almost point-blank range, from the left to the right side through the stomach and the liver, shattering the right half of the liver. There was a huge loss of blood. A gunshot wound was also found in the back, in the area of the spinal column, which shattered the right kidney, and another wound at point-blank range in the forehead (probably as he lay dying or after he had already died). The chest organs were intact and we examined the upper part of the body: yet there were no signs of death from drowning. The lungs were not swollen and no water or foamy liquid was found in the respiratory tract. Rasputin was already dead when he was thrown into the water. I recall, by the way, that the autopsy took place under quite awkward conditions, with kerosene lamps which had to be moved around in order to see the entire cavity.

_____________________________________________
* Or perhaps the result of Yussupov’s beating Rasputin with a rubber club - something Dr. Kosorotov was not aware of.


I have often had to conduct various difficult and unpleasant autopsies. I am a man of strong nerves who has seen just about everything there is to see. But seldom have I experienced such unpleasant moments as during that terrible night. The corpse made an unpleasant impression on me. The reedy expression on his face and the huge wound on the head were difficult to look at even for my experienced eyes. The haste with which this autopsy was performed also made a particular impression on me. A young, heavy-set woman arrived and then another young woman who instructed us that everything was to be concluded as quickly as possible. The authorities in charge of the investigation also requested this of me, but I found it essential to do my work methodically and conscientiously. In my opinion, Gregory Rasputin was killed by gunshot wounds from a revolver. One bullet was extracted; the other shots were made at close range and passed right on through the body, so that it was impossible to draw a precise conclusion as to how many people actually shot him.

Following the autopsy we had some tea in order to relax a bit from this difficult ordeal, and I clearly recall the perplexed glances on the faces of the representatives of the Investigatory Commission. Gregory Rasputin was of a strong constitution: he was some 50 years old and I recall how when talking with each other and sharing impressions during the autopsy we said that he could have easily lived for another 50. Rasputin was undoubtedly in an inebriated state when he was killed; the smell of cognac exuded from the body. His brain was normal in size and showed no signs whatsoever of any pathological aberrations.

I considered it my duty not to reveal all these facts before the trial. But now that the preliminary investigation into the murder of Rasputin-Novy has  been completed by Alexander F. Kerensky, the new Minister of Justice, I can speak about it.

Professor Dimitry Petrovich Kosorotov


Autopsy report on Grigory Rasputin as summarized by Prof. D. Kosorotov; see Kovyl-Bobyl, I., The Entire Truth About Rasputin, Obshchestvo Vozrozhdeniye, Profizdat, Moscow, 1990. (My translation, TRB)

Thank you for starting this thread.

Todd
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Louise on April 18, 2004, 10:25:42 PM
Great post Todd. I wonder who the two women were that Kosorotov mentioned?

Another Romanov/Rasputin mystery and myth laid to rest.

Louise
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Todd on April 18, 2004, 10:41:47 PM
Louise,

Thank you for your comments. I have no direct evidence as to who the two women were. From Dr. Kosorotov's description of a young, heavy-set woman, I believe this might very well be Anna Vyroubova. What do you think?

Todd
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Joanna Mayer on April 24, 2004, 06:16:04 PM
I believe that it was Akulina Laptinskaya, Rasputin's houskeeper/lover while he was in the capital, who prepared him for burial...I think that I read that in "Rasputin The Saint Who Sinned " by Moynahan.  

but I might be wrong.
Joanna Mayer
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Todd on April 24, 2004, 07:39:24 PM
Joanna,

That would make a lot of sense. You could certainly be right about that.

Todd
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Katharina on April 26, 2004, 05:42:15 AM
Quote
Cyanide is 100% lethal, period.  


Agreed - but only if you take it. In my opinion Rasputin neither tried the petit fours nor did he drink the poisoned wine.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Ella on April 27, 2004, 07:28:50 PM
I think that Rasputin was definetly some thing evil. Yeah he was completely human, but he definetly had some strange power, whether it be good or evil. There were just too many weird coincidences to over look it. I honestly think he had something to do with the over throwing of the Romanovs. But who knows?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Wakana Narisako on July 19, 2004, 08:28:49 PM
I honestly didn't read all the messages posted on this page, I maybe read 5-10.  I don't think Rasputin was that bad of a counselor.  Besides, there is no proof since there are no writings from that time stating that the murder or drowning of Rasputin ever occured.  I honestly don't think it matters that much if he was killed or drowned, but what matters is that he is dead and that Nicholas II didn't try to stop him before he started taking control.  If anyone disagrees, I will be more than happy to hear their opinion.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on July 19, 2004, 09:27:32 PM
Quote
I honestly didn't read all the messages posted on this page, I maybe read 5-10.  I don't think Rasputin was that bad of a counselor.  Besides, there is no proof since there are no writings from that time stating that the murder or drowning of Rasputin ever occured.  I honestly don't think it matters that much if he was killed or drowned, but what matters is that he is dead and that Nicholas II didn't try to stop him before he started taking control.  If anyone disagrees, I will be more than happy to hear their opinion.


There ARE writings from the time, both Greg's book and the new Eduard Radzinsky book "The Rasputin File" have police reports and records of the time, but a lot of the reports, especially the timing of the events and the number of people involved, contradict the stories told by Felix and Purishkevitch. It is clear that some people, like the women, (Vera Korelli and possibly Dmitri's stepsister, Marianna, according to one report by Anna Vryobova) were being protected by the participants' denial of their presence.  The police saw the two women being ejected from the Moika palace. The departure and arrivals of cars, and the number of cars and people at the house that night, is in dispute. The police reports do not match the eyewitness accounts.

Radzinsky even suggests that it may have been Dmitri himself who delivered the mortal shots, and Purishkevitch covered up for him because he was a possible candidate for succession to the throne in the event of Nicholas's ouster. In his report, written on the train as he fled town soon after the murder, keeps saying 'thank goodness the young Grand Duke's hands are not soiled with the blood of this peasant." But was that true? Did Dmitri do more than just drive the getaway car when they dumped the body? He was a much better marksman than either Yussoupov or Purishkevitch. Radzinsky speculates modern furinsics (sp?) would prove that the shot that brought him down was from a different person than the others (the first by Felix and some shoddy shots by Purishkevitch as he fled. He suggests, why, if P. had missed at such close range, could he have hit the mark when Rasputin was FURTHER away? The theory was Dmitri appeared and shot Rasputin as he fled, where P. had missed and Felix was inside passed out. The bullets themselves wouldn't matter, as Felix used Dmitri's Browning revolver to shoot. Also, a night watchman at the bridge where the body was dumped saw the car, and something being thrown in. So there IS evidence of his murder.

There is SO much that can be explored with this! There are even some reports that Dr. Lazovert confessed on his deathbed that he had never really added poison to the food and drinks, fearing for his soul. If this is true, it takes a lot of fun out of the invincible Rasputin theory, which I like better ;)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rskkiya on July 19, 2004, 09:39:33 PM
Annie,

I discovered some very interesting information about Rasputins ability to heal Alexie...Its at another thread on Rasputin but it have to do with aspirin...I don't know if its something that you would be interested in...He was a facsinating fellow.

R.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on July 19, 2004, 09:43:08 PM
Yes I would be interested, he is very fascinating!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rskkiya on July 19, 2004, 09:58:55 PM
Its under Imperial History RE Rasputin...

R.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on September 18, 2004, 08:01:30 AM
I have just carried out a major investigation for the BBC/Discovery Channel regarding Rasputin's murder.  Lots of new evidence both documentary and forensic.  Watch BBC2 9.00pm 1 October 2004 - new Time Watch - history is changed.

I am writing a major academic article on the subject.  Does anyone know where there are photographs of Lazovert or Shutokin.

I was given access to the State Archives and Political Museum as part of the research

Richard Cullen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on September 18, 2004, 09:37:45 AM
Mr. Cullen,
Welcome to the Forum, and many thanks for telling us about your work.  Any idea when Discovery Channel will be airing it for us in America? Should you be so inclined, we would love to have your article after publishing for a page in our Archives, or perhaps an original piece for us.
Either way, we are so please you have joined us.
FA
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Genevieve on September 20, 2004, 12:21:59 AM
About the aspirin it was on the history chanel.   The doctors thought that aspirin was a wonder drug and
ordered it for Alexie.   That made Alex bleed more.  Rasputin did not trust the drug and told his mother not to give it to him.  Thus the bleeding stopped and it appeared a miracle cure by Rasputin.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on September 20, 2004, 01:37:20 AM
The aspirin incident is not a recent revelation. It was detailed in d'Encausse's book Nicholas II at p 147, which she wrote in 1996.

Unfortunately very few other writers have given much attention to this more plausible explanation in alleviating Alexei's times of crisis.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rskkiya on September 20, 2004, 08:16:37 AM
Belochka

You are right about the aspirin not being a new revelation -- however it was a new one for me (sad ignorant little creature wimpering in the corner...hmmmnhmmmn :'() LOL .
It had not been mentioned in any recent posts that I was aware of so  when I found it, I mentioned it in passing on another thread.
I wonder if Alix would have had the same devotion to the "prayers" of Rasputin had she realized the properties of aspirin and its affect on her son.

I look forward to the Discovery program and hope that it may be shown in the barbaric west...(Umurikuh!)  

R
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: LisaDavidson on September 20, 2004, 04:29:33 PM
Mr. Cullen - where have you looked for photos of  Lazovert or Shutokin? I ask because I have a full shelf of Rasputin books. But, if you've already looked at the books published about GER, there is no point in my cracking them open to look for these men's photos.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on September 20, 2004, 10:58:39 PM
Quote
I wonder if Alix would have had the same devotion to the "prayers" of Rasputin had she realized the properties of aspirin and its affect on her son. R


I strongly doubt that Alix was open to understanding that any apparent alleviation of Alexei's condition was anything other than spiritual. She was desperate, and knowing that no medical intervention would have been successful, other than pain minimization, there was no other explanation as far as she was concerned.

It is not unrealistic to believe that Rasputin gave Alix instructions to discard the Aspirin because it was a manufactured pharmaceutical product, a form of medical intervention of which he was ignorant, coming from a primitive Siberian village. Afterall the use of home remedies was the more traditional practice where he came from.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rskkiya on September 21, 2004, 09:06:33 AM
Bella Belochka  ;)

A very good point regarding Rasputins ignorance of the properties of aspirin...
 If only these properties had been known at that time --I gather that aspirin's tendency to thin the blood was  not understood until the 1970s.

R
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on September 21, 2004, 09:43:36 PM
Hi rskkiya,

Yes it was around that time when pharmacologists began to understand how Aspirin actually worked in the body.

Many decades before (in the 1940's I believe), it was noted that Aspirin helped cardiac patients to survive for longer periods, by reducing the risk of heart attacks (myocardial infarction) in patients with unstable angina.

While Aspirin's therapeutic efficacy as an anti-coagulant was only appreciated many decades later. The key was that Aspirin prevented platelets to coagulate in the bloodstream.

Unknowingly, Alexei's doctors administered the new wonder drug Aspirin, without understanding that this medication was detrimental in persons who suffered from blood disorders such as Hemophilia. Its use lead to prolonged bleeding times and increased the risk of hemorrhages, which is exactly what happened to Alexei.

Rasputin ->No Aspirin = bleeding diminished


No magic, no spiritual intervention, just simple Pharmacology! ;)  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Sergio on September 22, 2004, 10:42:58 AM
In the book “Genetics” by Morton Jenkins, published by Hodder Headline, 1998, you can read:

“The cyanide`s (CN) incapability to rapidly kill Rasputin, suggests that he was a mutant because his stomacal glandules don`t segregated hydrochloric acid (HCl). For the majority of people the HCl reacts with CN to produce the letal acid hydrogen cyanide (HCN).”

If so, Rasputin wasn`t something evil, he was a MUTANT (in the genetic sense, of course)!  :o
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rskkiya on September 22, 2004, 03:29:34 PM
Sergio

Thanks for that information, but I had read that the reason that the cyanide didn't kill Rasputin was because there was no cyanide...the chemist felt anxious and replaced the crystals with some harmless stuff at the last moment ... I could be wrong -tho ...too bad that the body cannot be exhumed and examined for cyanide.

I dont think that the initial autopsy found anything about poison.

R
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: inquirer on October 13, 2004, 06:24:37 PM
I think you have to be very skeptical of that initial autopsy. He was killed by the establishment because of his power and the last thing they wanted to do was to create a legend by his death which would  happen if the rumers of his physical vitality and strength proved to be true. In effect it doesn't seem to have mattered anyway. By any measure a man of incredible personal power and physical strength.

What do you think was the source of his strength?

I believe it was a combination of desire,belief and lack of any restaint.  Power many of us might possess if it we not for our socialization.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on October 16, 2004, 01:53:27 AM
Quote
too bad that the body cannot be exhumed and examined for cyanide.

I dont think that the initial autopsy found anything about poison. R


Unfortunately no toxicology assays were conducted when Rasputin's remains were examined macroscopically. [Ref: p 697 in Gregori Rasputin without Myths and Legends Elvira Vatala, 2000, Armada press, Moscow (Russia language)]

The 'cyanide' story will continue unabated, because it does create a nice myth! The simple truth is that we will never really know. ;)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rskkiya on October 16, 2004, 08:33:26 AM
Bella Bellochka!

Thanks for both the information and the book recomendation about Rasputin --I will look for it asap!
I stand corrected about the poison! :)
R
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on October 16, 2004, 11:12:19 PM
Bonjour rskkiya!

The unique feature about the book which I quoted is that it comprises diary extracts, letters and memoir exerpts from high officials, including members of the Imperial Court - N. & A. and Anna Virubova. In fact all the people who were directly or indirectly interested in Rasputin are included. There are police protocols, Gendarmerie notes which also include comments made by members of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Relevant material taken from Kerensky's Extraordinary Commission enquiry of 1917 are also added.

There are a many photographs inserted towards the back of the book.

I hope that you can obtain your own copy and enjoy it as much as I have.  :D

A book worth having IMHO! :D
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: inquirer on October 17, 2004, 09:24:47 PM
I think Rasputin had what we would refer to today as "crazy strength."
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on October 24, 2004, 02:03:13 PM
Dear all,

Firstly I support Greg's view that Rasputin was not evil - if you were to take the New Oxford Dictionary Definition then he probably was.  But to me evil means someone like Stalin, Hitler or Pol Pot to name three or serial murderers, rapists and child sex offenders.  I think he was manipulative but I could recast him in another light 'peasant boy makes good' - a story of rags to riches.

I have a few comments on the autopsy - the damage referred to on the head was I believe the result of the bullet exiting from his head.  You can find some graphic descriptions of close contact bullet wounds to the head in Greg's book the Fate of the Romanovs.  The pictures I have in my possession from the Museum of Political History do not show this damage which i believe was to the back of his head.  Professor Zharov examined all the photographs as I have and can find no 'substantial damage' - the real damage must be at the back under his hair.  The face does have some considerable damage - but nothing the turn an experienced pathologist's or detective's stomach and if Professor Zharov gives me permission i will be publishing his full re consideration (with his two colleagues) in my paper on the forensic reinvestigation into rasputin's death which Bob and Rob have agreed to publish on the site.  I probably have twenty pages to go and have been under a lot of pressure at work recently so I have unable to spend as much time as I would want in completing it.

Rasputin wasn't poisoned - no smell of almonds - that is associated with cyanide.  No evidence of food in the stomach - there are possible, and highly improbale explanations about the cyanide having turned to potash - but this defies reality.

He didn't drown.  He did not possess super strength.  Look at the picture - on this web site in Lost Splendour as he got older (I think it might be before Chapter 13 but not certain).  he was into middle age, like all of us, even today with the advent of gyms, we start to sag.  With his drunken life style he was ageing considerably.  This wasn't some super fit human being, he was basically a high performing alcoholic.

Kossorotov was aware of him being hit with a heavy but supple weapon - he identifies its use in the crushing of Rasputin's genitalia.

As an aside the idea of him making the sign of the cross as he allegedly fought against drowning is just not reality.  His hands were firmly bound and his body wrapped from tip to toe in cloth, only his arms pertruded.  On one of the photographs I have you can see where the bonds were cut (cleanly with a knife) when he was removed deep frozen from the Nevka.

Richard



Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Vulga on November 12, 2004, 05:46:18 PM
I am very leary of the results of the autopsy and other information that came from the establishment. It was not to their benefit to give him credit for anything yet he was a very exceptional man if only given his ability to rise in the aristocracy as a peasant without any formal education.

I believe that he did possess great strength. High performance alcoholics can be very strong people [how about Winston Churchill]. Infact, one historian has theorized that it was the excessive drinking that Rasputin participated in that built up a good deal of his strength and certainly reisistance to the poison. I think he possessed unrestrained strength of the type that we see in crazy people who can break handcuffs or in people under stress such as the 120 pound grandmother who lifted a 3000 pound car off of her grandson. In such cases people generally  hurt themselves because they have passed the normal psychological and emotional safety brakes that most of us have learned as children.

Psychologist Al Siebert wrting in "The Survivor Personality" calls this over conditioning the "good child" syndrome and says it limits their ability to survive.

Oriental martial arts refer to this unlimited power as Ki or Chi.  They go through all types of training to release the barriors which are generally believed, even in training athletes, to limit us to 40% of our potential strength.

Rasputin was the member of a Russian Religious sect that believed to be saved you had to sin and sin big. He was raised without any rules and had a vision that he believed enpowered him. He did not have social restraints put on him so there was no need to take training to release them. Pure potential enegy without brakes-that is Ki or Chi.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Olga on November 13, 2004, 02:46:09 AM
Rasputin was not a member of the Khlysty sect.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rskkiya on November 13, 2004, 06:24:00 PM
As far as I know all khlysty connections were purely circumstancial and completely unprovable...

    Rasputin- for good or ill -was a Russian Orthodox peasant from Siberia who's faith probably had more in common with fertility based earth worship than any deep conprehension of the mysteries of the Church.
He was a Pagan with a nice gloss of Orthodoxy.


rskkiya :D
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on November 14, 2004, 11:03:10 AM
Spiridovitch spent quite a lot of time, both during Rasputin's life and after the Revolution on the question of R being a Khlyst... The answer is a definitive NO. It was mostly the exaggeration and rumor of the public.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Vulga on November 15, 2004, 05:35:01 PM
If Rasputin was not a member of the Khlyst then to what extent do you think that it influenced him since it was active in in the area?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on November 15, 2004, 05:39:33 PM
None. Rasputin was Rasputin...
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on November 15, 2004, 06:36:47 PM
I asked this some time ago but it never got answered, lost in the threads:
Are their any descendants of Rasputin still around? He did have children, did they ?
Robert
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Janet_W. on November 15, 2004, 06:51:18 PM
Working from memory, I believe he had four children with his wife--two boys, and two girls. One  of the sons was mentally disadvantaged. The other, if I recall correctly, died in the war. Of the daughters, I do not remember what happened to one of them, but Maria (who at one point made her living as a lion tamer with a circus!) lived to a rather elderly age and was the co-author of at least one book. (The one I have is written with Patte Barham and is about Maria's father.) I do not believe Maria had any children--or, if she did, they did not survive her. In her later years she lived somewhere in Los Angles and earned extra money as a neighborhood babysitter!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on November 15, 2004, 07:21:07 PM
In the early 1970's I met an old Russian lady at a Romanov auction [still have the catalogue}. She was mad for anything she could bid on, but couldn't pay for any of it at the end. I wonder if that was her? There was all sorts of talk about her.
[and the prices THEN, for that stuff, so cheap, if only...]
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on November 17, 2004, 09:51:40 AM
I met his grand daughter at the Yusupov Palace when we were filming there earlier this year.  A charming and very pleasant lady.  She was showing friends around the Palace.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Vulga on November 24, 2004, 11:22:54 AM
Last night I watched the HBO video "Rasputin" which I thought was excellent. I would be interested to know if any of you have seen it, and if so  how accurate you think it was.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Denise on November 24, 2004, 01:37:16 PM
Quote
Last night I watched the HBO video "Rasputin" which I thought was excellent. I would be interested to know if any of you have seen it, and if so  how accurate you think it was.


I just bought this video, and although I didn't find many of the events portrayed to be factual, I found the characterizations and relationships to be very good and as I have read them.  Ian McKellan and Alan Rickman gave great performances as did the actor playing Alexei.  Greta ? who played Alix was very good as well.  

I really liked the film and will definately classify it as a keeper.  There is a discussion about this movie on the Films about the Romanovs board as well.  

Denise
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on November 24, 2004, 02:19:28 PM
How was Yussoupov portrayed?

Also, Rasputin did have 4 kids, one boy died in infancy, the other was mentally disadvantaged, but drafted just the same. Alexandra got him a job as an orderly in the hospital where she worked to save him from the front. I heard he disappeared, along with his mother, in the terror camps of the 1930's. The youngest daughter, Varvara, was said to have been poisoned in 1923 while trying to leave Russia for Germany. The oldest daughter, Maria, who wrote the books, ended up in England and America and died in LA in 1977. She had 2 daughters, and I believe those are the source of the decendants.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Denise on November 24, 2004, 04:00:28 PM
Quote
How was Yussoupov portrayed?


Felix was portrayed as a young man who hated the way that Rasputin was bringing disgrace on the IF.  He finally approached someone and they planned the murder.  He seemed to be taking orders on how to do it, whereas my impression was that HE planned it.

I don't know how factual this portrayal was, as I just got my copy of Greg's book on Felix from Amazon yesterday.  

Denise
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on November 24, 2004, 05:56:18 PM
Annie, that could very well have been the old lady we met at the Romanov auction in LA, early 70's.
At first I felt sorry for her, she bid [and won] on several things, cheap-then- souvenir plates, cups, pictures, medals, etc. then at the end could not come up with the money to pay for any of it ! Pissed a lot of people off because they let her "have" the items instead of bidding on them. Including me !
Cheers, indeed !
Robert
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: JM on November 24, 2004, 07:44:18 PM
Robert, it is my opinion that you have had an interesting life.
Cheers.
Title: Who Killed Rasputin?
Post by: Johnny on December 08, 2004, 06:45:30 PM
Under Dimitri Pavlovich's thread, some people seemed to be strongly rejecting Radzinsky's allegations that Dimitri was Rasputin's murderer. I don't think that Felix was the murderer. He was a pussicat (I am spelling it this way because otherwise the automatic profanity nanny changes it to "girl thingy cat" which I find certainly more obscene than my endearingly innocent expression) and would not have been capable of killing a mouse. I also do not think that Purishkevich was the real murderer as he himself claims to be, in his account of the story. The reason for my belief is that if Purishkevich really was the man who killed Rasputin then there would have been no reason for Felix to invent a story and take the responsibility upon himself. He could have just gone along with the truth which would have been easier for him. I can imagine that Dimitri was the actual killer, meaning the one who pulled the last trigger. But I am not at all sure, since I base it mostly on Radzinsky's explanations, whom I haven't been trusting lately.
So without beating around the bush any further, I am ready to drop the bomb:
WHO KILLED RASPUTIN THEN?
Title: Re: Who Killed Rasputin?
Post by: Annie on December 08, 2004, 07:28:40 PM
Go to the Yussoupov forum here, there is A LOT of discussion on this topic! :)
Title: Re: Who Killed Rasputin?
Post by: LisaDavidson on December 08, 2004, 11:46:27 PM
Radzinsky, as I have continued to say, is a highly irresponsible writer of popular history. I urge you, Johnny, once again, to read someone else on this subject. He plays fast and loose with the facts. If his book is the basis of this topic, I pass!
Title: Re: Who Killed Rasputin?
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 09, 2004, 03:34:21 AM
Hi,

As Annie says Radzinsky is not a historian.  Last night I was finishing off the section in my paper that completely destroys Radzinsky's theory.  It is not my view of what happened but is based completely on the evidence available.  Radzinsky has based a theory on assumption and partial use of available evidence to describe Dimitry as the killer.

I wish I could complete my work earlier but I am still waiting for more information from Russia and formal permissions.  Two people are currently reading through the almost complete paper for me (one who is a member of the Alexander Palace) and I hope in the not too distant future be able to send it to Rob and Bob for placing on this site.

Who did kill Rasputin? - well without going into the British link I now doubt that any of the known conspirators did, they were there but I think there is compelling evidence to suggest that it was someone else.  I discover new things everyday, but I can promise you this is the most complete forensic (of the court) examination ever carried out of the evidence into who didn't kill Rasputin.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Johnny on December 26, 2004, 05:23:16 PM
Quote
Jennifer wrote:

Hello Jennifer - re. your good points above - I think there's little doubt that Alix DID know about Rasputin's "other side" to some degree, and that she chose not to ignore this (as some claim) but to accept it. Her letters include such comments as "He was very merry, though not tipsy", and even Olga Alexandrovna agreed in her memoirs that both the Emperor and Empress were fully aware of the dark side of his nature. I'm no expert on Orthodox theology, but I have the impression that Russian Church tradition places a greater than usual emphasis upon the redemptive power of suffering, and there was a certain cultural tendency in Russia to view sinning and self-humiliation as a form of suffering. Alix owned a book called "Holy fools of the Russian Church", which she leant to a friend with a sentence underscored. That sentence declared that great saintliness was often accompanied by sexual dissolution for one thing. I think she viewed Rasputin as a sort of voluntary Holy Fool and interpreted his behaviour in that light.  

Janet,
That's exactly what Radzinsky believs in his Rasputin book.
I agree with Jennifer that the Russian empire was boud to fall with or without Rasputin. Three other empires and several monarchies fell at the very same time and neither one had a Rasputin. I also believe that without Rasputin it was very likely that the Imperial family would not have been slaughtered. Also likely that the bolsheviks wouldn't take over. Remember this was not a communist revolution. Lenin and the Bolsheviks stole the revolution after the fact, the same way Khomeini and the islamists stole the Iranian revolution after it had been acheived by comunist and socialust students.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Johnny on December 26, 2004, 06:03:00 PM
Quote
If Rasputin was not a member of the Khlyst then to what extent do you think that it influenced him since it was active in in the area?

I think he was somewhat influenced, but probably himself had come up with his own brand of it not exactly knowing what was what. After all he was an uneducated and illiterate peasant. As someone mentioned above, he was a pagan with a gloss of Orthodoxy over it.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: matushka on March 11, 2005, 04:20:23 PM
Sorry if this question was already discussed (in that case, just tell me where!), I do not find answer: what was the relation of Elisaveta Feodorovna to the project of Rasputin's Murder? Did she know something? Was she agree? I read in very bad and popular articles (so not espessially reliable) that she blessed murderer... According to the new version of the crime, it seem to be impossible. Thank for answer.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: bluetoria on March 12, 2005, 11:41:51 AM
It seems likely that she knew something was about to happen but I do not think she actively encouraged the murder. Her telegrams to Felix & Dmitri (which did not reach them but reached Alix instead) congratulated them on their 'act of patriotism' even before Rasputin's body had been officially identified. It is likely that had heard the rumours of what had happened & she DID know that they were under house arrest so perhaps that explains her telegrams. They seem to show that she was pleased by what had happened  :-/ At the same time they show that she did not think Felix capable of murder - so perhaps she didn't think he would really do it.
It is - to me - inconceivable that a person of her calibre could encourage murder but the relief she felt was, I suppose, understandable as she & others had tried SO hard to persuade Alix to 'see sense.' The telegrams weee probably written hastily & show her immediate reaction.
She was away on pilgrimage praying for the IF AND for Rasputin (as she later told Nicky) at the actual time of the murder. Perhaps she prayed for him because she suspected what was going to happen...or in the hope that he would go away...
When she realized that Alix was virtually blaming her for supporting Felix & Nicky, she wrote a letter to Nicky which shows quite how angry she really felt.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: matushka on March 12, 2005, 04:32:32 PM
Thank you. Where can I read this letter in the web? It seems I do not know it.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: bluetoria on March 12, 2005, 06:26:48 PM
Quote
Thank you. Where can I read this letter in the web? It seems I do not know it.


Dear Matushka  :) I will write it out tomorrow!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Helen_Azar on March 12, 2005, 08:07:25 PM
Quote
Her telegrams to Felix & Dmitri (which did not reach them but reached Alix instead) congratulated them on their 'act of patriotism' even before Rasputin's body had been officially identified.


This is a little disturbing to me, after all, no matter what - it was murder...."frustration" or not it was not justifiable, especially considering that it changed absolutely nothing :-/.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: bluetoria on March 13, 2005, 06:04:35 AM
Quote

This is a little disturbing to me, after all, no matter what - it was murder...."frustration" or not it was not justifiable, especially considering that it changed absolutely nothing :-/.


As I see it, she was not so much condoning murder as making an immediate reaction to the news of Rasputin's disappearance (yes, I suppose death.) I think she greeted the news with relief - it was, as I say, only an immediate reaction (& an understandable one under the circumstances). It was in her character to react quickly to something & then, having thought about it, to make a more considered reaction (there is evidence of this in several of her letters to Nicky). Later, I think, she WAS trying to justify Felix & Dmitri - which is also understandable since they were so close to her (& I would probably think the same way if it were, for example, my nephews who were involved.) I think she was looking at the motives rather than the action.

Matushka, I will find that letter v. soon & write it today!  :)  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: bluetoria on March 13, 2005, 08:40:00 AM
This is part of the letter from Ella to Nicky:

"I have rushed to the two of you, whom I sincerely love, in order to warn you that all the classes from the lowest to the highest have reached their limit...[Alix] ordered me to say nothing...and I left wondering whether we would ever meet again....what tragedies might play themselves out & what suffering is still in store for us...
When I got back here I learned that [Rasputin] had been killed by Felix who wouldn't hurt a fly, who didn't want to go into the military because he didn't want to shed anyone else's blood. I pictured what he must have gone through before he decided to do it; I imagined how, moved by the blood of the Fatherland, he had decided to rescue the sovereign and the country from a person who made everyone suffer. The crime may be considered an act of patriotism."
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: matushka on March 22, 2005, 04:33:33 PM
Hum... I found it only today. Thank you. Strange, strange, I am surprised... Justify Felix and Dmitri Pavlovich, I understand, she wanted to evite them something bad. But as said Helen, they kill (according to official version). That is the only time I agree with Nicolas (at end, he was strict): a murder is a murder, and murderer must be punished...
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: matushka on March 22, 2005, 04:35:22 PM
Sorry, is there any other document? Letter to Felix before the murder, after him?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: bluetoria on March 22, 2005, 04:53:39 PM
No, not before the murder...I don't think. But I am SURE that after the murder it was only a momentary reaction on Elizabeth's part!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Helen_Azar on March 22, 2005, 09:35:01 PM
Quote
That is the only time I agree with Nicolas (at end, he was strict): a murder is a murder, and murderer must be punished...


Ditto!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: matushka on March 23, 2005, 03:26:45 PM
Thank you. I have an other question (I must say I never very well studied Rasputin s murder): some memories said that people (I mean simple people, peasants and other) was very happy of the death of Gregory Efimovich. So wrote Chavelsky, and, if my memory is good, Paleologue. Other books and memories say the contrary. According to them, simple people was sad that aristocrat kill one of them. Where is the truth :(? If this question was already discussed, jsut tell me please.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: bluetoria on March 24, 2005, 09:00:34 AM
According to one source (I have forgotten which, but I shall try to find it) the ordinary people lit candles in front of the icon of St. Dmitri in thanks for what Dmitri had done.
I would think that MOST Russians at the time barely noticed what had happened. Since they were in the middle of the war, I doubt they were very interested in the life & death of one man about whom they had only heard rumours.  :-/  It is, perhaps, surprising that the revolutionaries did not make more of it, since they could have used it to show how the aristocracy were hardly punished for their 'crimes.'
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: AGRBear on June 29, 2005, 01:34:47 PM
Quote
"Yankee Doodle" was also the song played over and over on phonograph record by Yussoupov and his guests at his party the night Rasputin was killed. It really happened, it wasn't just made up for "Nicholas and Alexandra."


Anyone have the source where I could find this little tid-bit of information???

AGRBear
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Scott on June 29, 2005, 02:02:16 PM
It seems like I have seen this discussed before, but can't find it:

Off of which bridge was Rasputin's body thrown?  And what is the exact location of this bridge?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on June 29, 2005, 03:53:17 PM
His body was thrown into the river Malaya Nevka from the Petrovsky bridge, that connects the Petrovsky and Krestovsky islands
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Scott on June 30, 2005, 12:01:47 AM
Is this the proper bridge?  If so, do you know whether the body was thrown over the east or west side of the bridge, and was it on the north end, south end or middle?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/lydunka/PetrovskyBridge-Map.jpg)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Rijio on July 09, 2005, 07:38:40 AM
Yeah, rasputin's murder was really strange indeed, but it made me laugh a lot especially when Yussupov said that he saw that rasputin was dead, but then Rasputin jumped and tried to struggle him  ;D
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Caleb on September 14, 2005, 02:53:02 PM
A close friend of ours, an Egyptologist, told me that he met an elderly woman several years ago. Supposedly she was a young girl during the Russian Revolution in 1917. Suppossedly this woman told our friend that she remembered seeing Rasputin's body being fished out of the Neva River.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: jim_segodnia on September 23, 2005, 05:48:45 PM
Quote
Rasputin's murder was very gruesome and strange.  First he was poisoned and he did not die and then he was shot several times but he was still alive and then finally he was thrown in a  freezing river.  His cause of death was drowning.  That means he survived the poison and bullets.  I mean what was he, was he human or something evil.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on September 24, 2005, 02:14:17 PM
Hi

Gruesome it was, strange it was - but he wasn't poisoned and he didn't drown - myth as far as the drowning is concerned and story telling by yusupov and purishkevich in respect of the poisoning.  No forensic evidence to support either contention.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: brnbg aka: liljones1968 on October 13, 2005, 08:47:52 PM
Quote

     Rasputin- for good or ill -was a Russian Orthodox peasant from Siberia who's faith probably had more in common with fertility based earth worship than any deep conprehension of the mysteries of the Church.

He was a Pagan with a nice gloss of Orthodoxy.





excellent!  

this is precisely how i see him, but would never have been able to put it quite so succinctly.

thank you, rskkiya, stating something i could never quite formulate.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 13, 2005, 10:42:54 PM
Quote
Hi

Gruesome it was, strange it was - but he wasn't poisoned and he didn't drown - myth as far as the drowning is concerned and story telling by yusupov and purishkevich in respect of the poisoning.  No forensic evidence to support either contention.

Richard


Richard, where did the the bit about "lungs full of water" come from , was it just something that was made up?  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on October 16, 2005, 06:39:17 AM
Helen,

Partially made up there was some water in the lings but nowhere near to suggest death by drowning.  There is a full explanation of death by drowning contained on the Dundee University's department of Forensic medicine web-site.

On interestingly had Rasputin's body not floated into the left hand bank of the Malaya Nevka, looking from the Petrovsky bridge towards the Bay of Finland the body would have floated out to sea and given the water temperatures at that time of year is likely never to have risen.

This again is a reason that I believe that weights were never attached to the body nor even contemplated.  I believe that the conspirators would havethought the body would ahve floated away never to be seen again.

P suggests that they almost forgot the two pood weights until they had thrown the body in.  they then allegedly put them in R's fur coat.  Strange then that body and coat float to the same place.  I think R was wrapped up as can be seen in many pictures of the recovered body with the fur coat wrapped around the cloth.  You can see it in the pictures lying next to the body.

Of course the drowning bit is a red herring - tw bullet wounds to the body both of which would have been fatal within 15-20 minutes and then a further immediately fatal shot to the foregead.  He was long dead before he got to the Nevka.

Rasputin was no 'iber mensch' in fact pictures taken not long before his death show a rather flabby man who was suffering from his debauched and increasingly drunken life style.

His hands were either frozen into position or as a result of rigor mortis he did not try to release his bonds - they on the left arm were cut (you can see the cut under close magnified scrutiny) when the police took the body from the water - my guess so they could unwrap the cloth covering him.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on October 16, 2005, 09:54:18 AM
Richard,

My reading of Spiridovitch's report of the original autopsy is that it concludes that Rasputin's death was caused specifically by the third gunshot to the head. period. Is that in line with the rest of your investigation? Just to put a final answer to it...

Rob
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on October 16, 2005, 11:04:53 AM
Rob,

I don't think it is as black and white as that.  Either of the body shots, the one to the left through the stomach and liver or the one to the right back to the kidney would have been fatal on there own.  In reality it is unlikely that he could have got up from either, but it is possible.  death would ocur within about 15 minutes from either.  he could have been long dead before the head shot was fired.

The shot to the head would be fatal, almost instantly.

So if the assumption which I believe Kossorotov and others were working on was that the murder had occurred as Y and P suggests then one would have to conclude that the head shot was fatal and fired last because he would be incapable of movement.  Kossorotov says he was lying down when the shot was fired - hoe he could come to that conclusion I do not know.

But there are more scenarios - say Rasputin was tortured and tied to a chair he could have been shot in the head first and then the other two shots. Or he is shot a couple of times as part of the torture and then as a coup de grace shot in the forehead.  Maybe he was standing up with his arms raised although the angles of fire are a bit risky for multiple shots at the same time.

Whatever he was dead long before he left the Palace and certainly ages before he got thrown in the Nevka.

I wish I did know the exact answer and the exact sequence but unless you can make the AP Time Mcahine real I will never know for certain.  All I do know is that Y and P were serial lairs.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on October 16, 2005, 11:19:07 AM
All quite true. One thought though. Since the policeman on patrol HEARD multiple gunshots, is it not more likely that they were fired outside? The basement room with such small windows would have likely muffled the sound enough that a policeman on the street many meters away would not have heard the shots?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on October 16, 2005, 02:29:11 PM
Rob,

They are described by one of the witnesses as 'not so loud'  certainly htere isn't any evidence I think to support multiple gun shots the most seems to be 'three or four'.  I have a view on that as well, imagine a cold, peaceful, Winter's night in St Petersburg.  There is hardly any, if any traffic on the streets, people have gone to bed.  Shots in the basement would resound around the building and at that time of the morning would be heard as 'not so loud' and elsewhere 'like a car back firing'.  Of course if Efimov was alert and he says he was because he heard the shots and was directly across the orad why did he not see anyone in the yard.

Equally if a dog was shot to provide the blood to cover R's dripping blood then it might be that they heard.

At the most I believe only one shot was fired in the yard and that was the fatal wound to the forehead but as I say I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that none were fired in the yard.

The initial hypothesis was that the large blood stain in the snow by the main gates to the yard were where he was shot through the head whilst lying on the floor.  However it seems that the bullet did not pass through the head - we don't know because we have no photograph showing the back of the head.

If it had passd through the head then I would expect there to be considerable brain debris and skull fragments mixed up with the blood and snow.  We are not told that any was discovered.

When we were filming in the Y Palace Courtyard we had a major problem with echoes and of course the crack of a pistol shot would resound around the buildings.

The field of fire is important to the 'outside scenario' and would make it just about impossible for all three shots to be fired in the left, right pattern that the wounds appear in.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Ssyentz on October 26, 2005, 08:14:59 PM
The answer to my question may have been presented somewhere here, but if it is I'm to blind to find it!  So, since I know whom to ask, I'm asking you!

I just saw the very last part of the History Channel presentation "Prophecies:  Miracles and Mystics."  There was, evidently, a section about Rasputin of which I caught the end.  Radzinsky was a commentator as was someone whose name I missed.  The statement was made that reports stated Rasputin was not dead when he hit the water and that he drowned.  That latter person then stated that the drowning ruse was invented to prevent Alexandra from attempting to have Rasputin made a saint.  Is that latter part true, specifically that drowning precludes sainthood?

I apologize if I missed seeing the answer if it's here already.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on October 27, 2005, 06:56:59 AM
The forensic evidence is he did NOT drown and was dead before he hit the water.  See other threads on this for details.

The story about Alexandra not being able to make him a sain because he drowned is factually incorrect as the she couldn't techinically do that it any case the church would ahve to.

I have also checked with the Russian Orthodox Church and have a considerable amount of documentation on this to say that drowning would not exlude an individual being raised to the diety.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Ssyentz on October 27, 2005, 09:44:11 AM
Thanks, Richard!

I knew about the forensic evidence; I was setting up the scenario from whence my question came.

I had never heard the "drowning precludes sainthood" concept before, and that's why I turned to you experts.  Thank you so very much for using your resources to find the answer.  I knew you would!

I am so thankful for this forum; I've met so many delightful people like you  Our abilities to learn so much more rise exponentially when those who really know share with those of us who are asking.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on October 27, 2005, 01:13:35 PM
I am afraid it is another one of the myths that surround Rasputin's death.  I don't think anyone can point to where this fabrication came from.  Maybe from his erstwhile secretary or one of the influential group that fawned after him.

I find him a fascinating character the Russian Orthodox Church really object to calls from some to make him a saint now.

The Russian Orthodox Church were really interested in the issue and put in a fair amount of research to answer a series of questions I asked them.  I was very appreciative of theri efforts.

Thank you for your kind comments I would like to think that all of us in here support each other with the knowledge we have or even by asking questions - we all have a lot to learn.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on October 27, 2005, 02:54:48 PM
This is the most wonderful way to learn.....Richard do you think that the PM photographs will ever be released for posting to the AP?  

..Arleen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Georgiy on October 27, 2005, 03:57:32 PM
Yes, it is absolute nonsense that drowning precludes someone from being made a Saint in the Orhtodox Church, as many Martyrs were martyred through drowning. A more famous (recent times) martyr who was drowned was Bishop Germogen (Hermogenes)  of Tobolsk.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Caleb on October 27, 2005, 07:25:29 PM
Quote
As far as I know all khlysty connections were purely circumstancial and completely unprovable...

     Rasputin- for good or ill -was a Russian Orthodox peasant from Siberia who's faith probably had more in common with fertility based earth worship than any deep conprehension of the mysteries of the Church.
He was a Pagan with a nice gloss of Orthodoxy.


rskkiya :D

I believe that Rasputin was a man who was a questionable Christian. I'm sure that he knew the laws of the Holy Bible, but he rebelled against God & fell into the sins that Satan tempts us with and in that he undermined the credibility of the Romanovs. As far as advice goes, I read that Rasputin's advice to not have Alexandra allow the doctors to bother him too much, may have been sound medical advice in that as a hemophiliac's body was so fragile, any mistake by the doctors could start more bleeding & eventually lead to Alexei's death.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on October 29, 2005, 02:13:08 AM
The pictures will be in my fornesic analysis of teh case, but we are just looking at a new feature of the forensics regarding the angle of shots.

You can find most of them in Andrew Cook's book.  My paper will ahve control photographs to show to lay people how we know saw a bullet was fored from contact range to the front of the ehad etc.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on November 08, 2005, 08:11:26 PM
This is all very interesting and sad too. Thanks to everyone for putting their thinking caps on.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 30, 2005, 03:19:19 AM
HELP I NEED YOUR BRAINS

Firstly I need to state that individuals  including myself have proved that the version of events set out by Yussupov and Purishkevich were in fact a tissue of lies.

We have also dispelled the myth that Rasputin drowned rather than died from his gunshot wounds.

We are left with ONLY the forensic evidence to rely on and the statements of witnesses taken during the investigation into his death.  Some of those witnesses cannot be relied upon as witness as to the truth.

A major problem is that the initial autopsy was predicated on the stories that Y and others were already circulating about the murder.  otherwise how could Kossorotov state that the first bullet was fired from the left side rather than being the kidney shot?  Why did he look for pison when there was clear evidence that the cause of death was from gunshots?

Prof Zharov and colleagues also follow the Y and P line not in any way challenging what they say and merely replicating Kossortov's autopsy with some additional details.  

There is a saying that 'there are no so blind as those that cannot see'.  For too long because there isn't anything else to rely on we have accepted the basic Y and P story even though we know much of is complete fantasy.

BUT the detailed forensic analysis throws up some key issues:

The first shot was to R's left side of the body and according to the evidence of the autopsy shattered the left lobe of the liver having passed through the stomach.  Professor Zharov in his re-examination with colleagues states that the exit wound from this shot can be found on the right hand side of the chest equidistant from lines drawn between the nipple and the navel.  This means that the bullet travelled at an upwards angle of about 40 degrees from left to right.

Joe Fuhrmann who has written a book on R puts his height at 5'7/5'8.  If Y did shoot the first shot and they were both standing the angle of shot and the position of Y's arm and wrist would be bizarre, try it out with a partner.  Put your fingers on the left side on the chest on the curve of the ribs about 10cm below the armpit and see how strange the position is.

Now let us imagine R was standing - shot one hits him from no more than 8" in the side, he falls, how does shot two from the back get fired into and shattering his right kidney?

Were the two shots fired almost the same time, we know the shot to the back was from a close range?  I doubt it think of the angle of fire, one from left to right one from back to front there is a real danger of hitting a fellow murdered.  We know the wounds were caused by different calibre weapons.

Then someone fires a gun at contact range to the front of his head and caused significant damage to the brain.

Freestanding doesn't work - I originally thought of R sitting there is some hearsay evidence to support this.  If the person who fired the shot to the left side of the body was sitting on R's left and the gunman was right handed the shot is quite plausible, upwards from left to right.  R slumps across a table and gunman two fires his shot into the back.

I had thought of R being ties to a chair before his murder, that makes shot one possible if in some way his left arm was raised as the shot would be almost impossible with his arms at his side. Shot two is difficult in a tied position as all the chairs in the basement dining room appear to have backs in them and the wound would indicate the bullet has been in close contact with R's back.  The final shot would of course be easy.

I had considered whether he was tied say to a post, a possibility but not the rear shot would again be difficult and the side shot would need the arms raised.

I then explored the fact that maybe R had been tortured, he has substantial injuries that cannot be explained away in the Y and P version, although some may have been caused post mortem when he was thrown into the Nevka and hit the bridge supports.  there are as Zharov and colleagues agree with Kossorotov a number of injuries that have been caused with a blunt instrument.  Zharov and colleagues assert that the person who inflicted these injuries would be covered in blood, something I have always suggested.  If we follow P's account then Y attacked R after the body was brought back in from the yard.  In this cae Y would have been covered in blood.  But constable Vlasuk returns almost immediately afterwards and finds Y sitting on a sofa in the study, he does not mention any blood, he does not mention the Y had changed clothes after he had seen him minutes before in the yard.

Was R tortured first, beaten for whatever reason, including the strange crushing injury to the testicles, left unconscious or semi conc. laying across a table.  this would allow shot one to be deleiverd by one of his tormentors sitting next to him and shot wo from behind.  the head finally being lifted up and the final shot delivered.

Imagine the amount of blood in that basement dining room what a scene of crime - but from what we know never examined.

We know that R's body was recovered from the Nevka and shots of the body on the ice show that there is a beaver (fur) coat, we are told one of the arms was missing.  It was also wrapped and bound with rope in some material.  In the photographs the material covering the top part of the body has been removed.  yet teh legs are at a starnge angle the knees are bent, I have experimented with this position, with R's arms outstretched as they are in the pictures and it coincides with someone sitting on a chair and then collapsed across a table.

Had rigormortis set in R would have been frozen in this position.

Now comes how challenge HOW DO WE KNOW R TAKEN TO AND KILLED AT THE Y PALACE?  Who tells us so, our serial liars P and Y!

The yard keeper at R's address describes a car coming to pick up R on that fateful night, he does not describe Y who alleges he collected R that night.  There is evidence from a maid that it was Y who picked him up this might be more conjecture than fact.

Who says he was at Y Palace - Y and P and in a short article some years later Lazovert - although L's account varies substantially from Y and P's.

No one else sees him, the comings and goings of cars are unobserved.

Why wrap the body and where did teh curtains material) and rope suddenly appear from?  was wrapping the body going to prevent a police officer who stopped the car saying 'hello, hello what is that body doing wrapped up int he back of your car' of course he wouldn't have wanted to look at the body would he?

If they had carried something like a body out it would have been seen.  The suggested evidence of a police report is highly doubtful and has the dark hand of R's personal secretary behind it.

The blood stains in the snow in the Palace yard could be the blood of a dog laid to create the impression that R was murdered there.

So my question is two proven liars, some forensic evidence, no evidence that R was killed at the Y Palace, was he murdered at the Palace or elsewhere, if we doubt Y and P's stories who took him from his address to where and why?  Did Y and P set up a complex decoy plot to cover the real killers and real motives for R's death.

I said this would go on and on and the more I consider it the more challenges I face.  Your views please.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on December 30, 2005, 04:25:18 AM
Richard

Just a few initial thoughts as I'm not with my files.

Something was definitely going on at the Palace as we have the independent policemen's reports about hearing shots, even if they disagree about times.  Also Pureshkevich is supposed to have told one of the coppers that R had been shot - does this appear in the policemen's testimony or only in P's & R's memoirs?

If R wasn't shot in the palace (and I've vaguely wondered about this myself) then what was going on?  If the original plan was to "disappear" Rasputin then a veil of silence after his leaving the flat would serve better than having some kind of decoy killing set up at the palace.

He was dropped off the bridge with the intention of having the body drift out into the gulf and the killers can't have known that it wouldn't (at least not quickly).  Surely the intention behind this was to get rid of him quietly?

If he was taken and killed elsewhere and it somehow went wrong then it would have been even more chaotic to try and set up a "false" murder at short notice than it actually was in the event.  P's & Y's stories do smell of having been quickly concocted but more I suspect because the killing went wrong when the police became involved at the palace.

Rumours circulated very quickly that R had been murdered in "a private house" & Sir Samuel Hoare at the British Intelligence Mission reported this to London fairly quickly (within 24 hours??).

All very interesting & I'll try and consult my various files on this over the weekend.

Phil T
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on December 30, 2005, 05:34:23 AM
If not at the Yusupov Palace - where?   Dmitri Pavlovich's palace?  

How did Yusupov and etc. manage to buy silence from staff inevitably present at other possible venues?   Silence which survived the immediate surprise and publicity of the murder.   Silence which survived the February Revolution.   Silence which survived the Bolshevick Revolution.    A silence which has been maintained to this day.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 30, 2005, 05:36:31 AM
Phil

We have two policemen who say they heard shots, Vlasuk and Efimov - but neither sees the body at any time.  Vlasuk goes to the yard and sees Y who in his accounts says that R's body was in the yard (from their story right next to the main gate).  Vlasuk says he looked around and saw nothing, the body by P's account would have been lying right by the gate where Vlasuk entered and spoke to the yard keeper.

Vlasuk goes back to the Palace shortly afterwards and sees Y and P, Y has no blood on him (after accroding to P violently assaulting R)

I just have a strange feeling about this and the problem is that we have to go back and rely on Y and P for what might have happened.

Efimov nor Vlasuk mention the coming and goings of all the cars - why not?

Of course according to P they intended to weigh R's body down with 2 pood weights and chains and therefore it would never have floated out to the Bay of Finland?  As it was the current towed it to the left bank 65 metres from the bridge.

Nothing seems right about the basement dining room as a scene and there are too many basics that are wrong.  Even P's description of his arrival has to be false.  In the yard pictures the snow is piled against the side gates so a car couldn't have entered.  How do we know that: because the forensic examiners found a track of blood from the side door to the main gates.  If the yard had been swept after the murder the stains would have been brushed away?

There are no more forensics at this scene, various reasons are put forward for this including the fact that a warrant could not be granted because of irina's relationship to the IF?

Even the 1916 picture that Brian has found does not lend itself to the way the weapons must have been fired, other than either R was in a drunken stuppor lurched over the table when shot or he was unconscious from a beating?

Yes P did tell Vlasuk that they had killed R - why?  Why, why?  Did they know that they would be protected because of Dimitry's alleged involvement and thus cover up for the real murderers?  Things just aren't adding up and the yardman's description of the man who went in to collect R is not that of Yusupov.

This is just a tangled web and there is something we are (I) am missing, I can't put my finger on it but all is not right.

Imagine the blood and gore in that basement room - I am sure detectives could have got into the Palace if they wanted to - no one could clean all that mess up.

So they do fire some shots and kill a dog, splatter some blood around to make it look as if something had happened.

I don't know the answers but there is something wrong here and badly wrong.

Richard





Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 30, 2005, 05:41:29 AM
Tsaria

They manage to to ensure Y's butler and his soldier Nedov did not tell the truth according to their version of events, nor the yard keeper of 92 who would have seen everything if there had been anyhting ahppening in the yard.  Nor the Palace's custodian who does not see anything.

I just think this is fascinating stuff.  As I have said previously we may never know the answers but for so long we have been blinded by Y and P's versions of events.

I am just finalising my paper on this (or to where we are as of today) and hopefully it will be with FA by mid week, if I can get a clear run at topping and tailing it.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on December 30, 2005, 06:47:22 AM
You are doing an amazing piece of work Richard, thank you.  

Rasputin's death falls, with ease, into the hands of conspiraracy theories - along with Kennedy assassination, the Munroe suicide and the death of Diana.   There will always be more questions than answers.  

I do not understand why Rasputin would leave the safety of his flat, voluntarily, in the face of all the warnings and appeals to take care, to go anywhere other than the Yusupov Palace   Perhaps to Dmitri's Palace or - at a stretch (when sober) - the gypsies.   Or, was he taken by force?  

For Yusupov's story to have survived, unchallenged, for so many years, he would have had to rely on many people to maintain their silence - long after they felt any sense of duty towards him or the other conspirators.  

Where does Spirodovich fit into this new scenario?    The Tsar's secret police would also have been hard at work.   Have their reports ever been explored?   Indeed, did they survive?

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on December 30, 2005, 09:29:45 AM
Phil,

I always believe that most lies are based on nuggets of truth rather than out of whole cloth, especially enduring ones. What if one killer was lying in wait in the basement for Rasputin, and shoots him FROM BELOW as he comes down (or goes back up) the stairs, while the second shooter fires from behind just after? That could easily explain the odd shot trajectories. That was my idea after reading your forensic conclusions.

Tsaria,
Sadly, Spiridovitch himself was in Yalta at the time, having been promoted during the war to be in charge of the Emperor's personal properties there.  His investigations, and those of his men, sadly, accepted to Y and P tale as fact, without doing any independant analysis. We lost any chance, sadly, of first hand investigation.  Further, I suspect the Emperor also accepted the tale and did not order deeper investigation either, which I believe, just my opinion, was created out of the genuine events but falsified to lay blame on those the Emperor could not punish severely due to the Imperial blood relations. Lets face it, Dmitri and Felix really could not get much worse than banishment...which only Dmitri got, which ended up saving Dmitri's life anyway!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 30, 2005, 10:34:08 AM
Rob

I assume you have been to the Yusupov Palace and know what the stairway to and from the basement room looks like.  Rasputin could have come down the stairs and been shot from teh left side, if you like the well of the staircase as you come to the door to the dining, this would allow an awkward trajectory becuase of getting the gun to within 20cms - although it is possible.  The problem then comes with the shot from behind. Gunman 2 shall we call him would already have needed to have his gun out, about he was escorting Rasputin under guard to the basement dining room.  Gunman 1 shoots into the left chest region and Gunman 2 immediately shoots into the back.  If it wasn't almost within that split second R's body would have fallen away down the stairs and be beyond the 20cm range.  Equally if Gunman 2 fired first, R would have fallen down the stairs making Gunman 1's shot very difficult.

However the angle of Gunman's 2 shot would be difficult given that he would be on at least a step above rasputin making his shot so low down in the back very difficult indeed.

The shot from below couldn't have happened to the left side  of the chest as if he was going upstairs his left side would be to the wall and therefore  couldn't be hit from the left side.

When might the beatings occur in your possible scenario, how and when the coup de grace?

I simply don't know the answers but more and more the facts don't seem to add up.

It is the legacy of P and Y that clouds our thinking on all this.

We now know that they both told so many lies but why and why such complex fabricated detail?

You are right had there been an independent investigation we might know the facts but there again that would be pretty boring and we probably wouldn't be having this debate.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on December 30, 2005, 10:49:12 AM
What about the staircase leading up from the ground floor to the 1st (or second in the US) floor? Did you try that in the scenario? Maybe the basement tale was yet another red herring.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on December 30, 2005, 11:16:27 AM
I am not denying the possibility that Rasputin was murdered someplace other than the Yusupov Palace.   (Sorry, I meant 'Simanovich' - not 'Spirodovich').   I am merely looking around the possibility.

I cannot see Rasputin being easily lured from his flat without very good reason.   He had received plenty of warnings.  He, himself, felt uneasy and threatened.   If he was murdered either in the flat or on the back stairs (I have descended these stairs - they are narrow only permitting one person to climb or descend at a time), his corpse would still require to be removed from the premises.   What happened to the considerable quantities of blood?   'Volunteer' cleaners would certainly have been spotted.

Had Rasputin been forceably removed from his flat, this would have been even more obvious.  

Shortly before retiring to bed, Maria Rasputina recalled her father telling her ...he was going to pay a visit that night to the "Little One's"' (Rasputin's pet-name for Rasputin).
She did state to the police that she didn't hear her father leave the flat.   The assumption was, she was already asleep.

Rasputin's maid's - Ekaterina Potemkina - evidence matched that of Maria's.   She too told the police Rasputin informed her earlier in the evening, that the the "Little One" would call for him later to take him to visit his wife, Princess Irina.

When visiting Rasputin, Yusupov's practice was to use the back stairs.   These led directly from the kitchen - where Potemkina slept.   (When I visited the flat, despite it then being a 'communal flat', the kitchen was much as it had been during Rasputin's residence.   It was painted the same shade of green.   It had recently been used in a Russian film shoot.   Likewise, the rear staircase was remarkably clean and fresh and green).      

The following obstacles remain - 1)  the maid:  2) the dvornik:  3) the police headquarters across the road maintained a 24/7 watch on 64 Gorokhovaya ulitsa:  4) the Tsar's secret police were constantly vigilant - with or without the orders of the Emperor.  

If received history is to be proved utterly unreliable the following questions must be addressed -

1)  How did Rasputin spend what was to be his last evening of life?   2)  If the murder did not take place at the Yusupov Palace - where, when and by whom?

It is hard to believe that all the evidence of all the  'witnesses'  is dodgy - or down right lies and that the real perpetrators, the, inevitable, witnesses along with their friends and associates managed to disappear off the face of the earth without as much as a hint of the truth.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on December 30, 2005, 11:26:21 AM
I very much doubt Rasputin would have been permitted near the staircase leading from the ground to 1st floor of the Yusupov Palace.  This is a grand, elegant staircase, although there would be service staircases.   Nonetheless, Rasputin was very much 'below stairs'.  

The staircase from the study to the basement is spiralled and tight.   My recollection is that there was insufficient room on the treads of each step for more than one person - being very narrow on one side and widening out to the other wall.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 30, 2005, 02:32:13 PM
Tsaria

They is nothing to suggest that r went anywhere near the main staircae - it wa slaways the winding staircase down from the side yard to Felix's apartments.

We don't know what forces were being exercised that night - for good or evil - so most things could have happened.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 30, 2005, 02:53:06 PM
Tsaria

thanks for your message.

In her statement taken by General popov and preserved in GARF Ekaterina Ivanovna Poterkin says:
'I moved aside the curtain and saw that the visitor was 'the little one' known to me as irina Alexandrovna's husband'  ...but I recognised his face.' this was at the time of the rasputin's collection from 64 Gorohovaya Street.

the custodian Fedor Korshynov describes someone completely different.  Interesting?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on December 30, 2005, 03:17:34 PM
Thank you Richard.

The 'staircase' statement was in response to FA's question.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on December 30, 2005, 05:39:36 PM
Tsaria,
I mentioned the grand staircase for one important reason. It was said that Rasputin was originally brought to the Moika house to meet Irina, something he was eager to do.  In Felix's tale, Irina was "upstairs", so it seemed logical to me that perhaps he told Rasputin he was being taken upstairs to meet Irina in her private apartments.  So distracted, it would be easy to shoot him from below and above on the stairs, and so the bullet trajectories could be explained.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 31, 2005, 02:39:34 AM
Rob, Tsaria,

I have tries to recreate your scenario on the stairs at home, the shot to the left hand side would have been ok if he had been coming down the stairs to the basement dining room (just before he reached the very small hall (vestibule) before you go into the room.  A gunman could have been waiting there, however it then makes shot 2 to the back almost impossible as the second gunman would have been on a higher level and would need to physical reach down to make the shot.  It could not have happened going up from the basement as the left side is shielded by the wall and there isn't room for two people side by side.  BRIAN, you posted a picture of the stairway leading to the side door do you have one up from the basement dining room to the landing??

I have been going over some of our debates about this and some very useful pictures have been published by Rob (rear courtyard) and brian the picture with the various yards etc identified and the brillianbt ground floor plan.  I am putting these in the final paper.

Rob you rightly made the point sometime ago why do all this in view of the street Moika when everything could have been done so priavtely through the main entrance at the rear.

The answer is I don't know but all the forensic photographs relate to that side yard. Maybe again we and the investigators at the time were bogged down in Y and P's stories.

Say if R was brought to the Y Palace under duress, if he ever went there.  He is tortured and killed and then taken to the Nevka.  No one can explain the lack of vehicular movements that night and again there are many red herrings.

R is bundled up and taken out through the rear courtyard, no witnesses etc.  Y and ors create a diversion at the front of the house, why though?

Did the conspirators panic because one of there staff heard the shots and feared the arrival of police.

The yard man for 92 and the custodian of the front of 94 report no cars in the side yard, but from what we know (dangerous because it is P and Y's word) P's and then Dimitri's car were parked in this side yard.

So where does this take us, more avenues to explore, more doubt?  Why create a diversion was it to get R out of the premises without being seen?  If so why did P in Y's presence tell Vlasuk that they had killed R?  (Not just what P and Y say but confirmed by Vlasuk)

Could he have been taken to the Palce as Y and P describe, down to the basement dining room - reason to fool the Okhrana and agents who were watching and guarding R.  'Well he is safely inside!' and then he was taken of his own free will or under duress through the Yusupov Palace to the main yard where a car was waiting to take him away to be murdered elsewhere?

That would explain many of the discrepancies around the murder and the transportation of the body.  It would also allow Y and P realising that something had gone wrong to create their story?

As I have said many times i don't know - your views please guys?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on December 31, 2005, 08:41:36 AM
According to 'received' history, Rasputin was told before he arrived at the Yusupov Palace that Irina was attending a party upstairs and that she would come down to join them 'later'.   (I've always found the 'Yankee Doodle Dandie' story, rather too much 'information'.)

To return to the flat at 64 Gorokhavaya, Simanovich records that at midnight Rasputin called him to say 'The "Little One" has arrived.   I'll go with him.'   To which Simanovich responded - 'For God's sake stay at home, or they will kill you.'   Rasputin reassured his secretary telling him not to worry.   'We will drink tea.   I will telephone you at two o'clock'...   Do you think Simanovich was part of a conspiracy?

His account points to the fact that Rasputin was not removed from his home by force.  He left voluntarily.

Robert Wilton, the St Petersburg correspondent of the London Times was in daily contact with his Russian colleagues who, in turn, relied for their many of their sources on the police.   It is hard to believe all these people were so quickly, readily and easily duped.

If Rasputin was not taken to the Yusupov Palace and murdered there that night - then where?  

Yusupov and Purishkevich, of course, put 'spin' on their stories, though they do, broadly, correspond.  

Perhaps details in their accounts of the event have been selectively ignored as well as embroidered, but the thrust of the general account of the murder of Grigory Rasputin seems, to me, to remain unchallengeable.

tsaria      
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 31, 2005, 09:44:37 AM
Tsaria

'Perhaps details in their accounts of the event have been selectively ignored as well as embroidered, but the thrust of the general account of the murder of Grigory Rasputin seems, to me, to remain unchallengeable. '

The general account of the murder is totally challengeable: the forensics tell us that the murder did not happen has Y and P said.  Np heroic recovery and run across the side yard, but three shots, from three guns fired from a very close distance at the most 20cm (8 inches).

In the boradest sense Y and P's accounts are similar but once you get into detail they are totally different.  Again issues like the side gate not being be able to be used because the snow was banked against it.

They (Y and P) were both liars but I think Rasputin's secretary was an even bigger liar.  I would love to prosecute the case because for once and for all we could be satisfied that Y and P's stories are almost a total fabrication.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on December 31, 2005, 09:57:00 AM
I find Simanovitch, sadly, so unreliable that I don't believe anything he reports. I really think that he fabricated so many details as to make himself and his "story" more widely saleable.  I totally discredit the "don't go they'll kill you" line.

Richard,
My personal theory is that Y P and Dmitri planned to take the blame on themselves, without actually doing the deed. Why? simply as I explained before that THEY were far less likely, indeed virtually safe not to be executed or imprisoned by the Emperor, whereas anyone of lesser status was certain to feel the full wrath of Nicholas and Alexandra for murdering R.

SO, we create a safe cover story. Y knows full well R is dying to meet Irina, so R jumps at the invitation to come to the Moika. We know from the reports that Y did publicly pick him up. I always wondered about this detail. It always seemed to be "gilding the lilly" so to speak for Y himself to fetch R. Anyone of Y's status would simply have sent the chauffeur on duty to fetch him. So, WHY else for Y himself to go out in the cold to fetch R? To emphasise the point the R was WITH Y publicly. Logic dictates that if one is planning a murder, you dont shout out to the world your actually BEING with the victim in advance. However, if you WANT everyone to believe you did it, then you emphasise this point.

THEN, you make perfectly certain that everyone knows that R is actually safely IN your house, like Richard points out, to further add credence to your actually killing him. Once safely there, you easily overpower or incapacitate the victim, and spirit him out the private back door. In order to make CERTAIN no one sees the victim leaving, what do you do? You create a diversion out in PUBLIC on the other side. This draws attention exactly where you want it. OUT in front, so people don't see R being taken away and you get added benefit. The diversion is staged to further support your cover story, gunshots audible, blood in the snow, Felix's public involvment, etc.

One thing always struck me about this story. Everyone involved is so bloody incompetent and almost TOO obviously so. The story is SO embelleshed with silly details, like "Yankee Doodle" on the gramophone, and the poisoned cakes and R's "mystical" survival of the gunshots that it seems to be entirely made up. More especially so now after forensics reveals that even the first shot was fatal.

What "if" Dmitri, Y  and P were actually CLEVER? I mean Y was not a stupid man, nor was Dmitri...maybe the story is all smoke and mirrors ACTUALLY DESIGNED to detract attention away from the real story. If so, then it has worked for 85 years....hmmmm
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 31, 2005, 10:55:56 AM
Rob,

I think I broadly agree with you.  The yard keeper at Rasputin's flat describes a male, average height, medium build, about 30, with a moustache that is certainly not Yusupov!

I checked P's account to make sure that we were definitely talking about the side yard at 92 Moika, it is.  he describes the iron fencing and the two sets of gates.  He describes entering the Palce by the main doors on the Moika - how do I know beacuse he says he turned left from the lobby into Y's rooms which is correct.

Taking him out thorugh the main courtyard is I am now sure what happened.  Of course shooting the dog is true because the investigators found the body buried in the snow.

I think forensics were far enough advanced in 1916 to tell the difference between human and animal blood.  Do any of our scientists on here know the answer?

This is so exciting, but so frustrating, if only we knew.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO Bob, Rob and all

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on December 31, 2005, 11:00:05 AM
Rob

I have just had another thought earlier today I was marking on the aerial map of the Y Palace that brian put in the about the yard where R died.  vlasuk was about half way down the road that runs from the right hand side of the picture down to the road that runs across the back of the Palace.

The shots at the front drew him away from his post from the back of the Palace to the front.  in my paper i have a map of this which is quite helpful.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on December 31, 2005, 12:57:55 PM
Richard,
We know from the Sokolov investigation that forensics was advanced enough at the time to tell dog blood from human. They did that test on the blood stains inthe Ipatiev basement.  BUT, why would the coroner bother to test the blood in the snow? They blindly accepted the story they had been told, remember? No one gave them reason to perform the test so we can never know the origin of the blood.

NOW my theory makes even more sense when you told me that Vlasuk was posted at the rear and the shots DREW HIM AROUND FRONT! Exactly what was planned.

As for P.'s story, he had been in the Moika palace, so of course his description would be accurate.  That was part of their plan IMO.

Happy New Year to you and yours!!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 01, 2006, 10:12:04 AM
Richard and FA - Happy New Year.

It would be helpful to know exactly where your thoughts are driving us.  

If the murder did not take place at the Yusupov Palace, then... WHERE?

If the three 'accepted' principals were not actively involved in the murder, then... WHO?

If indeed British Intelligence was involved where is the documentation?   Following war/revolution/revolution/civil war/artificially created famine/war/Cold War - the murder of Rasputin can hardly now be classed as 'sensitive'.

One final point - The dvornik (believed to be a police informer) at 64 Gorokhovaya described Rasputin's midnight visitor as Richard cites above.   Unlike Potemkina, he did not recognise the caller.  The dvornik also stated that half an hour elapsed before Rasputin, of his own free will, left with the 'visitor'.   This being the case, it gave Rasputin ample time to telephone Simonovich as Simonovich stated to the police the following morning.   Why, at this very early stage in the investigation, would Simonovich lie?

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 01, 2006, 10:22:43 AM
Tsaria, a Happy New Year (and whatever that unpronouncable Scots word is... ;D)

I have no idea as to the answer to a single on of your questions. Frankly, we may never know the answers. It just seems that the long held story collapses like a house of cards when modern investigative techniques are brought to bear. Perhaps Simanovitch lied to the police out of fear of being seen as an accomplice to the murder (" I TOLD HIM not to go").

I always always thought it so odd that Felix would do the deed himself. Someone of his character and money could so much easier dispose of the "problem" by hiring another and not getting his hands dirty in the process.  When you start to throw logic at the story in conjunction with the facts, the story just unravels, fast...IMO.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 01, 2006, 10:27:33 AM
Just take even the part of the story about fetching R. at the apartment. We KNOW that it was not Felix, from the independent testimony. So, WHAT possible reason would Felix have to actually say publicly that he went HIMSELF, if not to lend credence and support to the tale that HE murdered R...? Nothing else makes sense on this detail.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 01, 2006, 11:34:51 AM
'Hogmanay' - that's the word, FA.   Interesting conjunction. It was 89 years ago almost to the day, the events we are discussing took place.

How do you know it was NOT Yusupov who collected Rasputin from the Gorokhavaya apartment that night?   Although the dvornik failed to recognise him - he did offer the fact that when he guided the 'visitor' to the main entrance of the apartment block, the 'visitor' indicated he would enter the apartment by the rear entrance.   It was late at night.   It was dark.   Yet the 'visitor' went straight to the back door.   A certain indication he had been here before and probably more than once.  

Potemkina recognised the visitor.   She described him as the man who married Princess Irina.  

Rasputin had been repeatedly warned his life was in imminent danger.   He, instinctively, felt he would not survive much longer.   If it was not Yusupov, with whom would Rasputin have happily left the security of his apartment at one o'clock in the morning?   It must have been somebody he knew well and with whom he felt secure.   We already know, Rasputin spent the evening in preparation for the important appointment.   Not renowned for being paying particular attention to his appearance, it seems he went to considerable lengths that evening.   The post mortem report reveals he was indeed wearing the shirt Maria described - made for him by the Empress.

Now I am thinking about Robert Wilton - the London Times St Petersburg correspondent.   He worked closely with his Russian colleagues.   Journalists frequently rely on the police for their sources - official and unofficial.   Wilton had his own network of sources throughout the city and throughout society.   Wilton, an experienced journalist was acutely aware of the tensions tearing the heart out of the capital and the country.   I cannot imagine he would have been put off the scent so easily.   He would have been aware of British Intelligence activity.   Journalists of his calibre are not in the habit of accepting, unquestioningly, a press handout.   He would have been reading - and writing - above, on and below the line.

There were so many people directly and peripherally involved in this murder (and in your scenario many more than accounted for in 'received' history), it seems to me they cannot all have been lying.  

How is it that after almost 90 years there has not been one single 'leak'.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 01, 2006, 02:12:37 PM
Tsaria

I think it is right that rasputin knew 'people' were looking to terminate his life.  It would be amazing if he didn't know that yusupov was involved in the plot.  In my paper I list the people that Y or P had told about the murder beforehand and it is fairly obvious Y was touting around for supporters to the plot.

What I have never understood is how the Okhrana or other agencies did not infiltrate the plot and disrupt the plans of the conspirators?  Of course the British SIS worked closely with the Russian security agencies and given the general dislike for rasputin there may have been many in the Okhrana and elsewhere who wanted him dead.

I actually think despite the hearings that the Revolution put paid to some debate around rasputin and the stories became accepted.

The speed with which people knew of how R died, three bullets, poison etc is stunning.

Who had the enrgy to reinvestiagte it and despite the forensic facts confronting us for years we have ignored them - why?

There is a danger and I feel for it and andrew Cook has followed this line of accepting too much of what Y and P say, without saying 'we know they are liars, serial liars, so why do we accept what they say?'

I think, and I have come to this view slowly over the last two years that not only was this one of the biggest conspiracies to pervert justice ever, but it is one of history's greatest deceptions.

When i first posted in here 15 months or so ago, people were still insisting R had drowned.  the original PM says he did not drown, so why did people disbelieve?

I think it is an emotive issue and as Greg and Polly say in FOTR that sometimes it has hard for people to accept things are different from their accepted views, often ingrained over years

Richard

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 01, 2006, 03:18:57 PM
Richard - I agree the intervention of the Revolutions and their upheavals had an impact on the story of Rasputin's demise.

However, the Rasputin story has endured the decades - through all the enormous political and geographic turmoils.   It is a story which has been visited and revisited by historians and authors - with little variation.  

I still feel there were so many people involved at various levels in the murder and disappearance of Rasputin - a number of whom fled Russia and were under no duress to maintain a fabrication - it was impossible to choreograph them into speaking with what virtually amounts to a single voice.

I, for one, don't ever recall a time when I believed Rasputin's death was due to drowning.    Equally, I find Rasputin's story interesting rather than emotive.   My mind is open.   I am absolutely ready to believe an alternative version, but before doing so, there are numerous questions which must be addressed - and answered - beyond the trajectory of bullets.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: hikaru on January 01, 2006, 04:33:22 PM
I think that there is no necessity to invent a car or something else.
Rasputin was an outstanding person those days.
So, there are an enourmouse amount of reports of Police, Secrete Police etc about the place and details  of the murder.
Very  clever people from police investigated Rasputin'murder those days.
So, they said the same thing with Felix. ( maybe some small details will be wrong)
Firstly, Felix denied everything ( his participation in the murder) .
If my understanding is correct, he talked after the police's statement.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 01, 2006, 06:32:34 PM
Tsaria,

I have to agree with your statement(s). As well with some of Richard's. The following most of all :

Quote :
I still feel there were so many people involved at various levels in the murder and disappearance of Rasputin - a number of whom fled Russia and were under no duress to maintain a fabrication - it was impossible to choreograph them into speaking with what virtually amounts to a single voice.
End Quote

Thanks both very kindly for your input.

Tatiana


Quote
Richard - I agree the intervention of the Revolutions and their upheavals had an impact on the story of Rasputin's demise.

However, the Rasputin story has endured the decades - through all the enormous political and geographic turmoils.   It is a story which has been visited and revisited by historians and authors - with little variation.  

I still feel there were so many people involved at various levels in the murder and disappearance of Rasputin - a number of whom fled Russia and were under no duress to maintain a fabrication - it was impossible to choreograph them into speaking with what virtually amounts to a single voice.

I, for one, don't ever recall a time when I believed Rasputin's death was due to drowning.    Equally, I find Rasputin's story interesting rather than emotive.   My mind is open.   I am absolutely ready to believe an alternative version, but before doing so, there are numerous questions which must be addressed - and answered - beyond the trajectory of bullets.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 01, 2006, 09:34:06 PM
This is all very fascinating and it brings the story of Rasputin's death down to earth, showing it for what it was..a murder and not giving it some sort of covering myth to hide the horrible brutality of it. It sounds to me like he was taken, tortured and then executed by people who were professionals, not the bumbling duo who confessed and bragged about doing the deed. To me, it makes it all the more tragic.



Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 02, 2006, 02:06:58 AM
Tsaria

i certainly wasn't suggesting that you were emotive about the issue or that you thought he had drowned, if that was the inference you took I apologise.  However the issue of emotion and a willingness to believe the 'false' story told by P and Y is overwhelming.

Why did many historians miss the 'forensic facts' and it is the forensic facts that prove the lie?  They missed the facts becaues they became engrossed in the story.  Many of the books and papers written about rasputin seek a new slant, a way to sell a book - nothing wrong with that however many of teh offerings have ignored statements etc to which authors have had access.

Here I am a man with years of detective experience, with a massive interest in forensics, yet I had missed the clues that do say Yusupov and Purishkevich were liars.

I had read Yusupov's account, I had read Purishkevich's account and I had seen some of the post mortem and scene of crime photographs.  And guess what i followed the story until the BBC asked me to look at the forensics again.  I started to look at it as a detective and found that P and Y told lies, not just a few but loeads.  the trajectory of the shots in one part but most importantly is the fact that the two body shots were fired at almost the same time from no more than 20cms, and the head shot was fired to the forehead at contact range, so no back of the head shot from P at 20 metres.

Once you deconstruct the evidence of the two their accounts fall to pieces for a variety of reasons.

There were lots of stories circulating about the murder, some of which are at odds with Y and P but not substantially, but in believe the inner sanctum, the people who really knew what happened wer a very tight, intelligent group and therefore the rest believed what they were told.  Crumbs a Prince, a Grand Duke and a member of the Duma carrying out a murder - how sensational, how romantic!

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 02, 2006, 06:01:08 AM
I agree Richard - can you imagine if something similar happened in this country - a Duke, a Prince and a member of the House of Commons committing predetermined, cold-blooded murder?   What a sensation.

However, we are not comparing like with like.   Russia was (and is) very different to the UK - autocratic, losing a major war on her doorstep and on the brink of revolution.   By this point in 1916, Russia was largely lawless.

Yusupov made no secret of a plan to murder Rasputin.   He canvassed support.   We know the Romanov family apart, of course, from its leader and his family, felt threatened.   They were sufficiently in touch with reality to realise that, not just their lifestyles, but their lives were potentially in peril.   All the grand dukes wanted rid of Rasputin.   Some even wanted to go further -  to force their relative and Tsar to abdicate, and forcibly, if necessary, remove his wife to some distant convent.   That is quite extreme.   Perhaps, some may say, even more extreme than murdering a puffed-up, dirty, drunken, amoral peasant.

Extreme conditions call for extreme measures.

The details of what occurred inside the Yusupov Palace on the morning of 17th December 1916, I wholeheartedly agree deserve scrutiny.   However, unless an overwhelming case which details the murder venue and proof positive that Yusupov and etc., were in no way involved in the death of Rasputin, in my opinion, received history wins the debate.  

Am I correct in believing that one does not need to pull the trigger to be guilty of murder?

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 02, 2006, 08:08:55 AM
At the risk of pre-empting Richard I don't think he's saying that Youssopoff wasn't involved in the killing, just that the killing was considerably more complex than the accepted story.  Richard has stated already that even if he didn't pull the trigger he was guilty of murder under Russian law foir taking part in the planning.

The British Secret Service involvement, which I think is pretty much proved by Richard in his TV Programme, by Andrew Cook in his book "To Kill Rasputin") and myself in BBC History Magazine, means that the plotters had powerful friends and contacts.  British agents had been concerned about the possibility of a separate peace since at least October 1914 and had recently monitored a meeting between German agents and pro-German Russian officials in Sweden.  Capt Stephen Alley, who is closely linked to the plot (Andrew Cook quotes a memo from him on the subject), was the liaison officer between the British SS and Russian SS and Police.  He was in a perfect position to influence investigations, just as Lt Rayner, who was a close personal friend of Felix, was in a perfect position to influence Felix and his friends.

There is much yet to be written on this, but alas I must go visit my Goddaughter.

Phil Tomaselli
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 02, 2006, 08:54:48 AM
Tsaria

I am certain that in Russian Law at the time you did not have to be the actual murderer, but could have been what we call a conspirator in this country, or counsel or procured, aided or abetted the commission of an offence.  Thus those involved could be tried as if principals to the murder.

Of course all the bits about Dimitry not touching the body are nonsense.  Y says that D and P moved the body in the basement to stop blood stains going onto the white bearskin.

Y says D gave him the gun - what price D wasn't guilty of murder, although there was no way he was the actual murderer as suggested by Radzinsky

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 02, 2006, 09:06:52 AM
In my last post I agreed with the assertion that what happened in the Yusupov Palace in the early hours of the morning of December 17th 1916 is worthy of deeper scrutiny.

My problem is in going along with the notion that it was NOT Yusupov who accompanied Rasputin from his apartment.   That the Yusupov Palace may not have been the location of the murder (it was the perfect place - inaccessible to the authorities).    That Yusupov, Dmitri and Purishkevitch were not actively involved in the murder.   I already made the point that it was not necessary to pull the trigger to be guilty of a murder.

I have read the Andrew Cook book.   I was very put off by this publication when - amongst a number of other glaring, unforgiveable errors - Cook wrote that Alexander III was present at the marriage of Nicholas and Alexandra.  

Relations between Britain and Russia had become extremely strained and by October 1916 virtually at breaking point.   Had British Intelligence not been aware, even involved, in such a potentially serious and open conspiracy, they would have been negligent in the extreme.

British Intelligence activity was recorded.   Has there been a thorough investigation of Intellingence and Governmental papers of the time?   Almost 90 years have elapsed.   As I mentioned earlier, years which witnessed disaster heaped upon disaster.   Any documentation concerning the murder of Rasputin after this passage of time, must be accessible.   In the greater scheme of things with the murders and deaths of countless millions, the death of Rasputin, though an enduring tale, is not so serious as to be deemed 'sensitive'.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 02, 2006, 09:58:19 AM
Tsaria

I think generally Andrew's book is good although there are some errors, I will be challenging some of these (in respect of the investigation) in my paper, but the involvement of the British is his area of expertise.

I think Phil is the person to tell you about the files held by the British on Rasputin and the murder - I think he will tell you they have gone 'missing'.

A lady contacted me some time ago who had attempted to research Rayner several years ago, in her pursuit of his militray service file she was told 'It would never be released'.

Mind you I have to say that GARF is not exactly illuminating on the issues and there is much which could be there but is not.

I recall someone had a firend who was the curator of the Yusupov Palace can anyone remember who the member was, I need a couple of photographs??

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 02, 2006, 10:07:21 AM
That's me, Richard.   She is the Director of the Yusupov Palace.   She is an administrator, not a curator.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 02, 2006, 11:33:52 AM
Tsaria

For just about the last century files relating to British intelligence have not been released to the Public Record Office (except by accident).  It was only in the early 1990's remember that the Government even admitted publically that MI5 (the Security Service) and MI6 (our spies abroad) even existed.  Up until then you'd get a flat denial that we even had such people........

MI5 have been releasing historical files since 1997 (some say as part of a damage limitation exercise following allegations they were involved in a plot to murder Princess Diana) but MI6 refuse to release anything.  They do allow a few select historians occasional access but I doubt I wil ever be one of these.

MI6 provided a lot of information to people such as the Foreign Office but the files were held in red jackets so that they could be removed when the FO files were sent to the PRO.  Occasionally they were missed so that people like me can still find them if they look hard enough.

It's true what Richard says that MI6 officers files aren't released either (again except in error) and my friend Maisie was officially told that the files on Rayner would never be released.  Fortunately there are enough day to day signals about his, and other officers, work that have slipped through the net  so you can identify them.

The Foreign Office files which talk about the Rasputin killing (and you can tell they existed because they're shown in the index) are not where they should be.  I do have a small hope that I can track down copies, but don't hold your breath..........

Even after 90 years the idea that the British Government has ever sanctioned or arranged the killing of a foreign (or British) subject are quite an anathema to those in power.  How would the Russians greet the news that Rasputin was killed by the British if it was formally admitted??  Imagine the American reaction if the Russians suddenly announced that Kennedy had really been shot by the KGB.  In some minds, at least, sleeping dogs are best left lying.

Still, people like Richard, Andrew Cook & I will continue to dig.


Phil Tomaselli

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 02, 2006, 01:23:32 PM
SIS files, of course, remain inaccessible.   My mistake.    

Unfortunately, it appears, a route to the truth will not be found down this cul de sac.

I have a fundamental question.  

Why would the British want to murder Rasputin?  

The British had been paranoid over the possibility of Russia's capitulation, but by this time America was on the verge of committing to declare war on Germany.   With America imminently on board, Britain could afford to feel  the war was all but won.  

From the point of view of stabilizing the political situation within Russia, it was already far too late.   Sir George Buchanan had been warning Britain of the seriousness of the Russia's domestic situation for some time.   Indeed he even had the temerity to warn the Tsar.

The death, or survival, of Rasputin may have had  momentous implications for the Emperor, and particularly The Empress, the entire Romanov Family and on Russia, but in the world of geopolitics, I doubt it was particularly relevant.

tsaria  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 02, 2006, 02:17:41 PM
Tsaria,

I think it really all came out when I interviewed Muriel Scale, she was so adamant that her father thought Rasputin was evil.  I think the Brits would have done anyhting to keep Russia in the war.  I read an awful lot about 1st World War history and there is no doubt the eventual victory was won by the narrowest of margins.

Had the March offensive managed to break through, further than meeting Gough's orderly retreat, and they had not run out of supplies they could have well (the Germans) won the war.

I think the Brits had a huge incentive to remove Rasputin from the picture if they, as people like Purishkevich perceived him the Empress as 'The Dark Forces'.

There was a conference due early in 1917 of the allies to discuss the war.  Maybe they hoped that rasputin out of the way would mean a free Tsar who felt ready to recommit to the war effort.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 02, 2006, 03:05:48 PM
Well said Richard.

Tsaria - I strongly recommend you try and find a copy of "Go Spy the Land" by Capt George A Hill (Cassell, 1932).

Hill was the son of an Anglo-Russian merchant with a history in Russia of several generations.  He joined the British army in 1914, was wounded & eventually sent to Russia in 1917 to work in intelligence.

Long after the American declaration of war Hill was  working to (a) try and get the Bolsheviks back into the war (b) support Russian and Roumanian forces still fighting the Germans and (c) work with both pro and anti-Bolshevik forces in German occupied territory.  He was, at the same time, helping Trotsky move aviation units away from the front to prevent their capture by the Germans and working with White aviation officers to secure their allegiance in the event of a pro-British revolt.  He also helped the Bolsheviks reorganise the railways while simultaneously recruiting wrecking gangs amongst the railway workers in case he needed sabotage done.

This is all in the spring and summer of 1918 and is not only in his book but also in the Foreign Office files for the period.

Even in mid-1918 the British Govt thought that Russia was a vital ally and behaved as such.  From the Russian point of view I think you can see, even from the brief resume above, why they always thought of us as nothing but perfidious.......

Phil Tomaselli

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 02, 2006, 04:01:11 PM
First of all, I never said Y, Dmitri and P were not involved. They WERE deeply involved. I just now suspect they didn't pull the trigger, but rather created the whole consipiracy. As for British involvement, I do not know enough about the specifics other than what I've read here from Richard and Phil.

Just dug out my Spiridovitch bio of R. Rather than translate the whole thing here, I'll just summarize some salient bits.

Spirid. reports that Felix himself drove to fetch R. but relies on Yussupov's story for this detail.

1. Pg 379: Y. reports in his book "The end of Rasputin" that R allegedly said to Y that R KNEW no one was home at the Moika, especially Y's mother, as R knew Zinaida despised Rasputin, and Y reassured him that she was in the Crimea.Then, R allegedly tells Felix "You know, I have to tell you something. Protopopov came to see me this evening and warned me that I must stay at home all the time now. He warned me that they were going to kill me, that evil men were planning bad things against me.  But I mock all of them. It won't come to that, they don't have arms long enough..."

Now Sprid. writes that he finds this strange, as it is critical that Y makes it quite clear that Rasputin nor Yussupov made any reference about to going to see Princess Irina, specifically because A. Vyroubova reported that in her last visit to Rasputin, Rasputin had SPECIFICALLY told her that he was going to the Yussupov house for this very reason.  This was also told directly to Beltsky, who confirmed as much the day after the murder to the Investigators.

2. In August 1917 Akaemov wrote that a Sergeant of the police on duty that night went to investigate the gunshots at the Moika Palace. He was called inside to see P. who told him in so many words:
"Do you know who I am?' "no," replied the officer.
"Do you know who Pourishkyevich is?" "Yes I do, Your Excellency."
"Good, I am Pourishkyevich. If you love your Tsar and your Country, swear to me that you will never tell this to anyone...but Grigori Rasputin is dead." P. then explained to the Sergeant that he and Y. had killed R. and told him to keep it secret.

OK, so much for anyone denying the murder that night...WHY would P actually TELL this policeman IF he did not want it known what happened? The policeman confessed what P told him...

3. Spirid. reports that as soon as the next morning, the police knew that highly placed people were implicated in the affair of R's disappearance. Further, he confirms that the Sergeant reported the conversation with P. literally as soon as he was off duty.  They actually thought that the Sergeant was drunk and did not believe that P. made such a confession.  They went so far as to even smell his breath! Then then brought in General Grigoriev, chief of police to hear the story. Grigoriev thought the officer was crazy.  THEN Grigoriev goes to General Balk, governor of Petersburg with the officer, who tells Balk the story again. THIS all happened before 7am the next day. Now the Okhrana gets involved.  They go to R's apartment where the servant girl reports that Yussupov came to fetch R. himself and that R had not yet come back.  They interview Y. who tells them an invented story about a party and Dmitri shooting a dog. They interview all the Y servants who know nothing about anyone killing a dog. A servant later calls the police to say that he had thown out a dog's body under Y's orders. The police then went to the body at the palace and they DID  test the blood on the snow to determine if it was human or dog.  The experts could not establish whether it was human or dog, as a result they judicial authorities refused to open an investigation into the murder of R. Thus, it was left in the hands of the police as simply the disappearance of R.

F then writes his letter to Alexandra, the complete fiction of the party, with women, Dmitri and shooting the dog, on the 17th.

HOWEVER, it seemed that "somehow" all of Petrograd already knew R was dead. The morning of the 17th Ambassador Paleologue in informed of R.'s murder.  At 530 that afternoon, Ambassador Buchanan HIMSELF calls GD Nicholas Michaelovich to tell him R has been murdered. However, N.M. declares, rather interestingly to Spirid., at dinner at the Yacht Club that same night that this "news" was simply "incitement" by Protopoov. At this same dinner, Dmitri P. (according to NM's journal) told everyone there that "in his opinion, Rasputin had either really disappeared or had been killed." That same night, Y then tells Rodzianko about the murder, and then tells "one of his best friends, the English officer Oscar Reiner" about the murder. P. then telegraphs (TELEGRAPHS!! where the telegraph operators themselves would read it) Malakov in Moscow with the news of the murder and their involvment.  Spiridovitch writes VERY saliently "It was thus the very conspirators themselves who unveiled the secret of their acts." pg. 393 Alexandra herself knew the truth of the involvement of Y P and Dmitri by the evening of the 17th.

What is important about this, is these facts are confirmed outside of the tales of Y and P.  IF Y and P did not want people to know about their murdering R, why would they tell people in such a fashion that the world knew the truth in less than 24 hrs, even long before the body was found? It sure looks to me like they were trying very hard to make darn well SURE that their story was out.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 02, 2006, 05:45:03 PM
I have been following this thread as it is interesting, but not really my topic.  Am I understanding correctly then, that as the murder happened in the very early hours, it was then general knowledge by 5:30 pm the same day ? Or am I missing a day here ?
BTW, I also read the Andrew Cook book and found it less than revelvatory, other than bringing in the British agents bit. But even then, he offers no real insight as to what they might have actually done, does he ?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 02, 2006, 06:30:02 PM
No Robert, Yussupov picked up Rasputin sometime after midnight, close to 1am on the 17th December. The murder occured that early morning, probably between 2 and 3am.  Before 7am, the Police knew the truth, before noon the French Ambassador knew, that afternoon the British Ambassador knew and by evening the Empress herself knew the details. By dawn of the 18th, all of RUSSIA knew. It was that fast...THAT is a smoking gun to me that the conspirators actually wanted the story known. They really made zero effort to hide it, in fact the token denials seem just THAT, to me, token denials to make the story even more realistic.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: calebGmoney on January 02, 2006, 07:28:11 PM
Did anyone watch the 2005 documentary "Rasputin: Marked For Murder"? In it, the forensic expert guy suggests that the British Secret Service were involved in Raputin's death, and that Rasputin actually died from a bullet in the head.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 02, 2006, 08:24:34 PM
Caleb.
That "forensic expert guy" is none other than our esteemed colleague Richard Cullen...who honours us with his particpation here.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: calebGmoney on January 02, 2006, 10:23:15 PM
Quote
Caleb.
That "forensic expert guy" is none other than our esteemed colleague Richard Cullen...who honours us with his particpation here.

That's nice. I wasn't insulting him. I simply couldn't think of his name.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 03, 2006, 06:36:13 AM
FA - We appear to be singing from the same hymnsheet... almost.  

Within half an hour of the murder, Purishkevich drunk, high on adrenaline and testostorone, blurted out to Vassiyev, the duty policeman -

'Have you heard of Purishkevich?'.   The policeman replied in the affirmative.

'I am he.   And Rasputin, you've heard of him, haven't you?   Do you know him?'

The policeman told Purishkevitch that he did not know Rasputin, but of course, he had heard of him.

Purishkevich replied - 'This Rasputin has just been dispatched.   If you love the tsar and your country, you must keep silent about the matter and not say a word to anyone.'

Vlassiyev responded - 'I understand, sir.'

With that he was dismissed and returned to his post.



Around 4.00a.m. Vlassiyev, on duty near the Yusupov Palace, at the junction of Moika with Maximilian Lane, was alerted by the sharp sound of three, perhaps four, shots, fired in quick succession.   Initially Vlassiyev mistook the direction of the sounds, he thought they came from the direction of the German Church.   He walked down to the Pochtamskaya Bridge and called across the canal to his colleague, Yefimov, on duty outside 61 Morskaya, asking him the direction of the shots.   Yevimov confirmed they came from the Moika side.

Vlassiyev walked along the Moika until he came to No.94 where he asked the gateman, what was going on.   The gateman told Vlassiyev he heard nothing.   Peering through the railings, Vlassiyev spotted two men, 'bareheaded and dressed in loose smocks.'   The men crossed the courtyard in the direction of the gate.   Vlassiyev recognised the men - Prince Yusupov and his steward, Bushinsky.   When he questioned them about the shots.   Both men said they heard nothing.   They returned to the palace and  Vlassiyev, from the pavement, endeavoured to take a closer look at the courtyard.   Seeing nothing amiss, he returned to his post.

About fifteen minutes later (4.20a.m.), Bushinsky left the palace, approached Vlassiyev and told him Prince Yusupov wanted to speak with him.   He led Vlassiyev into the palace, across the main entrance and into Yusopov's study.   Here Vlassiyev met Yusupov and was introduced to Purishkevitch.

Therefore, according the Vlassiyev's deposition, we can assume he knew of the death of Rasputin by 4.20a.m.   Less than 30 minutes after Rasputin's murder.  

Vlassiyev returned to his post and within 20 minutes he had broken his promise of silence.   At 4.40a.m. the district police commander, Superintendent Kalyaditsh, was on his early morning rounds.   When he arrived at Vlassiyev's post.   Vlassiyev immediately told his boss of the events of the morning.   The two policemen returned to the palace.   At the entrance they found a car, parked, its engine running.   The chauffeur told them Prince Yusupov had ordered the car.

With that, the police superintendent instructed Vlassiyev to keep the car under observation and returned to his round.

Soon after Yusupov left the palace, got into the car and drove off in the direction of Potseluyev Bridge.   Vlassiyev waited for a while outside the main entrance of the Palace, but seeing no further activity, he returned to his post.

At 6.00a.m. Superintendent Kalyaditsh returned and took Constable Vlassiyev to meet the divisional police commander, Colonel Rogov.  

Constable Yefimov's depostion regarding the automobile differs from that of Vlassiyev.   He timed the departure of the car at shortly after 4.00a.m.   His record of the sequence of events is as follows -

He first heard a shot at around 4.00a.m.   This shot was swiftly followed by a further three or four, fired in quick succession.   From his position the shots sounded as though they came from, approximately, 92 Moika.   Yefimov recalled that in the moments between the initial shot and the succession of shots, he heard a 'half-suppressed cry, as if uttered by a woman.'

A short time later he saw a car driving along the Moika in the direction of the Potseluyev Bridge.   He did not recall seeing the car stop anywhere.   He telephoned to report the shots to his headquarters, the Third Kazan Police District.   Then he set out walking in the direction of the shots.   He met Vlassiyev near the Pochtamskaya Bridge and told him he thought the shots had come from No.92 Moika.   He returned to his post.   Yevimof did not see another car until sometime between 5.30 and 6.00a.m.

The above is based on the police depositions provided by Vlassiyev and Yefimov.

Colonel Rogov was alarmed.   He called the Petrograd Chief of Police, General Balk.   Balk realising this was a case for the secret police, immediately called Vassilyev, who, in turn, contacted Protopopov.

The cat was out of the bag.   Inevitably it would not be long before news like this was in general circulation.

As of now, I see no reason to believe this was all part of a deliberate scheme to deceive.   My interpretation is that it was no more than amateur incompetence.

Phil - I will endeavour to lay hands on the book you recommend.   I will try my university library and, failing that, the British Library.

I still fail to understand why Rasputin's murder was pivotal to British/Russian entente.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 03, 2006, 07:59:10 AM
source GARF files

Flor Efimov who was on duty at the police post across the Moika from the Yusupov Palace.  He says:

“During the night from 16th to 17th of December I was on my post at Morskaya Street next to building 61.  At 2.30am I heard a gunshot and 3-5 seconds later three more shots followed fast one after another.  The sound of gunshots came from Moika Street, in the region of the building number 92.  The first gunshot was followed by a low scream, as if it was a woman’s, there was no noise.  In 20-30 minutes following the shot no car or carriages went along Moika Street.  Only half an hour later a car drove along Moika from the Blue Bridge towards Potselyev, it did not stop anywhere.  I reported the shots by phone to the 3rd Kazan Police Station and went towards the place of shooting.  I noticed point duty policeman Vlasuk at Pochtamtsky Bridge, he also had heard the gunshots and thought they were fired at Morskaya Street, he went towards me to find out who had fired shots and where.  I told him that those shots had been fired near to building number 92 at Moika Street.  Then I returned back to my post and did not see or hear anything.  I remember that since the shooting to 5-6 in the morning I did not see any other car driving along Moika Street, apart from the above mentioned.”

Stepan Fedoseev Vlasuk, a policeman of the 3rd Police Station of Kazansk Corps states:

“During the night of the 16th to the 17th December I was at my post at the corner of Prachechny and Maksimilianovsky Lanes.  At about 4am I heard 3-4 gunshots soon after another.  I looked around everywhere was quiet.  I thought the sound of the shots came from the right from the German Kirha on Moika Street.  I went to the Pochtamtsky Bridge and called point duty policeman Efimov, who was at his post by the building number 61 along Morskaya Street.  I asked where the shots were fired from and Efimov replied that it was on ‘our side’.  Then I approached the yard keeper of the building number 92 at Moika Street and asked him who fired the shots.  The yard keeper whose name I don’t know although I know his face replied that he did not hear any shots.  At the same time I noticed looking above the fence that two people wearing tunics and no hats were walking along the yard of that building towards the wicket.  When they approached us I recognised them, it was Prince Yusupov and his butler Buzhinsky.”

He then goes on to tell of being recalled to the Palace where P spills the beans.

The time difference is not explained away but Efimov and vlasuk are talking about the same event.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 03, 2006, 08:49:18 AM
Thank you Richard.   The duo has become a trio.   Soon we might have a choir.

I have lived in Pochtamtskaya.   I know the territory very well.  I can imagine, in the middle of a dark night, everthing muffled with snow and the Moika frozen, gunshots would resonate and reverberate.   It would prove difficult to identify their source.

As you probably have Richard, I have walked from 64 Gorokhovaya to the Yusupov Palace.   It is no great distance.   How much faster it would be in a car and with no other traffic on the streets.  

According to the timetable, Rasputin left his flat with Yusupov at approximately 1.00a.m.   They would arrive at the Yusupov Palace no later than 1.10 - 1.15a.m.   Accepting 'received' history and the sound of the shots came from the Yusupov Palace at approximately 4.00a.m., the question is what were the conspirators and Rasputin doing during the intervening two and three quarter hours.

If the wounds to Rasputin's corpse were not caused by his being tumbled over the bridge and dropping a considerable height into the, partially frozen Nevka, were these intervening hours spent taunting, tormenting and torturing Rasputin.   (A reporter from Birzhevye Vedomosti present at the time of the retrieval of the corpse wrote, 'There was a lot of blood.'   He noted Rasputin's arms and legs were still tied with cords and the corpse showed evidence of multiple wounds.)

If, during the time Rasputin was inside the Yusupov Palace, he was subjected to systematic torture, it is small wonder that Yusupov fabricated the tale of Madeira and cakes - anything to make the absolutely unpardonable more palatable.

tsaria      

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 03, 2006, 09:05:07 AM
Tsaria

Are the Vedomosti comments sourced - can I find them anywhere?

The issue of blood is an interesting effect of immersion in water, although I am sure everything was frozen solid.  When bodies float in water they generally float head and arms down, legs and bottom down and torso raised.  Thus many buffeting injuries occur to the face as it collides with objects etc.  This blurrs the issue of whether injuries are caused ante or post mortem and is an added complication to whether R's injuries were caused by assault, hitting the supports of the bridge or in the water.

R's body does not conform to the normal pattern, the head is back not dropped forward as one would expect to find, I am doing some research on this at the moment.

I am also looking at how they 'swung' the body into the river.  the arms I would suggest must have been free, as fifting the neck would be difficult if not impossible if the arms were bound to his side.

Grabbing material would not be helpful too loose to take the force of swinging and lifting - interesting stuff!

Richard
Title: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 03, 2006, 10:09:11 AM
I did a sketch of Rasputin's body in Photoshop and am including it here in case it might help as far as position goes. If he was thrown into the river right after he was murdered then his body had probably not gone into rigor yet so he would have been frozen in a position his body assumed under the ice perhaps. I rotated the image so that the position could be seen from different angles.


I hope this might be helpful.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 03, 2006, 02:15:33 PM
Digging through some old notes on the Rasputin murder I have to ask whether anyone knows the location of Grand Duke Nicholas at the time of the killing.  Not that I suggest that he was involved, but he may have had talks with the British shortly after the event.

Phil Tomaselli
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 03, 2006, 02:43:21 PM
The Vedomosti reference I took from notes I made from a book I bought in Leningrad in 1990/91.   A friend was helping me with a translation of the book.  When I returned to Scotland, I loaned it to somebody who wished to continue with the translation.   I have not seen it since.   I have asked her twice and my husband asked her to retrieve and return it.   I gave up about five years ago when she insisted she had never seen it.    A warning for all.   I mentioned the book to FA some time ago.   It was an excellent resource.   I have been unable to locate a copy since.

I will check out my university library which has one of the best collections of Russian/Soviet books, pamphlets, magazines and newspapers in the UK.   You could also call the British Library to see if they have copies.   If they do, you would be required to go in person and plough through editions post-dated 17 December 1916.

I found the blood reference rather strange.   Would this indicate the blood had coagulated some time earlier and immersion in water failed to disperse it?   I also recall a reference - can't remember where - to blood being found on the wooden parapet of the bridge.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 03, 2006, 03:08:25 PM
There have been two articles in Birzhevye Vedomosti on December 20th, 1916, No. 15995, both on page 4. One was called: On the Petrovsk Island, about the discovery of Rasputin's body. The second: The death of Rasputin. Unfortunately I do not have the texts, only the above information, from the bibliography of Mr Arthur Chernyshov, from Tjumen. Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 04, 2006, 03:14:39 AM
MORE HELP PLEASE

What was the position of the Belozersky-Belosevsky Palace on Ketrovsky island

Is there an interactive map of St petersburg that goes out from ther Moika to Petrovsky bridge, there used to be one but I can't find it now?

Is the Neva/Nevka tidal and if so by how much?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 04, 2006, 05:26:18 AM
Seek and ye shall find!!!

Well done Rudy3.   If only we had the full text.

I am afraid I cannot help you with answers to those questions Richard.   I think you might find the answer, at least to the Belozersky Belozelsky palace in the 1914 Baedeker's Russia.   I frequently borrow it from my library, but feel that sometimes I should leave it on the shelf.   Although invariably I find I am the last person to have withdrawn it.

This is one of the best books in the world.   I saw one on e-bay about a year ago with a reserve of £850 and there were numerous bids on it.   If you can find a public library with a copy, it will almost certainly be reference only.   It may be available through the inter-library loan scheme - that's worth a try.

The river will be tidal, but I have no idea of the rise and fall.   Vladimir V is the one person on the Forum who I think would be able to help.

tsaria      
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 04, 2006, 08:54:16 AM
Phil,
You will note that GD Nicholas M. was in Petrograd the day of the murder, he hosted a dinner party at the Yacht Club the evening after, and Dmitri was in attendance. The source for this in Spirid. is Nicholas' own journal. The bibliographic reference is:
Grand Duke Nicholas Michaelovich (N.M. Romanov) "Memoirs", Kr. Arkh. No. 49. Edit. of the State, Moscow 1931, pg 98.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 04, 2006, 12:45:17 PM
Grishka

Sorry for teh delay in responding excellent drawings and very accurate - you need to invert the top one, a body will normally float arms, head a legs down.  I will use you drawing in my paper if I may it is very helpful.

Tsaria your point about the bloodied face is quite accurate, although at recovery the whole body was frozen as would be the blood.  This is caused by the face down attitude of the body generally.

In fcat Greg tells me it is the dacha and not the actual Palace that I need the location of.  

This is all very good stuff and I don't want to bark up the wrong tree but the phtograph of Rasputin's body by the ice hole with the Great Petrovsky bridge taken in the background could either have been taken from a position close to the Petrovsky Island side 65 metres downstream towards the Gulf of Finland or from the Krestovsky island side about 65 metres upstream.  The photogrpahs work either way.

My experiements on the bridge assuming that the body was thrown in on the Petrovsky side at the fourth support showed that the current towed various items at an angle from the support that took them to a point about 65 metres from the bridge, the distance where reports say his body was found.  But the reports also say it was the Krestovsky side of the island.  If he was thrown in at the fourth support on the up river Krestovsky side his body would needed to have floated against the current of the Nevka which is moderately strong towards the Krestovsky bank.  Interesting stuff or what?  There are so many conflicting statements etc.  the importance of the Palace (dacha) is the body was meant to have been recovered close to it.

This also why I need to know if the river is tidal.

I have receieved a great deal of help from the Metrological office on the temperatures and weather conditions in St Petersburg during this period and now have the range of temperatues for each day and night and the weather conditions, the importance of which will be revealed.

Did you know that sunrise on 17 December 1916 was 10.07pm in St Petersburg?


Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 04, 2006, 12:47:12 PM
By the way Rudy is a bit of a star and he should contribute more often in here, if he wants to, he knows an awful lot about the period.  We correspond frequently.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 04, 2006, 01:07:00 PM
10:07 PM ? So, even though all this was going on  in the "middle of the night" so to speak, it was not exactly dark, and visiblity was clear for all those conerned ? [like the police officers ?]
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 04, 2006, 01:57:55 PM
Here the corpse is rotated once more and mirrored.

Richard, help yourself to whatever you need and I'd be glad to do any other drawings you'd like.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 04, 2006, 02:34:17 PM
Robert

My error Sunrise was am not pm.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 04, 2006, 05:30:15 PM
The address of the former dacha of the Beloselski-Belozerski's (well, it was more a small palace, it was by the famous  A. I. Shtackenschneider "himself") is Krestovskij Prospekt No. 22. On its place now operates a horse-club called "Prostor"  Look at this page for map and information: http://www.prostor.haute.ru/contact.htm
Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 05, 2006, 04:45:22 AM
Rudy is obviously an authority on this case and I appreciate his sharing information.

I now realise the relationship between the Belozersky-Belozelsky Palace and the Petrovsky Bridge.   I did not know the name or the origin of this estate.  

Given events took place during month of December, would the 'dacha' have been occupied at that time of year?   The dachas on the Islands were usually closed down for winter.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 05, 2006, 06:40:10 AM
Tsaria

I only wish I knew of Rudy's existence when I was in Russia with the BBC.  He has supplied me with photographs of the dacha and present pictures on the bridge.  He knows of some work that reviewed all the stories that were circulating just after the murder about what happened.  I think he has far more knowledge than I and he is a nice guy as well.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 05, 2006, 03:33:54 PM
Well, friends, who would call this a dacha? The russian word for it is "usadba", kind of summer residence.
On the following webside a nice picture of it:
http://www.encspb.ru/bigimage.php?kod=3482

Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 06, 2006, 03:10:04 AM
Here folows the translation of an article in the St Petersburg newspaper "Birzhevye Vedomosti" No 15995 from Dec 20th, 1916, page 4. (Please excuse my "bad english"):

On Petrovsky Island

On Dec 18th in the early morning, as was mentioned in yesterdaymorning’s edition of ”Birzhevye Vedomosti” passers-by found on the ice, close to the Petrovsky bridge, a galosh-shoe No. 11, color darkbrown. Closeby were detected some bloodstains. In the snow, that covered the bridge, were visible prints of feet and cartyres, also, the last prints went up close to the railing of the bridge.

The galosh was presented and recognized.
After that further investigations were organized.

The authorities interrogated on the spot the local guard, concierges and custodians of the beerbrewery ”Bavaria” and the concierges of the ”Shelter of the Imperial Theater Association” (today: ”Home for veterans of the scene, named after M.G. Savina”, built in 1902; note Rudy). Upon closer investigation of the bridge some cloth with bloodstains was found next to the railing.
The railing was cleaned of snow in one part, that gave reason to assume, that something had been laying on it.

Divers were called, who during 2½ hours searched the bottom of the river, but no corpse was found. The divers suggested, that, because of the strong stream in that place, the corpse might have flown away from the Petrovsky bridge underneath the ice. Because of the severe frost, the search by the divers was postponed to next day.
The bridge was blockaded by the police and a guard was posted at the railing. The place, where the galosh-shoe was found, was photographed. All admission to the Petrovsky bridge was prohibited.

Further investigation was made in the area of the Petrovsky and Krestovsky islands.

Yesterday morning the whole area around the Petrovsky bridge, on the Malaja Nevka, was blockaded by the police forces. Research and administrative authorities arrived at Petrovsky island.
By order of the authoroties a group of workmen widened the hole in the ice of the Malaja Nevka.  
Soon after work started, the workers noticed a … furcoat in the water. A few moments later, close to the bridge, the corpse was found under the ice. The workers, with the help of some kind of hook, were able to tear the completely frozen corpse out from underneath the ice.

The corpse was dressed in a darkblue ”poddevka”, darkblue trousers, blue traditional russian shirt with a black silk waist belt, feet in lacquered boots, and were so tightly fastened with a rope, that only with great difficulty could be opened.

A first investigation of the corpse here on the shore showed, that the corpse had hit the pile of the Petrovsky bridge, when it was thrown into the hole in the ice. The right side of the face was broken. A part of the pile covered with blood was prepared and sent to the prosecuting office.
The guards, who were on duty the last two nights on the Petrovsky bridge were interrogated.

The corpse was put into a wooden coffin and under police escort  moved to the army pathology-hospital, where defrosting of the corpse was started.  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 06, 2006, 05:02:09 AM
Rudy - 'Poor English' - what poor English.   Thank you for that amazing piece of translation.   Absolutely fascinating.

Two particular points come to mind.

In order to remove the corpse, grappling hooks were used.   Would they have caused damaged to a frozen corpse?

More importantly - the story of the galosh has always puzzled me.   On arrival at the Yusupov Palace, Rasputin would automatically remove his galoshes.  I doubt he spent two and three quarter hours inside the Palace wearing galoshes.   Equally I cannot imagine the murderers even thought, never mind took the time, to replace the galoshes on the dead body of Rasputin.  
Given the chaos, is it likely they remembered to collect the galoshes and put them in the car?   Did the galosh fall off the corpse in the struggle to throw it over the parapet of the bridge?     Or, do we suppose the murderers had the presence of mind to, once again, collect the galoshes from the car and toss them over the bridge?  

I recollect one galosh being mentioned in various accounts.   What became of the other?   Could its remains still be lying at the bottom of the Malaya Nevka?   What exactly was burned by Purishkevitch's wife on the hospital train?  

Any answers?

tsaria  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 06, 2006, 05:16:41 AM
The word "hook" is probably an example of my bad english. The text says "with a hook fastened to a long stick". No idea what kind of hook. Probably just some kind of iron piece, to be able to get hold of the corpse.
For your other reactions, I just have to say: there are too many questions in this story, and too few answers available.  R.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 06, 2006, 05:50:05 AM
One more word about the galosh: in an article (even more interesting than the above newspaper article) published in "Byloe" No.1 (23) July 1917, Petrograd, are the accounts of the official interrogations by P. K. Popov.  Galosh was No. 10, brown colour, made by company "Treugolnik" ("Triangle"). Bloodstains were found at the bridges fourth flight.
"The brown galosh No. 10 from company Treugolnik, found under the Great Petrovsky bridge on the Neva today, at 3 am, has been preented to the daughters of the missing Grigory Rasputin-Novyj, Maria and Varvara Rasputin-Novyj, living on Gorohovaja street number 64; they confessed the kalosh as belonging to their father, both in size as in resemblance. The galosh was also recognized as belonging to Rasputin-Novyj by two agents of the Security Dept, being in the appartment, by the concierge and by Mr Semonovitch. Dec 18th 1916, Chef -detective Mihajlov.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 06, 2006, 06:05:42 AM
It is not poor English, Rudy.  Your description is absolutely correct.   In English we call a hook at the end of a rod or stick a 'grappling hook'.

Any theories on the missing galosh?

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 06, 2006, 08:39:32 AM
It sounds like Rasputin had taken off his outer clothing (or someone else took it off of him) to settle in for a long night of either carousing (or torture) and he was then murdered while wearing his trousers, boots, shirt, belt and 'poddevka' (is that a vest?)
After he was killed, whoever took his corpse for disposal gathered his outer clothing, wrapping and tying the body in his coat, maybe grabbing his galoshes and his hat (he must have had a hat), gloves? and disposing of those items somehow, either by burning, throwing seperately into the river, or even leaving the disposal of those items to later, leaving them in the automobile.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 06, 2006, 08:44:01 AM
"or...."
Rasputin dressed again to leave the Y palace on the Moika, putting on his galoshes...
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 06, 2006, 09:40:08 AM
Touche, FA.   The galoshes could prove rather a vital piece of evidence.

I have been trying to find references to the clothes disposed of in Purishkevich's hospital train incinerator.   I cannot remember if the items were detailed, but they did include Rasputin's belongings.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 06, 2006, 10:03:48 AM
Richard,
While going further into Spirid., I discovered this, while looking for details about th clothing, they found one "snow boot" of R on the canal on the 18th, then...! pg. 398: "On another front, they learned that day (Dec 18th) that the results of the analysis of the blood sample removed from the Yussupov palace courtyard: it was human blood and not blood from a dog."

then pg 400:  "December 19, very early, the police resumed searching  on the Petrovski bridge.  One of the divers of the river police was preparing to go into the water saw something floating on the surface of the water in an open place in the ice just by the bridge.  They retrieved the object: it was Rasputin's fur coat. At the top of the color it was tied with a pice of dark cloth." ... the diver goes in and finds R's body floating STILL LYING ON HIS BACK under the surface of the ice.  they break the ice to retrieve the body.  He was dressed in a blue shirt, large pantaloons and high boots on his feet.  The arms were tied underneath his knees, the end of which was knotted on to his right wrist.  Eyes closed, mouth semi-open, teeth clenched. Face covered with blood.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 06, 2006, 11:09:58 AM
Excellent piece of sleuthing FA.

I'll keep looking for references to Purishkevich's wife burning Rasputin's belongings.   Was she ever required to give evidence?

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 06, 2006, 12:08:03 PM
Here is what Spirid. reports on the "burning of clothes", bear in mind these details ONLY come from the Y and P tales:

R. is specifically described as "putting on his fur coat, beaver fur hat and snow boots" when Y. picks him up at his apartment. Then later:

The moment after R. falls in the basement after being shot, they drag the body across the flagstone floor, not wanting to get blood on the white bearskin rug, right over to the door.  Y calls everyone upstairs. Then a few minutes later, Sukhotine takes "Raputins clothes" and leaves "in the Grand Duke's closed car", with Dmitri and Lazavert to go to the hospital train to burn the clothes.

Then after the shooting in the courtyard, the body is wrapped up in cloth and tied. They put the body into Dmitri's car and all get in. Only THEN does P. "notice that R's fur coat and snow boots" are still in the car. Dr. Lazovert tells P that Mrs. P did not want to rip up the coat so that it could be burned, and so she only burned the smaller things.

NOW, following the "trail of the clothes" so to speak...R leaves dressed in his shirt, pants, boots (his normal attire) and puts on a fur coat, beaver hat and snow boots. They say that Soukhotine takes Rasputin's clothes off to be burned. P. reports that both boots and the fur coat are still in the car afer the murder..  One boot and the fur coat are found. R.'s body is found fully dressed. WHAT exactly did Mrs. P. supposedly burn? Just one beaver hat?? WHY in the world would they go to such trouble just to burn a fur hat?

There is no mention that anyone asked Mrs. P about exactly what she burned, or didn't.

What "clothes" would Soukhotine exactly have taken? Other than the hat it is all accounted for. I think this part of the tale is pure fiction Tsaria. Logic, to me at least, dictates that Rasputin was wearing the coat and boots at least when he left the Moika (dead or alive)....
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 06, 2006, 01:08:02 PM
Crumbs I am not going to go away for a couple of days ever again so much happens.  

As Samwise says to his wife Rose when he returns to Bag End after seeing Frodo, Gandalf and the other two elvishring bearers off at the Grey Havens ''I'm back.'

The golash - firstly one was found at the bridge by the support and allegedly one shoe, but I have to say on the pictures I have both shoes are on.  P says that they put the golashes and beaver caot in Dimitry's car as an after thought just before they left the Palace with the 2 pood weights and the chains.

P suggests that they threw the body in and then realised that they had left the golash(es0 coat, weights and chains in teh car.  throws golash (obviously only one) over the bridge, and weights, put chains in the coat and throw that over (a lie because the coat was attached to the body when found)

The second golash was allegedly found in the back of Dimitry's car when they returned to D's Palace on the Nevesky and D's man servant was told to burn it and the carpet that was blood stained.

Mrs P and Mrs L did not burn the coat etc because it was allegedly too big to fit in the stove - a likely story.  Of course before this they drove (D, L and S) back to R's apartment with S dressed in R's clothes to fool the Okhrana agents watching R's flat) a likely story!!!

Spiros bit, it would be unusual for the body to float face upwards, not impossible but very unlikely.  The body would have floated as per grishka's inverted drawing.  I am pretty certain the legs were not tied under the knees, that body was frozen solid and we have the photographs from the recovery, which show the position he came out of the water.

Boating hooks etc., I do not think were used people often look at the picture of Rasputin at the autopsy (the right hand side of the body shot and assume the large dark area around the shoulder and back is a wound.  Zharov and colleagues are explicit it is not, just shadowing on the picture and Kossorotov does not refer to it in the original autopsy.

Where was the body found? - our ace detective Rudy has more or less confirmed to me through his knowledge of the area and photographs that he and I have traded that the picture was taken from the Petrovsky Island bank where I first thought the picture was taken from.  By why did reports suggest that it was recovered by the dacha (palace) on the Krestovsky side. The actors/artist home on Petrovsky is key to this as it is not shown in any of the pictures in 1916.

Had it been R could not have been thrown off the bridge as the Royal geographical Survey have sent me a very detailed report showing that the Neva/Nevka is not tidal.

I am waiting for a responsee from the Historical Diving Socieyu of Russia about the equipment and methods of water body recovery at the time.

So many people helping and all good stuff.

Richard



Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 06, 2006, 01:20:09 PM
I was wondering as well, what other clothes would there have been ? After all, he was not naked when found. If there was indeed a buring by Mrs. P. could it have been blood-stained clothes of the participants  instead of Rasputin's ?
And in death, most people die with eyes & mouth open [unless already asleep or otherwise dormant]. Someone would have had to have closed his eyes if he was not drugged into a stupor. [at least in my experience and I have dealt with not a few dead bodies]
Just curious, as I have not been so interested in a thread in a long time even though Rasputin has rarely interested me.

Also, I have some maps [copies] of 1914 St. Petersburg that I would be happy to share if it would help  point out the locations that this discussion mentions.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 07, 2006, 03:02:41 AM
Robert,

His eyes were open, in fact one was out of the socket.  He was wearing a blue floral (wheat corned) patterned, on white background shirt, with an undershirt (vest), trousers and boots, I cannot be sure from the photographs one or two boots (shoes) of course if there are two then it creates some problems with one shoe being found on the bridge supports.  I am going to try and blow the photograph up, but need to sort out the resolution.

He was wrapped in a blue material (possibly curtaining) in the photogrpahs the piece covering the top of the body has been removed and is at his left side.  P says the material covered the body including the head.  The photograph reveals that the cloth covering the leg is tied off at the ankles so the boots are showing.

Although the head may have been covered the arms could not have been tied in by the material as it would make swinging over the bridge barrier as P suggests impossible.  Try and dead lift someone from behind their neck. The arms certainly were free.

As you know I believe that the beaver coat was wrapped around the body as well, and some reports have one arm of the coat missing, possibly where it came off when they were swinging the body over the barrier.

I am doing some detailed triangulation work from the photographs to establish exactly how far the body was from the bridge (based on the photogaphs) but is certainly within a couple of feet of where my experiemnts suggested a body would have been given that it was thrown off at the fourth bridge support and carried by the current into the Petrovsky island bank of the Malaya Nevka.

There are still lots of issues - Rudy has a vast knowledge of material that many of us have never seen before and I have seen an awful lot, so that is saying something.  Some of the information he has may well hold clues that will help us determine what really happened, if we ever can that is, and certainly put some clarity around the sequence of events.

The Historic Diving Society of Russia may well have information and we will certainly have some pictures of what the police divers of the time looked like and how they worked, it should be fascinating.

Regarding the maps - the area I am interested and thus I suppose everybody else is from the Moika, across the Neva, west past the Peter Paul Fortress and out along the Malaya Nevka towards the Gulf of Finland where we eventually come to the islands of Petrovsky and Krestovsky.  I am interested in which bridghes existed across the Neva at the time and what roads existed to and from the islands although my guess is the main roads are remarkabley similar if not exactly the same as those that exist today.  Rudy has sent me a really nice picture of his room and he has a 1916 map next to his desk and computer station which looks very elegant.

I am glad you are enjoying the debate; for me this is what the AP Discussion Board is about, a number of interested people discussing issues in an intelligent, reflective, though often questioning way.  It really does add to knowledge and I am really glad to have found the site when I was carrying out my research into Rasputin's murder.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 07, 2006, 04:31:00 AM
If the book to which Robert refers is Baedeker's Russia 1915, so far as I recall, it contains maps of the area.   As the date in the title implies '1915', is close so to the date of the murder, there will be little change.

I agree Richard, debate like this is the very essence of the Alexander Palace Discussion Board and, regretfully, I will be absent for the next few days.

Enjoy!

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 07, 2006, 04:42:33 AM
Richard wrote "As you know I believe that the beaver coat was wrapped around the body". Here a line from an article, published in newspaper "Den" (Day) on tuesday, Dec 20th 1916, No. 350, page 2:
"He did not have the furcoat on, he just was wrapped in it, besides, he was winded up in a rather big piece of cloth of dark colour and almost 3 arshin long"
I will try to translate the article one of these days. Also I will add a warning and example, that one cannot trust the press completely, not even in those days! R
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 07, 2006, 05:21:05 AM
'There's no-one you can bribe or twist, thank God, the British journalist - but - seeing what the guy (sic) can do, unbribed, there's no occasion to'.

GK Chesterton.

(tsaria)

Couldn't resist Rudy's remark.   Back to the infinitely more interesting topic.................
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 07, 2006, 07:31:06 AM
Robert

GARF File Statement 1740

Inspector Asonov:

'In the gap between foundations, size 1.5 square arshins (an arshin is 28"), a man's golash and a warm brown shoe,size 10, manufactured by Treygolnik were found.'

I have carefully studies the photogrpahs of the body when it is lying on the ice and one of these shows clearly that Rasputin is wearing both of his shoes.

So was it rasputin's shoe that was found on the bridge support or not.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 07, 2006, 12:40:08 PM
Two things Rudy tells me that the firm which made the shoes are still in business, but since the revolution they have traded under another name.  They made rubber shoes - interesting!

RUSSIAN DIARY OF AN ENGLISHMAN - do any of you know who wrote it and what date it was published.  Rudy has sent me copies of the relevant entries.  It is all very confusing and to some extent unreliable, but the author does point out that R was shot at point blank range in the forehead - now who was this author.  he claims to reflect what Y told him when he met him in the Crimea after the event - I probably doubt this.

In the Appendix are two interesting documents a Memorandum which is factually incorrect in a number of places, but much of what is recorded touches on our present deliberations.  I will try and type it all up and post it on here.  It is going in my paper.

I think the concerning Appendix is the alleged official police report dated 30 December.  I doubt this document and Andrew has used it in his book to my knowledge it only exists in this document and is not in GARF or otherwise officially referenced.

Rudy if you know how to post photographs in here I think the views of the Petrovsky bridge you have taken and the Imperial Theatre Artists' home would be really informative for those interested in this thread.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 07, 2006, 12:52:35 PM
The following is the statement of  Inspector Mikhailov

Source GARF file:

'The brown shoe size 10 manufactured by 'Treygolnik' found under the Big Petrovsky bridge on neva river today at 3am has been presented to daughters of searched for Grigory Rasputin Maria and Varvara Rasputina - Novaya, residing at number 64 Gorohovaya Street.  They confirmed that the shoe belonged to their father, it was the right size and looked the same.  Moreover, two agents of the secret Political Police Department, door lady and Mr Simanovich who were at the apartment confirmed that shoe belonged to Rasputin-Novyi.'

Policeman Kordukov only refers to a galosh and the bridge guard Kyzmin who recovered the galosh with a boat hook only refers to a galosh.

I think that there is probably a typographical error in the typing of the statement of inspector Asonov and we are only talking about a galosh as the shoes are attached to the body in the scene of crime photograph.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Louis_Charles on January 07, 2006, 12:57:12 PM
As someone who has been lurking on this thread (I have nothing to contribute other than intense interest), can I interrupt for a moment to compliment all of you upon the way you have assembled it? This is fascinating reading from start to finish, whenever that may be.

Regards,

Simon
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 07, 2006, 03:40:08 PM
First about “The Russian Diary of an Englishman, Petrograd, 1915-1917”. It was edited by William Heinemann, London 1919. No name of the writer. One possible author might have been Philip Gibbs, correspondent for the Daily Telegraph in Petrograd during that time. I do think, there is quite a lot of inside information to be found, but it should be handled with the greatest of care and criticism.
Second, we are back at the galosh. I quote Richard who quotes “GARF File Statement 1740
Inspector Asonov: 'In the gap between foundations, size 1.5 square arshins (an arshin is 28"), a man's golash [AND a warm brown shoe,size 10, manufactured by Treygolnik were found.'
The same statement 1740, published in journal Byloe, No 1 (23) from July 1917, Petrograd, reads:
'In the gap between foundations, size 1.5 square arshins (an arshin is 28"), was found a man's galosh; a warm brown shoe, size 10, manufactured by Treygolnik'
information:
The brown galosh No. 10 from company Treugolnik, found under the Great Petrovsky bridge on the Neva today, at 3 am, has been presented to the daughters of the missing Grigory Rasputin-Novyj, Maria and Varvara Rasputin-Novyj, living on Gorohovaja street number 64; they confessed the galosh as belonging to their father, both in size as in resemblance. The galosh was also recognized as belonging to Rasputin-Novyj by two agents of the Security Dept, being in the appartment, by the concierge and by Mr Semonovitch. Dec 18th 1916, Chef -detective Mihajlov".
My point: we are talking about ONE item. Where Richard writes AND, in the text published in Byloe is just a “;”
In Russian it reads “galosh; warm “botik”. “Botik” is used for an over-shoe, a galosh. Besides, Treugolnik did produce only rubber shoes. And only one item was shown to the daughters of Rasputin. Also, Rasputin wore “sapogi”, boots, no shoes.
About the pictures, I will aski Laura Mabee, who has been so kind to help me before, when I published some pictures of a “panihida” for Rasputin (see: Yusupov courtyard, where R was shot), to assist me once again. Rudy  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 07, 2006, 04:54:46 PM
Kind of puzzled why most of R's clothes were all found but the beaver hat was burned. It was burned, right, but why ? A head shot would have produced massive bleeding would it not ? Also where R was shot, would that explain where the body had been initially, and where the beaver hat was found, was this the first place considered where he was murdered ?

Thanks all for your in depth analysis of all these issues. It is indeed captivating reading.

Tatiana
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 07, 2006, 10:24:29 PM
Eyes closed, mouth semi,
wish I could get the "quotes" bit down. but that is what I was refering to, though the Spiridovich  quote. Why would he say the eyes were closed ? Especially since the body was recovered with an eyeball falling out of it's socket. ??
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Laura Mabee on January 07, 2006, 11:41:42 PM
The following images are generously shared by Rudy3:

"Bolshoi Petrovsky Most" - Home for veterans of the scene, named after M.G. Savina -, built in 1902

(http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/3748/img23901sp.th.jpg) (http://img355.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img23901sp.jpg)
(http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/9996/img23922jc.th.jpg) (http://img355.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img23922jc.jpg)
(http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/1157/img23997sw.th.jpg) (http://img355.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img23997sw.jpg)
(http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/2979/img24015fd.th.jpg) (http://img355.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img24015fd.jpg)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 02:11:36 AM
Robert

Spirod wasn't there at the time and probably has just taken on board what somebody else said.  there are so many 'incorrect' versions of what happened that it makes getting at the truth very difficult.  The eyes are certainly open in the pictures I have seen from the point of his recovery on the ice to being on the post mortem slab.

Kossorotov

'The body is that of a man of about 50 years old, of medium size, dressed in blue embroidered hospital robe, which covers a white shirt.  His legs, in tall animal skin boots, are tied with a rope, and the same rope ties his wrists.  His dishevelled hair is light brown, as are his long moustache and beard, and it’s soaked with blood.  His mouth is half-open, his teeth clenched.  His face below his forehead is covered in blood.  His shirt too is also marked with blood.'

Of the head injuries:

'His right eye has come out of its cavity and falls down onto his face.  At the corner of the right eye the membrane is torn.
His right ear in hanging down and torn
His neck has a wound from some sort of rope tie'

So Kossorotov deals with the shoe issue he had both his boots on and the eye issue.


Richard


Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 02:18:07 AM
Rudy

Thank you very much for the pictures.  For those of you not intimate with the bridge it was at the time of the murder a bridge capable of taking two way vehicular traffic.

The Gulf of Finland side of the bridge (the side over which Rasputin was thrown over remains as it was in 1916) the upstream side was reduced in size and moved closer to the Gulf side if that makes sense.

Rudy's excellent pictures show:

TOP - a shot from Krestovsky Island to Petrovsky Island, you can see the Imperial Theatre Artists' home top left of centre.

No2 is a closer view of the bridge from the same side showing the home more clearly.

No3 is from Petrovsky island towards Krestovsky island and shows the absence of any substantial building on the left side of the bridge.

No4 is the main entrance of the Imperial Theatre Artists' home.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 02:19:09 AM
FA (Rob)

Any ideas on the 'Russian Diary of an Englishman' at all?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 09:05:13 AM
Below is the text I have typed up from Russian Diary of an Englishman that Rudy sent to me.  There are a number of issues that are at variance with the facts and although I don't believe P and Y with the accepted version of events.

For instance we have his assertion in the second entry that he saw the 'blood stained polra bear skin rug' Y and P say there was no blood on the rug and P goes as far as to suggest that it was 'nor marked and only flattened slightly'.

The issue of the women - who I am satisfied were not there is reported incorrectly Y in his statement to Colonel Popov and his letter to the Empress said two ladies were present.

He does however say that the final shot was point blank to the forehead how was this missed for so long.

In his diary entry which I do not in anyway think is contemporaneous he says that it was the first time R hade been to the Yusupov Palace but in Appendix II it says R had gone there frequently.

I will type the alleged police report up later today or during the week.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 09:06:28 AM
A Russian Diary of an Englishman

Page 83

‘Nineteen Seventeen

Tuesday January 2. Letter to the Marchioness of Ripon

I have got such awful rheumatism in both arms and both hands I can hardly hold a pen.

Rasputin was killed in the Yusupov Palace about 7 a.m. Saturday, December 31.  There were present Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich, Felix Yusupov, and a Conservative members of the Duma, and two lady friends of Rasputin, who left, protesting, at 4 a.m., so the man had an agony of three hours.  All this is from the Police report which I have got.  I happened to be in the very storm-centre.  Grand Duke Dimitri was arrested by order of the Empress – illegally, but he submitted, as it gives him a card in his hand.  The Emperor arrived post-haste last night from Stavka.  I have written minutely in my diary ever detail.

THE TRUE AND AUTHENTIC STORY OF THE MURDER OF GRIGORY RASPUTIN AS RECOUNTED TO ME ON JUNE 6, 1917, AT YALTA BY THE PERPETRATOR

Prince Felix Yusupov made the acquaintance of the notorious Gregory Rasputin because he was convinced that the removal of this man was absolutely essential for the safety of Russia.  The scene of the Rasputin tragedy was the palace Yusupov, a long building with twenty-six windows on each floor, overlooking the Moika Canal.  The apartments on the ground floor, which the Prince’s parents had given to him and his wife, had been in the process of redecoration since the beginning of the war.  In the meantime they were using as a sitting-room the extreme corner room on the ground floor at the left end of the palace, as seen from the street; and beneath it in the basement had been arranged a dining-room, in which were placed several Italian sixteenth-century cabinets and objets d’art of the same period.  From the sitting-room on the ground floor a narrow staircase leads to the dining-room in the basement.  At the sixth step from the top of the staircase, on the left, a small door opens into the cobbled forecourt of the house adjoining.  This house also belongs to the Yusupov family, and its forecourt has trees panted along a wooden palisade which borders the Moika Quay overlooking the Moika Canal.

The deed was definitely planned to take place before Friday, December 29, 1916, because Felix Yusupov was to leave next day with his two young brothers-in-law, to join his wife and spend Christmas in the Crimea with her family.  On the fatal night there was no ‘supper-party’. Felix Yusupov went himself o fetch Rasputin – who had never before set foot in the Yusupov Palace – and only with great difficulty persuaded him to come hoe with him and talk over the political situation.  On their arrival the motor-car drove into the forecourt of the adjoining house.  They entered the palace by the small door and immediately went down to the dining-room.

The Grand Duke Dimitri and M. Purishkevich, a member of the Duma, were at that time in the sitting-room upstairs on the ground floor, and the Police report leaves no doubt that two ladies were with them, although neither they nor their friends have ever admitted that any ladies were present in the palace that night.  Neither the Grand Duke Dimitri nor M. Purishkevich saw Rasputin while he was within the palace.

Arrived in the dining-room, Felix Yusupov engaged Rasputin in a long conversation, in the course of which the latter positively asserted that the Empress Alexandra Feodorovna intended to make herself regent on January 10 (N.S.)

Rasputin, invited to refresh himself, drank a glass of red wine in which poison had been put.  Felix Yusupov himself drank no wine, being a total abstainer.  The poison having been bought some three weeks before, its strength had apparently evaporated, and it failed to tae immediate effect.  There ensued an interminable wait, during which the moujik, though he grew drowsy and dazed, did not die, so Felix Yusupov determined, as the night was now far advanced, to shoot the man outright.  Accordingly he went upstairs to the ground floor to borrow Purishkevich’s revolver.  Returning to the dining-room below with the weapon held behind his back, he approached Rasputin, who was leaning over the supper-table half dazed, and, touching him on the shoulder, said, ‘On the cabinet at the end of the room there is a wonderful crucifix.’  Felix Yusupov was holding the revolver in his left hand, but having Rasputin now on his right side, quickly transferred the weapon behind his back to his right hand, and then shot Rasputin at close range through the left side, below the ribs.  The moujik reeled and fell heavily back on a white bearskin, and Felix Yusupov, believing he was dead, left him lying there, and went upstairs to join his friends on the ground floor.

The Police report makes it evident that this was the moment when the ladies who had been entertained in the salon on the ground floor were persuaded to leave the palace.

Felix Yusupov, after a short interval, in order to make quite sure that Rasputin was dead, descended the staircase and again entered the dining-room.  Bending over the body, he was horrified to find that the eyes were not only wide open, but gleaming with tiger-like fury.  Suddenly the wounded man raised himself on his elbows and struggled to his feet; then, springing with amazing vitality on Felix Yusupov, seized him by the throat and tried to strangle him, pulling off his epaulettes in the melee.  Finally disengaging himself, the wretched man made off by the staircase with the instinct of a wounded animal to escape out of the he trap into which he had fallen.

Finding that the door through which he had entered the palace was unlocked, he passed out into the forecourt of the adjoining house, and then fell down exhausted in the snow.

Meanwhile Felix Yusupov had rushed up the staircase after him and burst into the sitting-room to call Purishkevich, who at once came out into the forecourt and fired four shots at Rasputin, the number mentioned in the Police Report.  Two of these must have missed their aim, as only two bullets hit Rasputin, one in the back of the head, and the other fired at point-blank at his forehead.  The lifeless body was picked up and carried back into the palace to await the return of the motor-car, in which, on arrival, it was paced, driven rapidly out to Kristovski Island, and thrown into a hole in the ice of the Little Neva.

Felix Yusupov returned with the Grand Duke Dimitri to his palace in the Nevski and remained there, the answer to all subsequent inquiries at the Yusupov Palace being that he had ‘left for the Crimea.’

At the inquest subsequently held it was authoritatively recognised that the shot fired in the dining-room must have been mortal.

The police have not the right to enter a house where any member of the Imperial Family is present.’

‘Wednesday July 4

A procession of soldiers went up the Nevski at noon.  In the afternoon to visit Felix Yusupovs.  He showed me exactly where Rasputin was killed, the blood-stained Polar bear skin, and how it happened.  We then walked to the Nevski, where Felix left me.’
Title: Russian Diary of an EnglishmaRe: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 09:07:25 AM
Russian Diary of an Englishman

‘Appendix II

MEMORANDUM PRIVATELY CIRCULATED ON DECEMBER 31, 1916

The following narrative represents what was generally believed, up to the time of the revolution, about the death of Rasputin

Gregory Rasputin was shot in a room in the basement of the palace of Prince Yusupov on the Moika Canal shortly after 7 o’clock on the morning of December 30, 1917 (N.S.).  The Grand Duke Dimitri Pavlovich, Princes Feodor and Nikita Alexandrovich, and the young Prince Felix Yusupov were in the palace, and were all privy to the shooting.  Conjointly with other young Princes of the Blood, including the sons of the late Grand Duke Constantine, they had decided some time previously to ‘remove’ Rasputin, because they regarded him as the cause of the dangerous scandal affecting the interests of the Dynasty and the Empire.  So many persons being involved in the plot, rumours were bound to leak out, and as far back as Monday last it was reported that Rasputin’s death might be expected at any time.  It was even understood that one of the sons of the Grand Duke Constantine had been selected by lot to perform the deed, but that he hesitated and the execution been consequently postponed.
Prince Yusupov and the young Princes, his brothers-in-law, together with the other Imperial princes, used to assemble at night at the Yusupov palace, and to these gatherings they frequently invited Rasputin, their object being to  extract from him as much information as possible as to the doings of august personages.  While under the influence of liquor, Rasputin would give away, not only his own secrets, but also those of the various Ministerial and other political changes that have so much incensed Russian public opinion within recent months – notably the dismissal of Sazonov, the appointment of Sturmer, and the successive and persistent failures to introduce a stable Ministry of internal reforms.

It was at these nocturnal meetings that the idea of removing Rasputin assumed concrete form.  When the Duma was suddenly prorogued on December 29, the princely conspirators decided that further delay would be dangerous.  The disclosures made by Rasputin himself left no doubts in the minds of his hosts that he had also played some part in the prorogation of the Duma. This only strengthened their resolve to do away with him at once.  They accordingly invited him to meet them as usual, and, in order to allay his possible suspicions, some of Rasputin’s lady friends were included in the invitation.

From the reports of the police investigations cited below, and from other information by reporters on the staff of the Novoe Vremya, it would appear that about 2.30 at night Rasputin was told he would die, and he was given the option of committing suicide or being killed.  A revolver was placed in his hand, but he flatly declined to commit suicide and discharged the weapon somewhere in the direction of Grand Duke Dmitri.  The bullet smashed a pane of glass, and the sound attracted the attention of the police outside.  Subsequently he was killed and his body removed to a place unknown, presumably Tsarkoe Selo.’

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 09:11:32 AM
There are other versions of events but you have to read with care and decide on the truth against what we know to be fact.  below is a version that purports to be Lazovert's version of events.

A third and previously unconsidered version of events, that of Doctor Stanislaus Lazovert.  The account is to be found in the 1923, National Alumni document, ‘Source Records of the Great war, edited by C.F. Horne and W.F. Austin.

At page 86/88 Lazovert allegedly says:

‘The shot that ended the career of the blackest devil in Russian history was fired by my close and beloved friend, Vladimir Purishkevich, Reactionary deputy of the Duma.

Five of us had been arranging for this event for many months.  On the night of the killing, after all details had been arranged, I drove to the Imperial palace in an automobile and persuaded this black devil to accompany me to the home of Prince Yusupov, in Petrograd.  Later that night M. Purishkevich followed him into the gardens adjoining Yusupov's house and shot him with an automatic revolver.  We then carried his riddled body in a sheet to the River Neva, broke the ice and cast him in.

The story of Rasputin and his clique is well known.  They sent the army to the trenches without food or arms, they left them there to be slaughtered, they betrayed Russia and deceived the Allies, they almost succeeded in delivering Russia bodily to the Germans.  Rasputin, as a secret member of the Austrian Green hand, had absolute power in court.  The Tsar was a nonentity, a kind of Hamlet, his only desire being to abdicate and escape the whole vile business.  Rasputin continued his life of vice, carousing and passion.  The Grand Duchess reported these things to the Tsarina and was banished from court for her pains.

This was the condition of affairs when we decided to kill this monster.  Only five men participated in it.  They were the Grand Duke Dimitry Pavlovich, Prince Yusupov, Vladimir Purishkevich, Captain Sukhotin and myself.

Prince Yusupov’s palace is a magnificent place on the Nevska.  The great hall has six equal sides and in each hall is a heavy oaken door.  One leads out into the gardens, the one opposite leads down a broad flight of marble stairs to a huge dining room, one to the library etc.  At midnight the associates of the Prince concealed themselves while I entered the car and drove to the home of the monk. He admitted me in person.

Rasputin was in a gay mood.  We drove rapidly to the home of the Prince and descended to the library, lighted only by a blazing log in the huge chimney place.  A small table was spread with cakes and rare wines – three kinds of the wine were poisoned and so were the cakes.  The monk threw himself into a chair, his humour expanding with the warmth of the room.  He told of his successes, his plots, of the imminent success of the German arms and that the Kaiser would soon be seen in Petrograd.

At a proper moment he was offered the wine and the cakes.  He drank the wine and devoured the cakes.  Hours slipped by, but there was no sign that the poison had taken effect.  The monk was even merrier than before.  We were seized with an insane dread that this man was inviolable, that he was superhuman, that he couldn’t be killed.  It was a frightful sensation.  He glared at us with his black, black eyes as though he read our minds and would fool us.

And then after a time he rose and walked to the door.  We were afraid that our work had been in vain.  Suddenly, as he turned at the door, someone shot at him quickly.  With a frightful scream Rasputin whirled and fell, face down, on the floor.  The others came bounding over to him and stood over his prostrate, writhing body.  It was suggested that two more shots be fired to make certain of his death, but one of those present said, “No, no; it is his last agony now.”

We left the room to let him die alone, and to plan for his removal and obliteration.

Suddenly we heard a strange and unearthly sound behind the huge door that led into the library.  The door was slowly pushed open, and there was Rasputin on his hands and knees, the bloody froth gushing from his mouth, his terrible eyes bulging from their sockets.  With an amazing strength he sprang toward the door that led into the gardens, wrenched it open and passed out.

As he seemed to be disappearing in the darkness, F. Purishkevich, who had been standing by, reached over and picked up an American revolver and fired two shots swiftly into his retreating figure.  We heard him fall with a groan, and later when we approached the body he was very still and cold and – dead.

We bundled him up in a sheet and carried him to the river’s edge.  Ice had formed, but we broke it and threw him in.  The next day search was made for Rasputin, but no trace was found.  Urged by the Tsarina, the police made frantic efforts, and finally a rubber was found which was identified as his.  The river was dragged and the body recovered.

I escaped from the country.  Purishkevich also escaped.  But Prince Yusupov was arrested and confined to the boundaries of his estate.  He was later released because of the popular approval of our act.  Russia had been freed from the vilest tyrant in her history; and that is all.’

I have more versions that I will post during the next week or so.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 09:16:08 AM
INFORMATION REQUIRED

This is some suggestion that Stopford may have been the author of the diary.  have we any information on him - he seems off key on a number of issues though?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 10:50:53 AM
The Police report as promised but it is absolute nonsense and I will de construct it all for you over the next week or so.  It is just one of these things that keeps getting in the way of publishing my paper because I want it to be as 'definitive' as possible in terms of the investigation.  Some many things have come up in the last couple of weeks that are causing me to go back and re examine several areas.  But who said writing was easy?

Russian Diary of an Englishman

‘APPENDIX III

THE POLICE REPORT OF DECEMBER 30, 1916

The following is a literal translation of the Official report handed in by the Police

TO-DAY at about 2.30 in the morning, the policeman who stands on guard at the house of the Home Office situated on the Morskaia heard a detonation from the palace of Prince Yusupov situated on the opposite side of the Moika.  As this post is a special one and the policeman on duty is forbidden to leave it, he went into the Home Office premises and communicated by telephone with the police sergeant on duty at the adjoining station.  Then the news of the shooting was passed on to the Kasan police district in which the palace is situated.  The chief police officer, Colonel Rogov, with a detachment of men, proceeded to the spot.  Examination of the dvornik on duty at the adjoining house elicited the fact that the shot had been fired from the young Prince’s side of the palace.  In order to ascertain the causes of the shooting in the palace, the assistant police officer, Captain Krylov, was ordered to enter the building, and he was informed by the butler that a reception was proceeding inside, and that one of the guests, while practising t a target, had missed and fired into the window, in proof whereof Captain Krylov was shown the broken window on the ground floor overlooking the forecourt of the adjoining house.  The data obtained through the investigations were communicated by Colonel Rogov the same night to the Police Master of the Second Division, Major General Grigoriev, and to M. Chaplygin, the official on duty at the prefecture.

Scarcely had the police officers left the palace when a motor-car drove up along the Moika Canal quay and stopped near a small foot-bridge almost facing the palace.  Four men were seen to alight from the car.  The moment they had left it the chauffeur extinguished the lights, and, putting on full speed, made off along the canal.  This scene was witnessed by a detective belonging to the Okhrana, named Tihomirov, who had been detailed by the Police Department to look after Rasputin.  Tihomirov – presuming that the men who entered the palace, not by the main entrance, but from a door situated on the side of the palace and opening into the forecourt of the adjoining house, were robbers – hurried across the canal to the police station, and thence telephoned a report of what he had observed to the Chief of the Secret Police.

Colonel Rogov had no sooner returned to hs home that he was notified from the Okhrana that information had been received relative to an attack on the palace of Prince Yusupov – A number of police officers were again dispatched there.  The butler came out and explained to them that some very highly placed guests had just arrived from the environs of Petrograd.  A report about this was made during the course of the night to the Prefect, General Balk.

Shortly after 6 a.m., at the police station beside the palace, while the police officers who had come off duty were being questioned in the ordinary course as to the events of the night, the sound of several police whistles was heard from the street.  This drew the constables and police sergeants to the windows, whence they perceived that from the main entrance of the Prince’s palace two women were being helped out, and that they were offering resistance to their ejection and refusing to enter a motor-car, and doing their best to force a way back into the palace.  In response to their protestations the detectives stationed along the canal had sounded the alarm.  By the time the police rushed out of the police station the motor-car was already whirling off along the quay. Hastening out after his men, the police inspector, Colonel Borozdin, hailed the motor-car belonging to the Secret-Police, which was permanently on duty at the Home Office building, and started off in pursuit.  T the same time his men were hurried to the palace.  It was impossible to overtake the fugitive car on account of its superior speed; moreover, it carried neither number nor lights.  To the police who came to inquire at the palace the explanation was offered that two ladies belonging to the demi-monde had been mis-conducting themselves and been invited to leave the palace.

On he nocturnal adventures on the Moika a joint personal report was made to the Prefect in the morning by Colonel Rogov and Colonel Borozdin.  The whole affair seemed to be at an end when suddenly from the forecourt alongside the palace four shots were heard in rapid succession.  Once more the alarm was sounded in both police stations, and again detachments of police appeared at the palace.  This time an official wearing colonel’s uniform came out to them and announced categorically that within the Prince’s palace there was present a Grand Duke, and that H.I.H would make in person to the proper quarters any explanations that might be necessary.  After such a declaration , the police inspector, unable to obtain any enlightenment whatsoever, returned to his official duties, leaving a patrol on the opposite side of the Moika by way of precaution.  About an hour had passed when suddenly from the direction of the Blue Bridge a motor-car drove up to the palace.  The servants, assisted by the chauffeur, in the presence of an officer wearing a long fur cloak, carried out what looked like a human body and placed it in the car.  The chauffeur jumped in, and, putting on full speed, made off along the canal side and promptly disappeared.  Almost at the same time General Grigoriev was informed from the Prefecture that Rasputin had been killed in the Yusupov Palace.

The police officials on arriving at the palace were met this time by Prince Felix Yusupov himself, who told them that it would be necessary to draw up a report as to the killing of Rasputin.  At first this announcement was not accepted seriously in view of all the strange occurrences of the night.  But the police officials were invited to come into the dining-room in the basement, and were shown the spot where the body had been lying.  They saw on the floor a pool of congealed blood, and traces of blood were also visible on the snow in the forecourt of the adjoining house.  In answer to the question where the body was, the Prince replied that the body was where it should be, declining to give any further explanation.

Soon afterwards the palace was visited by the Director of the Police Department, the Chief of the Secret Police, and the whole of the Generals of the Gendarmerie.  The police patrols were then relegated to their various stations, and at the subsequent investigation sent over to the officials of the Police Department.  At 5 o’clock on the following afternoon a secret telegram was sent to every police station with a view to ascertaining the itinerary of the motor-cars which had come up to the Prince’s palace during the night, and of the one which had removed Rasputin’s body in the morning.  At the same time numerous police patrols were dispatched to the islands in the Neva and to the suburban districts.’

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 08, 2006, 11:11:39 AM
Bob says "Without a doubt the author was Stopford.  Its a well known fact, everyone knew it was him right after it was published and always has."
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 08, 2006, 12:00:11 PM
FA (Rob) and Bob

I am intrigued by Stopford and the contradictions and discrepancies in his diary.  the Police Report is nothing like a police report and seems to be a journalist's effort to beef things up.  The Police report does not exist in GARF and is in conflictwith reports in the GARF file.  It is written as a narrative and not as a report would be presented.

He asserts in the main text that he has seen the report and is quoting authoritatively from it - I do not think so.  It conflicts so much with the evidnece of Vlasik and Efimov and much of what is in that report would have been put to Y when he was interviewed by Popov it is not!

I sense the hand of R's secretary in this, but what i have to do is show that it is a real 'red herring'.  Mind you there are so many.

The question of the ladies is interesting Y tells the police that there were 2 he writes to the Empress to say theer were two and then he and P deny that implicitly in their memoirs as does Lazovert - if he ever spoke the words that are contained in the document above.

Paleologoe is insistent that women were not at the Palace.

More issues to be addressed.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 09, 2006, 08:04:41 AM
Another version of events from a diary

Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich – (1859 – 1919) Cousin of Nicholas II

‘The place chosen for the murder was the Yusupov Palace on the Moika, and night 16th December was designated for putting the plan into action.  Before the crime, the young Felix spent a long time praying alone in Kazan Cathedral.  At home he informed his people that he would be having a few young men around with some ladies for drinks and supper, so all the extra staff were sent home and only a few servants remained downstairs – and they kept out of the way.  Those invited were Grand Duke Dimitry Pavlovich, Purishkevich, Sukhotin, and a doctor brought along by Purishkevich, whose name I don’t remember.  Tea and refreshments had been prepared for them upstairs, while downstairs in the young Yusupov’s dining room a cold supper and drinks were laid out, it has here that Rasputin and Yusupov sat down together.  They spent about three hours there (from 12.15 until 3 o’clock), until Grisha (Rasputin) was drunk.  Felix served him wine laced with poison (potassium cyanide), but to his astonishment and increasing despair it had no effect.  

Seeing that his plan was not working and that Rasputin was just getting gradually drunk, Felix left him alone in the dining room and dashed upstairs to the other conspirators where he declared in a very agitated voice: ‘gentlemen, I don’t understand, but the poison isn’t working.  Give me a revolver; we’ll have to finish him off by shooting him.’  It turned out that Dimitry Pavlovich had a revolver; for sometime he refused to give to Yusupov, but eventually he was persuaded.
Returning to the dining room, Yusupov sat right next to Rasputin and still talking to him fired a shot at point blank range.  The bullet entered Rasputin’s lung, passed through his liver, and he fell unconscious to the floor – to all intents and purposes a dead man.  With the deed apparently completed, Yusupov returned upstairs and summoned the others to the dining room.  The doctor observed Rasputin’s dying agony and declared that in a few minutes he would cease to breathe….then something unbelievably dramatic occurred.  As Yusupov knelt beside the body, feeling for a pulse or a heart beat, both of which seemed to have stopped, the supposed corpse suddenly opened his left eye, and then his right and stared with the look of ferocious, burning hatred at his would be murderer, who jumped back in horror.  He only managed to step a few paces back before Rasputin, with a tremendous effort, drew himself up to his full height, and threw himself like a wild animal at Yusupov (who had left the revolver upstairs), tearing of his epaulettes and clutching at his jacket.  Yusupov screamed and together with Rasputin struggled out onto the winding staircase where he managed to shake him off.  Rasputin fell to his knees and tried to climb the stairs on all fours, foaming at the mouth, roaring and snarling like a wounded beast.
In an instance Yusupov ran to Purishkevich for help.  On returning to the staircase, they found to their amazement that Rasputin was no longer there: he had managed to escape as far as an entrance, where he summoned sufficient strength to haul himself up and open the unlocked door in to the courtyard.  Catching him up, Purishkevich fired two shots:  one hit him in the back of the head, the other in the leg.  Rasputin let out a groan as he fell to the ground and then started to crawl towards one of the outer gates of the Palace.  Here Yusupov caught up with him and started to hit him with a rubber club until his victim finally expired.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 09, 2006, 08:52:25 AM
Allow me, please, to participate in the discussion with the promised translation (with thanks for his help to richard) of an article from daily newspaper "Den":

Newspaper Den (Day), Tuesday, Dec. 20th 1916, No. 350, p. 2
Two articles on Rasputin, the first: “Grigory Rasputin’s end”: ‘Today, Dec. 19th in the morning near the Petrovsky Bridge was found the body of Grigory Rasputin, which had come to the shore. An investigation is being carried out by the justice authorities.’

There then follows a short biography of Rasputin, the final part of which relates to events after his death:

‘The insistence of some ladies, admirers of the deceased, to get to know something about him by whatever means, that they had to be removed from the apartment with force.’

During the last days of his life Rasputin had felt bad, both physically and morally. Almost on the eve of his final journey from his home, the family suffered a great misery. He had approved the proposal of marriage by a Cossack officer Pkhakadze to his daughter. Fate smiled on the engaged couple. But then, completely unexpected, Pkhakadze committed suicide.’

S.P. Beleckij and his wife put two sumptuous wreaths of fresh flowers on his coffin.¦

The second article is entitled:
“Incident on Petrovsky Island”

‘Yesterday, Dec 19th, the following happened: At 8.40 in the morning an old man from the municipal river police Andreev began to sweep with a broom the rather thick but completely clean, ice, that covered the surface of the ditch. Looking closer, Andreev noticed a dark lump, that was frozen under the ice, and slightly coming out to its surface. Having cut off this marked part, Andreev discovered the brim of a sable fur collar and immediately informed the police officer on duty of his discovery. Some policemen cut at once a square sazhen (fathom) of ice, and when cutting off the last part, they discovered a human corpse. This was immediately lifted to the surface and moved ashore.

Immediately higher ranking officers were informed:

Area-Inspector, Gen.-M. Galle, Security Chef Gen.-M. Lobachev, Generals Kurlov and Popov all arrived at the scene. The latter two inspected the corpse and immediately informed the Minister of Interior Affairs of this discovery. At the same time they informed the local police about the discovery; Governor of the City, Balk, the Police Detective Dept and the juridical authorities.
At 11 a.m. in the morning the corpse was thoroughly examined again. However, the clothing and pockets were not searched. After the arrival of the Examining Magistrate  Zavadskij and the Special Prosecutor Sereda, all present went into one of the houses on Artamonov’s land, to compose a deailed report.  The majority of which was compiled from the information provided by the police doctor, who was summoned.  

On examination it was found that the corpse had three gun shot wounds, one to the head, another to the chest and the third in the side. The head had an abundant loss of blood, this, evidently, was caused as the corpse, thrown head down, before falling into the water, hit the support of the bridge. This was also proved by a blood stain on the balk. The corpse was not dressed in the fur coat, it just was wrapped in it, and besides it was wrapped in a dark coloured piece of cloth, almost 3 arshin long. The feet of the corpse were bound by a thin rope. Evidently the arms of the corpse were bound as well, but the rope undone in the fall, The corpse froze with upwards lifted arms. Beside the fur coat, the corpse was dressed in a long Russian shirt with rich embroidery of expensive material, blue trousers and high boots without galoshes. By telephone a coffin was ordered from the undertaker Petrov, and this came in half an hour. However, it was not possible to fit the body into the coffin, because of the position of the hands, as mentioned above. Measurements were taken at once, and it was suggested to make immediately a wooden case, that was soon delivered by the same company. The composition of the report, the interrogation of witnesses lasted till 5 o’clock in the evening. Throughout this time cars were arriving at the secne almost every minute.

Among the people arriving were: Bishop of Tobolsk Isidor, some military groups, Petrograd merchant Simonovitch. Also some journalists were present. However, from the place, where the corpse was found, to the exit to the Petrovsky Boulevard, there was a long line of policemen. They did not let through to the corpse anybody without special permit. During the composition of the report only two or three persons were admitted to investigate. At about 6 o’clock in the evening a lorry came from the Red Cross, that drove into the courtyard, and, after having taken the case with the corpse, left for the pathological dept. of the Military-Medical Academy, where after the body had defrosted the post mortem would be held.’

‘Wednesday Dec. 22nd the newspaper “Rech” (“Speech”) No. 351, page 4;
We return to Rasputin’s daughter’s fiancé who, as we read above, committed suicide. In “Rech” it says: “A few days before the murder of Grigory Rasputin, the fiancé of Rasputin’s daughter tried to commit suicide. After the disappearance of Rasputin, this matter attracted attention and was investigated. The wound P. caused himself, appeared not to be considerable, and he soon recovered.”

This as proof for the unreliability and lack of credibility of the Russian press of those days (as well) and may remind us to put all information in the right perspective. Rudy.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 09, 2006, 09:09:49 AM
Rudy

Well done, you mentioned a list of witnesses I have prepared a list already:

Witness                        Evidence      Credibility

Yusupov Felix            Conspirator   Perjured

Purishkevich Vladimir Conspirator  Perjured

Lazovert Stanislaus   Conspirator  Doubtful

Sukhotin Lieutenant        Conspirator  No evidence

Pavlovich Dimitry        Conspirator  No evidence

Paleologue Maurice      French Ambassador      Hearsay

Mikhailovich Nikolai      Grand Duke   Hearsay

Evidence as to ‘shots’ at Moika

Vlasuk Stepan      Police officer  Good witness

Efimov Flor      Police officer  Good witness

Lazykov Akim      Yard keeper   Suborned

Bobkov Ulian      Watchman     Suborned

Nefedov Ivan      Batman            Suborned

Collection of Rasputin from 64 Gorohovaya Street

Korshynov Fedor      Yard keeper    Fair witness

Poterkina Ekaterina       Maid             Fair witness

Recovery of Clothing etc at the Petrovsky Bridge

Kyzmin Fedor      Bridge Guard   Good witness

Kordukov Vasily      Policeman             Good witness

Asonov            Police Inspector Good witness

Mikhailov            Police Inspector  Good witness

Kossorotov              Pathologist         Good witness


Richard                  


Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 09, 2006, 11:31:45 AM
In order to stay close to the names in Russian I would suggest Lazukov for Lazykov, Korshunov for Korshynov, Kuzmin for Kyzmin, Kordjukov for Kordukov, and Kosorotov for Kossorotov.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 09, 2006, 01:25:59 PM
I was trying to figure out exactly where the bullet wounds were on the body and I put them where I thought they should be in this diagram. I'm sure it's not accurate, but it's a beginning.

(http://users.adelphia.net/~smwilde/rasautopsy2.jpg)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 09, 2006, 02:16:12 PM
May I ask why the French ambassador would have been privy to any particular information ? I can sort of understand the British ambassador, if the agent connection is correct.
The bullet wounds- well, the head shot [pardon the expression] surely looks fatal, the others, would they have been as well ?  Looks to me as if the man was ambushed then given a coup de grace. Am I being naive here ?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on January 09, 2006, 03:47:59 PM
Don't mean to interupt!  Its just that I've been gone a while and just now found this and I am absolutely overjoyed!!  Keep on, keep on.  This is the very best of the AP.

Arleen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 10, 2006, 01:13:40 AM
To Grishka's illustrating pictures:
As we can read in Prof. Kosorotov’s report “One bullet was extracted; the other shots were made at close range and passed right on through the body”, the bullet from the shot in the back, did not “have an exit”.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 10, 2006, 03:50:12 AM
Griskha,

Rudy is correct the shot to the right hand side of the back did not pass through the body according to the pathologist.  the angle for the left hand side of the body is correct.  The head shot would from my analysis have been almost flat - straight in and out.

Robert all three shots would have been fatal in their own right, from the two body shots he would have bleed to death and death would have occurred if not immediately within 15 minutes fromeach one, the combined effect immediate I would suggest.  The head shot would disable a person immediately and although techinically not correct death would have been immediate.

Will try and post more in the day but very busy at moment

Regards to all

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 10, 2006, 05:20:30 AM
Robert,

of course Paleologue's commentary, and I am careful about whether it is a diary or not and I think not is quite informative.  Despite Y saying to Popov and in his letter to the Empress that there were two women at the Y Palace that night he denies this in his memoirs as does P.

I am afraid it is a case of lies and more damn lies.  The Russian Diary of and Englishman and its reference to the alleged Police report is I am afraid another creation of somebody's over active mind which i will prove over the next few days.

Paleologue would as an Ambassador of the Entente a close knowledge of what the Brits were doing and all the allied Ambassador's were interested in the 'Dark Forces'.  I find some of what paleologue says as compelling, but equally there are factual inaccuracies.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 10, 2006, 07:23:06 AM
Excellent, thank you. I will amend the drawings and repost. I must say, I'm fascinated by this topic and I think you've really destroyed the entire myth put forth by Y and others. In a way, it's disappointing, because the myth of the thrice killed monk is a good one, but truth is even more exciting.

No exit wound on the shot in the back? I'm totally ignorant of anything concerning ballistics, but isn't that unusual?

Addendum: Here's the reworked diagram. I hope it's useful.

(http://users.adelphia.net/~smwilde/rasautopsy2a.jpg)
Title: Paleologue – The French AmbasRe: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 10, 2006, 09:10:35 AM
Paleologue Part I you can find his full diaries on the AP site

'Paleologue – The French Ambassador

Despite Yusupov’s claim that the conspirators were bound to keep details of the conspiracy and murder a secret an account appears in the diary of Maurice Paleologue dated 24 December (Gregorian). From the dairies copyrighted by Bob Atchison.

From two different sources, one of which is peculiarly private and personal, I have obtained a quantity of information which enables me to reconstruct the principal phases of the murder. I am assured that the details agree with the facts so far established by the police enquiry.
The drama took place in the night of December 29-30 at the palace of Prince Yusupov, No. 94, Moika Quay.
Prior to that date, Felix Yusupov's relations with Rasputin had been purely casual and indefinite. To entice him to his residence he resorted to a not particularly pleasant device. On the 28th December he went to the staretz's house and said to him:
"My wife came back from the Crimea yesterday and is extremely anxious to meet you. She would like to see you quite privately and have a quiet talk with you. Won't you come and take tea to-morrow evening at our house? You must come rather late, about half-past eleven, as my mother-in-law is dining with us; but she will certainly have left by then."
The idea of making friends with Princess Irene, a very pretty woman, who is a daughter of the Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich and a niece of the Emperor, took Rasputin's fancy immediately, and he promised to come. But, contrary to Yusupov's statement, Princess Irene was still in the Crimea.
About eleven o'clock the next evening (December 29), all the conspirators met at the Yusupov palace, in one of the rooms on the first floor where supper was served. Prince Felix had with him the Grand Duke Dimitry. Purishkevich, a member of the Duma, Captain Sukhotin and a Polish doctor, Stanislaus de Lazovert, who is in charge of one of the great medical departments of the army. Whatever rumour may say, there was no orgy at the Yusupov palace that night; no ladies were present at the gathering, whether Princess R - -, or Madame D - -, or Countess P - -, or the dancer Karally.
At a quarter past eleven Prince Felix drove in his car to Rasputin's residence which is No. 68, Gorokhovaya, about two kilometres from the Moika.
Yusupov groped his way up Rasputin's staircase, for the lights of the house were out and the night was exceedingly dark. In this darkness he could not find his way. When on the point of ringing, he thought he had mistaken the door and even the right floor. Then he said to himself: "If I'm wrong, it means that fate is against me and Rasputin must live."
He rang. The door was opened by Rasputin in person; his faithful servant Dunia followed him.
"I've come for you, Father, as we arranged," said Yusupov. "My car is at the door."
And in Russian fashion, with a great show of affection, he gave the staretz a resounding kiss on the mouth.
Rasputin, suspicious by nature, protested in a mocking tone:
"Heavens! What a kiss, boy! I hope it isn't the kiss of Judas ... Come, let's go! You go in front! Good-bye, Dunia!"
Ten minutes later, i.e. about midnight, they got out of the car at the palace on the Moika.
Yusupov introduced his guest into a small room on the ground floor leading into the garden. The Grand Duke Dimitry, Purishkevich, Captain Sukhotin and Dr. de Lazovert waited on the upper floor from which the sound of a gramophone playing dance music could be heard from time to time.
Yusupov said to Rasputin:
"My mother-in-law is still up there with a few young friends of ours, but they are all just about to go. My wife will then join us at once. Let's sit down!"
They seated themselves in large armchairs, and talked about occultism and spiritualism.
The staretz never required any invitation to discourse on such subjects to his heart's content. In any case, he was in great form that evening; his eyes sparkled and he seemed very pleased with himself. With a view to enlisting all the arts of seduction in his attack on young Princess Irene, he had put on his best clothes, his ceremonial get-up; he was wearing wide trousers of black velvet disappearing into new top boots, a white silk blouse with blue embroidery and a sash of black satin trimmed with gold braid, which was a present from the Tsarina.
Between the chairs in which Yusupov and his guest, were lounging a table had previously been placed; on it stood two plates of cream cakes, a bottle of Marsala and a tray with six glasses. The cakes nearest to Rasputin had been poisoned with cyanide of potassium, supplied by a doctor from Obukhov Hospital, who is a friend of Prince Felix. Each of the three glasses by the side of these cakes contained three decigrams of cyanide, dissolved in a few drops of water. Small though it may seem, this is a tremendous dose, four centigrams alone being fatal.'
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 10, 2006, 09:11:39 AM
Part II

'Hardly had conversation begun before Yusupov casually filled a glass of each kind and took a cake from the plate nearest to him.
"Aren't you drinking, Father Grigori?" he asked the staretz.
"No, I'm not thirsty."
The conversation continued in lively tones on the practices of spiritualism, spell-binding and divination.
Once again Yusupov invited Rasputin to have something to eat and drink. Declined again.
As the clock was striking one, Grishka suddenly lost patience and cried out rudely:
"Why isn't your wife coming down? You know I'm not used to being kept waiting. No one ever takes the liberty of keeping me waiting - not even the Empress."
Knowing how swift to anger Rasputin is, Felix murmured soothingly:
"If Irene isn't here in a few minutes I'll fetch her."
"You'd better; I'm beginning to get very tired of this place."
In a casual tone, but with fear gripping at his throat, Yusupov tried to get the conversation going again. Suddenly the staretz emptied his glass. Smacking his lips, he said:
"Your marsala is lovely. I could drink lots of it!"
Yusupov mechanically filled the two other glasses which contained the rest of the cyanide but not the glass which Grishka held out to him.
Rasputin snatched one and tossed down the contents at one gulp. Yusupov expected to see his victim totter and collapse.
But poison does not always have any effect. Another glassful.  Still no effect.
The murderer, who had hitherto displayed remarkable nerve and self-possession, began to feel very uncomfortable. On the excuse of going to fetch Princess Irene, he left the room and went upstairs to consult his accomplices.
The conference was a short one. Purishkevich emphatically declared in favour of precipitating the crisis.
"If we don't," he said "the beast will escape us. And as he's at any rate half-poisoned, we shall reap the full consequences of the crime without any of the advantages."
"But I haven't a revolver," said Yusupov. "Take mine!" replied the Grand Duke Dimitry. Yusupov went back to the ground floor holding the Grand Duke's revolver in his left hand, behind his back.
"My wife is exceedingly sorry to have kept you waiting," he said; "her guests have only just left; she's following me."
But Rasputin could hardly hear what he was saying; he was striding up and down, puffing and blowing. The cyanide was working.
Still Yusupov hesitated to use his weapon. Suppose he missed! Being slight and effeminate, he was afraid to attack the burly moujik from in front; the latter could have knocked him out with one blow of his fist.
But there was no time to lose. At any moment Rasputin might discover that he had fallen into a trap, catch his enemy by the throat and escape over his prostrate body.
Recovering his self-possession, Yusupov walked casually to the far end of the room, stopped at a table on which various objets d'art were laid out, and said:
"As you're on your legs, come and have a look at this fine Italian Renaissance crucifix I bought recently."
"Show it me; you can't look too often at the image of Our Lord crucified."
The staretz walked up to the table.
" Here you are," said Yusupov. "Look at it. Isn't it beautiful?"
As Rasputin was bending over the sacred figure, Yusupov stood on his left and fired twice into his ribs, almost point blank.
Rasputin cried out "Oh!" and he fell in a heap on the floor.
Yusupov stooped down to the body, felt the pulse, examined the eye by raising the lid and could see no sign of life.
At the sound of the shots, the accomplices upstairs rushed down at once.
The Grand Duke Dimitry said:
"Now we must throw him in the water quick. I'll go and find my car."
His companions went back to the first floor to arrange how to move the body.
Twelve minutes later Yusupov returned to the room downstairs to have a look at his victim.
He shrank back in horror.
Rasputin had half risen, supporting himself on his hands. With a supreme effort he staggered to his feet, brought his heavy fist down on Yusupov's shoulder and tore off his epaulette, saying in a last whisper:
"You wretch! You'll be hung to-morrow! I'm going to tell the Empress everything!"
Yusupov shook him off with great difficulty, ran out of the room and went upstairs again. White to the lips and covered with blood, he called to his accomplices in a choking voice:
"He's still alive! He spoke to me!
Then he collapsed on a sofa in a dead faint. Purishkevich seized him in his rough hands, shook him, lifted him, took away his revolver and dragged him with the other conspirators to the room on the ground floor.
The staretz was not there. He had had strength enough to open the door leading to the garden and was dragging himself over the snow.
Purishkevich fired one bullet into his neck and another into his body, while Yusupov, now a yelling maniac, went to fetch a bronze candlestick and battered in his victim's skull with it.
It was a quarter past two in the morning. At the same moment, the Grand Duke Dimitry's car drew up at the little gate of the garden.
Assisted by a servant on whom they could rely, the conspirators wrapped Rasputin in his cloak and even put on his overshoes, so that nothing incriminating should be left in the palace. They lifted the body into the car, in which the Grand Duke Dimitry, Dr. de Lazovert and Captain Sukhotin quickly took their places. Then the car made for Krestovsky Island at full speed, Lazovert showing the way.
Captain Sukhotin had explored the banks on the previous evening. On a signal from him, the car stopped by a small bridge below which the swift current had produced a mass of ice-floes with holes between them. Not without difficulty, the three accomplices carried their heavy victim to the edge of a hole and threw it in the water. But the practical difficulties of the operation, the intense darkness of the night, the icy hiss of the wind, fear of discovery and anxiety to get it all over put their nerves on edge to such an extent that they did not notice that, in thrusting the corpse in by the feet, they knocked off one of the galoshes which remained on the ice. It was the discovery of this galosh which three days later showed the police where the body had been thrown in.'
Title: While this sinister task was Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 10, 2006, 09:12:34 AM
PART III

'While this sinister task was in progress on Krestovsky Island, something happened at the palace on the Moika where Prince Felix and Purishkevich had been left alone, and were occupied in feverishly obliterating all traces of the murder.
When Rasputin left his residence on the Gorokhovaya, an agent of the Okhrana, Tikhomirov, whose function it was to watch over the safety of the staretz, had immediately posted himself so as to keep an eye on the Yusupov palace. Of the preliminaries of the drama he necessarily had no knowledge.
But if he could not hear the two revolver shots which wounded Rasputin, he heard those fired in the garden quite clearly. He began to feel uneasy and hastily went off to advise the police lieutenant at the nearest station. When they returned together, they saw a car leave the Yusupov palace and tear away at top speed towards the Blue Bridge.
The police lieutenant wanted to enter the palace, but the Prince's major domo, who received him at the door, said:
"What has happened has nothing to do with you. His Imperial Highness the Grand Duke Dimitry will inform the proper authority to-morrow. You must go away!"
The lieutenant pushed his way in. In the vestibule he found Purishkevich who said to him:
"We've just killed the man who was disgracing Russia."
"Where is the body?"
"You shall not know. We are sworn to absolute secrecy about what has happened."
The lieutenant returned post haste to his station on the Morskaya and telephoned to Colonel Grigoriev, Chief of Police of the 2nd District. Barely half an hour had elapsed before General Balk, Prefect of Police, General Count Tatichev, Commander-in-Chief of the Gendarmerie, General Globatchev, head of the Okhrana, and Vassiliev, Director of the Police Department, arrived at the Yusupov Palace.'

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 10, 2006, 09:17:20 AM
Do we know from which wound the bullet was retrieved?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 10, 2006, 09:49:50 AM
Dr Kosorotov wrote, that bullets from the shots from close range, i.e. into the side and into the head, went through.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 10, 2006, 01:25:15 PM
I see, then, that the bullet into the man's back lodged in his body. Makes sense, as he was rather "stockY'.  So, were the other bullets ever retreived ? What I am getting at, I suppose, is that the crime scene, as we are told, was rather confined.  So either stairs or  the murder room itself would have provided them ?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 10, 2006, 02:14:42 PM
Robert

thanks for the maps.

I have to say there is some doubt in my mind as to which bullets came out, I am certain and Zharov confirms that the shot to the left side came out.  I would be surprised if both of the other bullets didn't come out seeing that they were fired from such close range.  certianly one would anticipate the shot to the forehead exploding out of the back of the head and making an awful mess.  Unfortunately we have photographs of the rear of R's head at the time of recovery or at the post mortem.

You can find some fairly graphic descriptions of bullet wounds to the head in greg and Penny's book FOTR.

The one to the kidney may have stayed in the body depending on the trajectory, it could have hit bone or mass.  We know the shot to the left side shattered the left lobe of the liver and therefore had to be an upward shot, and Zharov tells us where it exited.  The shot to the back shattered the right kidney.

The more I read and research, the more complicated the case becomes, and I spend more time disproving things than actually proving them.  But I suppose that is what makes the case interesting and really an unsolved mystery that still captures our imagination.

What I still cannot understand is that the original PM said he was shot at point blank range to the forehead, Stopford in the Russian Diary of an Englishman said it was point blank to the forehead (one of the rare factually correct comments in his diary about R's death), yet no one has picked it up and the lies of Y and P have permeated the years, accepted as fact.

More tomorrow I hope if I can find the time.  Glad people are enjoying the debate.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 10, 2006, 03:33:24 PM
One reason, why we have more questions than answers, is, that the official investigation in, as it was called, "the disappearance of Gregory Rasputin", as ordered under number 573 by the Minister of Interior Affairs, A. D. Protopopov on Dec 17th, was by order stopped on Dec 19th. So only some interrogations, an autopsy, that was about all, that has been done. Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 11, 2006, 02:03:19 AM
Another account of events:

Baroness Sophie Buxhoeveden – (1884 – 1956) Lady-in-waiting to Alexandra

“The story of the murder has been so often told that there is no need to repeat it. It is enough to say that Rasputin was first offered poisoned wine, the amateur murderers not knowing that for the poison they chose alcohol is an antidote. Their victim survived what appeared to be a deadly dose. Prince Yusupov and Purishkevich then took the Staretz into an adjoining room and, as he was admiring an ancient crucifix, shot him several times in the back. Rasputin's strong frame resisted even this, and when Prince Yusupov -returned to remove his body, he got up and staggered across the room. More shots were fired, this time with effect. The body was taken in a car and thrown into a hole made in the frozen Neva. The strength of the current drove the body down under the ice and it was washed ashore some days later. The Staretz does not seem to have been dead even when he was thrown into the water, for the cords bound round his body were loosened, and his rigid hand was folded as if making the sign of the cross.
When the police came to Prince Yusupov's house to ask about the firing at dead of night, they were told that a dog had been shot. The authors of the murder lay low at the time; some even denied any knowledge of it. In spite of the Censor, however, the story of the Staretz's disappearance got almost immediately into the Press, and caused a tremendous sensation. Though patriotic feeling was supposed to have been the motive of the murder, it was the first indirect blow at the Emperor's authority, the first spark of insurrection. In short, it was the application of lynch law, the taking of law and judgment forcibly into private hands.
No inquest was ordered, on account of the personalities involved. An Imperial order forbade any legal procedure, and the murderers of the Staretz, went unpunished. Both Prince Yusupov and the Grand Duke Dimitry Pavlovich were, however, exiled by the Emperor, the first to one of his properties, the second to the Caucasian front. The whole Imperial Family signed a petition to the Emperor, asking leave for the Grand Duke to stay in Petrograd on account of his health, but the Emperor refused, making a marginal note on the petition that "no one had the right to commit murder."

Richard


Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 11, 2006, 01:07:00 PM
So, Felix's palace, or at least the "murder" room were never actually searched ?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 11, 2006, 01:22:45 PM
Robert

No it was never searched because of the inviolable right of relatives of the Tsar not to be subject to search of their premises etc.  Because of Felix's wife's Royal blood this would not be allowed unless they decided to invite the police in.  There are some stories it was searched but it is all hearsay and nothing is contained in the GARF files.

STOPFORD - RUSSIAN DIARY OF AN ENGLISHMAN

It was interesting to find that there is a strand in the Romanov and Imperial Russia Links on this discussion board that deals with Albert Stopford.  William Clarke who is a member is writing a book on Stopford that may be published in 2006.

ANALYSIS OF STOPFORD’S RUSSIAN DIARY OF AN ENGLISHMAN.

The first thing I want to say is that investigating Rasputin’s death has led me to be highly sceptical of anything that purports to be a ‘diary’.  I have to say that the whole story of Rasputin’s demise is tainted by LIES, LIES, DAMN LIES and EVEN MORE DAMN LIES and none of us know why.

Maybe I have been quite naïve in not knowing where some of the stories about what happened at the Yusupov Palace (or didn’t happen there) have come from.  I now find that much of it owes it origin to what I can prove is a very flawed ‘diary’ presented by Albert Stopford.

I have and will continue to treat this as the investigation of a crime, that is what I did for much of my police career and trained many others even at the highest levels to do the same.  This isn’t a criticism of those that have commented before but from a straight factual analysis of what happened.  This can include the direct evidence of witnesses, the compelling, if not always accurate, and open to challenge, forensic evidence.  An examination of hearsay, for instance; what Paleologue says and within this falls a series of what purport to be ‘factual reports’.  Finally I look at the circumstantial evidence.

I am stunned that anyone should credit Stopford’s account with the least credibility.  The glimpses of truth are rare and undoubtedly due to his contacts made through the British Embassy in St. Petersburg.  He had been convicted of what was then the offence of homosexual sex in England, and which now would be the legal act of consensual gay sex.  He knew Yusupov, how intimately; it would be very interesting to know? His account should therefore have been capable of reflecting something close to the truth; it does not.  Alternatively this friend of Felix from Oxford University and London may well have been expected to mouth the previously ‘accepted’ version of Yusupov; he does not.  He produces a confused ramble which contains within it substantial discrepancies and I have to say untruths.  My particular criticism is of the alleged ‘Police Report’ at Appendix III of the Diary which I must suggest is a creation of journalistic making.  Its relationship to the truth is almost non existent.  Some have accepted this alleged document as a font of knowledge, without seeing a verified copy of the original document I am not prepared to accept it as having the least credibility.

The original document is not with the GARF file which I find surprising, if the document ever existed that is.  It is in no way similar to any police report of the period that I have examined.  It is not a ‘report’ but a journalistic swan through the ‘perceived’ facts.  It reads like an article in a newspaper, flitting from one incident, to something much later in the chronology of the alleged happenings, back to a previous time. It is totally at odds with the documents contained in the GARF file and in particular the evidence of Constable Vlasuk. At the best it is a ‘gilding of the lily’ at the worst it is a total fabrication on which I see the dead hand of Rasputin’s personal secretary.

Just to start the debate, more tomorrow if I get time:

In his letter to the Marchioness of Ripon dated 2 January 1917, Stopford asserts and states that he has the ‘Police Report’ in front of him:

1.      Rasputin killed in the Yusupov Palace about 7.00am Saturday 31st

This could be a writing error of course it was 30th.

The police report does not mention 7.00am

2.      Dimitri, Felix and P there plus two lady friends of Rasputin

There is no suggestion that the ‘ladies of the demi-monde’ mentioned in the Police Report were Rasputin’s lady friends.

The two ladies left at 4.00am and that Rasputin had to suffer agony for ‘3 hours’ i.e. from 4.00am – 7.00am.

The police report does not mention 7.00am and suggests that it was ‘shortly after 6.00am the two women were escorted out of the Y Palace.

So here is a man who allegedly had the ‘Police Report’ in front of him and which he states elsewhere in the diary he received on the 30th.  He has got things so wrong, he either had no police report or he just made up another story.  What do we make of someone who in the letter says to the Marchioness ‘All this is from the Police Report which I have got’ really?

More tomorrow on his alleged ‘true and authentic story of the events as told him by Felix Yusupov’.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 11, 2006, 03:03:50 PM
Richard, it is your attention to the known facts instead of the writings of others which has fascinated me on this board and I applaud you for it. So much has been made up about both Rasputin's life and his death that I think we're hard-pressed to know the actual facts. You have already busted the myth of Yusupov's story by strict attention to the autopsy reports and photos. I have to tell you that I read this thread religiously, if that word can be used when discussing Rasputin and look forward to everyone's posts.

I wonder what stories about his life are true and which are false.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 11, 2006, 03:17:52 PM
Did Felix actually admit guilt before the revolution and exile ? That is, before the publication of his book. If he did, I would think he would have invited a search to verify his story.  Then again, what would his reason be for admiting a crime- especially murder, that he may not have comitted ?
You have certainly re-awakened my interest in the story !
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 11, 2006, 06:29:56 PM
Richard,
We know from Vlassiyev's own depostion that he distinctly hear shots at 4am, and by 6am, the superior officers were already involved. Vlassieyv is and credible and disinterested witness.

The basic time frame is confirmed by Yefimov exactly. Another credible and disintersted witness.

Spiridovitch himself confirms this exact same time frame. A third credible and disinterested source.

This alone is enough for me to dismiss the alleged Stopford "police report" in and of itself. NO police report if genuine would differ so significantly from the testimony of the officers involved, in such basic and critical information.

Spird. reports that interestingly enough, Felix never confesses in so many words, however, saliently, repeats often to people that many call him a "hero for what he did" and never actually DENIES specifically his involvement.

here is Alexandra's letter (in part) to Nicholas  dated 17 Dec. 1916:
"You can not imagine our feelings, our thoughts: our Friend disappeared. Yesterday A...saw him; he told her that Felix invited Him to come to his house that night, and that an automobile would come to take Him to go see Irina.
"The automobile came and He got in and He left.
"That night there was an enourmous scandal in the Yussupov house - a large gathering - Dmitiri Pourishkevich etc all drunk.
"The police heard shots. Pourishkevich came  out shouting that our Friend had been killed.
"The police opened an investigation and the investigating judge went to go into the Yussupov house; but there was nothing he could do because Dmitri was there. Felix is preparing to leave for the Crimea; I asked Kalinine to keep him here..."
"Felix affirmed that he did not go to His house and the he never invited Him.  It all seems to me to have been an ambush.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 12, 2006, 01:44:00 AM
FA.
The person you call Vlassiyev is, I suppose, policeman Vlasjuk, Stepan Fedoseev?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 12, 2006, 03:51:08 AM
FA (Rob) Rudy

Rob I agree I will deconstruct what he says in more detail. Radzinsky and Andrew Cook use his alleged police report as a basis of fact.  To be fair to him he got the alleged police report on 31 December not 30th as I suggested above. Vlasuk is the key to the deconstruction and if all this did happen (the actions described in the polcie report) how come Vlasuk did not see it or hear it.

Rudy yes it is Vlasuk (the English spelling)

Will post more later.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 12, 2006, 05:26:50 AM
Richard et al

I've been reading through the posts and two things strike me.

Richard - you identified Rasputin as wearing shoes in the photograph of the corpse on the ice.   How was this possible?   Beneath his galoshes, he was wearing Russian high boots of fine polished leather.

As regards the presence of women in the Yusupov Palace, 'Vlasuk', (can we decide which spelling of his name, it can be confusing even for people with a little knowledge of the case) in his deposition, reported a single shot at around 4.00a.m. followed by, what he detected as the muffled scream of a woman, before the final salvo of three shots in rapid succession.   Might this indicate the presence of female guests in the Palace?

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 12, 2006, 05:39:45 AM
Paleologue, who undoubtedly has left the most colourful account of life on the perimeter of the Imperial Court, was known as the biggest gossip in Petrograd.   He hoovered up information only to regurgitate it.   After it passed the Paleologue filter.  

This is evidenced from his account of the murder in at least one minor point.   He described Rasputin's clothing as including a waistband of black satin and gold which, he says, was made for him by the Empress.  

The clothes as described by Maria and others comprised a white silk Russian shirt, embroidered with blue cornflowers - made and presented to him by the Empress - baggy black velvet trousers, tucked into knee-high boots and a thick rope of raspberry cord round his waist.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 12, 2006, 06:04:51 AM
Quote
Did Felix actually admit guilt before the revolution and exile ? That is, before the publication of his book. If he did, I would think he would have invited a search to verify his story.  Then again, what would his reason be for admiting a crime- especially murder, that he may not have comitted ?
You have certainly re-awakened my interest in the story !


He denied it while he felt Alexandra wanted to have him shot. I think he first openly admitted it in the Crimea. He  said he was asked to tell the tale to people on the HMS Marlborough.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 12, 2006, 07:42:22 AM
I think the word 'shoes' is just a mistranslation and the word can be replaced with 'boots'. Also, I think, I read somewhere that he was wearing dark blue velvet trousers, but either that's wrong or the color was so dark as to be seen as black especially when in low light situations, and certainly when wet.
The question arises, would you wear galsohes over boots? Probably, if the boots were expensive and worn as 'dress boots'. Most agreed that Rasputin was dressed in his best which means he was trying to make an impression on someone.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 12, 2006, 08:10:30 AM
Felix's description of Rasputin's clothes is almost identical to Maria's, meaning either they both remembered exactly the same, or perhaps Maria copied it from Lost Splendour:

From Lost Splendour, chapter 23:

Rasputin wore a silk blouse embroidered with cornflowers, with a thick raspberry colored cord belt. His velvet breeches and highly polished boots seemed brand new. He had brushed his hair and carefully combed his beard. As he came close to me, I smelled a strong odor of cheap soap which indicated that he had taken pains with his appearance. I had never seen him look so clean and tidy.

However, Felix and Maria differ on Felix's clothes that night. Felix stated he was in his Corps De Pages uniform, Maria described him as being in elegant evening clothes with a long overcoat.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 12, 2006, 09:39:57 AM
Hi,
Lets all use Vlasuk as the spelling (its easier I think).

I think all the accounts concur that R was wearing knee high polished leather boots. They would easily fit into galoshes or "snow shoes" (which is an untranslated quote from Spiridovitch) I remember needing such foot apparel when I went to Russia in the 1970s, and while I had an expensive pair of american "apres ski" shoes, I found an inexpensive pair of russian boots designed to easily fit over your "indoor" footwear, making it easier to go in and out.  There is no doubt in my mind that R. had on his best pair of boots to go meet Irina, and put on "snow shoes" or a sort of galoshes OVER them to keep them clean.

Lets not forget that R. believed he was going to meet Priness Irina in her own home, and even R. would have dressed very well for such an occassion out of respect for her.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 12, 2006, 01:37:45 PM
Tsaria

You are quite correct the shoes were boots.  however i disagree with the fact that Yusupov only admitted guilt when he was in the Crimea - he by his own admission had told individuals about what had happened almost straight after the murder.  Felix was a strange man, in many ways, but let us face it without Rasputin he would have been a bit of a rather uninspiring, unspectacular, rich boy.

I will post the detail of Vlasuk shortly.  It is Efimov the constable on duty in Morskaya Street who reports 'a low scream, as if it was a woman's'  But he doesn't say it WAS a woman's scream.

FA (Rob) Of course the problem is we believe the story that R was only going to the Y Palace because Irina was going to be there.  We have no independent evidence of this, the letters between Felix and Irina hint at somehting but there is nothing saying 'I want you here beacuse you are the lure for Rasputin'  I think this is the problem we all have, is anything, other than that which we have evidence to support, the truth or is it part of the conspiratoral story created by Y and P?  I don't know the answer.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 12, 2006, 01:44:48 PM
Richard - Sorry, I got the names of the two policeman mixed up (hence the value of deciding on spelling).

Indeed, he describe it as sounding like a woman's scream.   He did not definitively state it was female.   I have seen other references to women being present at the Yusupov Palace.  I will try to establish where.

Additionally, what about the sons of 'Sandro' - Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich?   Is there evidence their support their presence?

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 12, 2006, 01:49:36 PM
Felix's palace certainly had female servants. So perhaps the female  voices were from staff and not "guests" ?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 12, 2006, 01:50:14 PM
THE TRUE AND AUTHENTIC STORY OF THE MURDER AS RELATED TO STOPFORD 6 JUNE 1917, AT YALTA BY FELIX.

1. He says that there was no supper party - well that coincides with Y and P, just the pretence of one.

2. Y went to fetch R personally - R had never set foot in the Palace (this is strangley at odds with the privately circulated memorandum he produces at Appendix II where he suggests R was a regular visitor to the Y Palace where his hosts, a consortia of Princes got him drunk in order to interrogate him).

3. He says the police report leave sno doubt that two women were with them but that Dimitri and Y had always denied this.  Not correct Y had told Popov and written to the Tsarita that there were two women at the Palace.  Something which he, P and lazovery subsequently say is not the case and of which there is not one bit of real evidence to support.

4. Y did not drink he is an abstainer - rubbish he says he drank wine that night and he tells of being drunk on Champagne elsewhere in his memoirs.

5. Crumbs Y borrows P's revolver, Y says he borrowed Dimitri's. P says he took his own baby browning from a drawer in his study desk.

6. Shot him and left him lying on the bearskin - Y and P both insist that Dimitri and P moved the body to save it staining the rug.  P says that it was only 'flattened'.

7. R escapes, P goes in pursuit, but allegedly R has collapsed in the snow.  P fires 4 shots, two miss, difficult if he is lying in the snow, the last two hit the back of the head, he must then have rolled over so P could fire the fatal shot to the forehead.

8. Body taken back in to await the return of the car?  Stopford is mixing the police report and Y's tale here.

9.  he is correct in saying poilce have no right to enter the Palace as Irina lives there (Greg King is very strong on this)

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 12, 2006, 02:01:28 PM
Appendix III

Tsaria here come some of the suggestions:

1. Rasputin shot at 7.00am (no evidence at all to support this)

2. Dimitri, Princes Feodor and Nikita Alexandrovich were at the Palace and privvy to the shooting (no evidence to support this contention although Feodor and Nikita undoubtedly knew of the plot as did an awful lot of peopel - Stopford suggest he was told by Dimitri, 12 days before the event)

3. reported that one of teh sons of Grand Duke Constantine involved - no eveidence at all

4. Y and young Pronces, his brothers-in-law together with othe rimperial pronces used to assemble at night with rasputin and get him drunk - not one shred of evidence.

5. Some of Rasputin's ladies were invited by invitation - not one shred of evidence.

6. from the reports of the police investigation (he refers to Appendix III) it would apepar that at about 2.30 R was told he would die and was givemn the option of committing suicide and given a gun - really this is a fantasy world.

7.  he is alleged to have fired the gun in the direction of Dimitri - that is why you wouldn't give a trapped man a gun.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 12, 2006, 02:02:00 PM
Appendix III

Tsaria here come some of the suggestions:

1. Rasputin shot at 7.00am (no evidence at all to support this)

2. Dimitri, Princes Feodor and Nikita Alexandrovich were at the Palace and privvy to the shooting (no evidence to support this contention although Feodor and Nikita undoubtedly knew of the plot as did an awful lot of peopel - Stopford suggest he was told by Dimitri, 12 days before the event)

3. reported that one of teh sons of Grand Duke Constantine involved - no eveidence at all

4. Y and young Pronces, his brothers-in-law together with othe rimperial pronces used to assemble at night with rasputin and get him drunk - not one shred of evidence.

5. Some of Rasputin's ladies were invited by invitation - not one shred of evidence.

6. from the reports of the police investigation (he refers to Appendix III) it would apepar that at about 2.30 R was told he would die and was givemn the option of committing suicide and given a gun - really this is a fantasy world.

7.  he is alleged to have fired the gun in the direction of Dimitri - that is why you wouldn't give a trapped man a gun.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 12, 2006, 02:40:40 PM
Quote
FA (Rob) Of course the problem is we believe the story that R was only going to the Y Palace because Irina was going to be there.  We have no independent evidence of this, the letters between Felix and Irina hint at somehting but there is nothing saying 'I want you here beacuse you are the lure for Rasputin'  I think this is the problem we all have, is anything, other than that which we have evidence to support, the truth or is it part of the conspiratoral story created by Y and P?  I don't know the answer.

Richard



Richard, you missed this above: (A...is Anna Vyrubova, who told Alexandra and others  that Rasputin specifically told HER this)

Alexandra's letter (in part) to Nicholas  dated 17 Dec. 1916:
"You can not imagine our feelings, our thoughts: our Friend disappeared. Yesterday A...saw him; he told her that Felix invited Him to come to his house that night, and that an automobile would come to take Him to go see Irina.

Spirid.: pg 375. Dec. 16
"In the afternoon Grigori took a nap to disspiate some of the wine he had been drinking.  Afterwards he took a long shower.  When he felt better, it was announced to him that A.A. Vyroubova would come at 8pm to see him.  At that time no one else was in his house except Maria Golovina.  The staryets told her that he was going that evening to Felix's house, and she was very happy to hear it.
"Annoutchka appeared at 8pm, and she brought him a small wooden icon which the Empress had brought from Novgorod to present to him.  On the back of the icon were the signatures of the Empress and all her children.  Rasputin also then told A.A. Vyrubova that he was going to Felix's house at 1am.  As Anoutchka was astonished at the lateness of such an hour, the staryets explained that he was going to take care of Felix's wife who had been ill, but because the rest of the family hated him, the prince asked him to come very late so that no one would see him in the palace.  Vyubova advised him that he should not go as she felt something suspicious about the invitation.  Moreover, since Felix and his wife would be publicly disgraced should they openly receive R, there would be no harm in refusing to go. Annoutchka and Mounia Golovina left around 9pm.  As soon as she returned to Tsarskoe Selo, AA Vyrubova told the Empress about the staryets' intentions to go.  Alexandra Feodorovna knew full well that Princess Irina Alexandrovna was still in the Crimea, and so was very much surprised, so that she thought that Vyrubova must have misunderstood him.  At 10 pm, once his girls were asleep as usual, R. went into their room.  He told them that Y. was coming to get him later that night, so that if anyone telephoned, they must respond that he was not home, but they should not tell anyone that he was at the Yussupov house.  
"About this time, the Ohkrana agents retired...."

I for one am wholly convinced of the truth of the "cover story" that R was expecting to see Irina at F's invitation. Pehaps if only Vyrubova had told it there may be doubt, however Alexandra's telling it to N. gives it extrinsic credibility. It actually makes sense now that perhaps women WERE there, so the R might hear a female voice and assume it was Irina.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 12, 2006, 03:16:15 PM
I know Radzinksky is not popular here, but according to "The Rasputin File", there were 2 women present and he named them by name. One was a ballerina, one was Dmitri's stepsister, his stepmother's child by her first husband. Anna V. was apparently friends with the  latter, and got the report from her. This is  mentioned in her book, and seems to have been backed up by police reports released after the Soviet regime fell, which stated 2 women were seen by police being shoved out a door around dawn, this is mentioned in "The Rasputin File."  I will consult the books and come back later with direct quotes.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 12, 2006, 04:02:59 PM
Here is an excerpt from Vyroubova's "Memories of the Russian Court" Ch. 13, from the main AP website:

"On the afternoon of December 16 (December 30) I was sent by the Empress on an errand, entirely non-political, to Rasputin's lodgings. I went, as always, reluctantly, because I knew the evil construction which would be placed on my errand by any of the conspirators who happened to see me. Yet, as in duty bound, I went. I stayed the shortest possible time, but in that brief interval I heard Rasputin say that he expected to pay a late evening visit to the Yussupov Palace to meet Grand Duchess Irene, wife of Prince Felix Yussupov. Although I knew that Felix had often visited Rasputin it struck me as odd that he should go to their house for the first time at such an unseemly hour. But to my question Rasputin replied that Felix did not wish his parents to know of his visit. As I was leaving the place Rasputin said a strange thing to me. "What more do you want?" he asked in a low voice. "Already you have received all." All that his prayers could give me? Did he mean that?

That evening in the Empress's boudoir I mentioned this proposed midnight visit, and the Empress said in some surprise: "But there must be some mistake. Irene is in the Crimea, and neither of the older Yussupovs are in town." Once again she repeated thoughtfully: "There is surely a mistake," and then we began to talk of other things. The next morning soon after breakfast I was called on the telephone by one of the daughters of Rasputin, both of whom were being educated in St. Petersburg. In some anxiety the young girl told me that her father had gone out the night before in the Yussupov motor car and had not returned. I was startled, of course, and even a little frightened, but I did not then guess the real significance of her news. When I reached the palace I gave the message to the Empress, who listened with a grave face but with little comment."
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 12, 2006, 04:11:40 PM
While you are reading her memories, can you find the part where she talks of the females at Yussoupov's that night?

I found something on it in Radzinsky's book, I will post it in my next post.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 12, 2006, 04:29:40 PM
Vyrubova says nothing about any women being present.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 12, 2006, 04:37:50 PM
Another female name, said to have been present that night, is Vera Corelli.   She was an opera singer, I think.   She was also Felix's cousin.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 12, 2006, 04:54:50 PM
"The Rasputin File"
from page 467

The murderers could not, of course, have failed to arrange for the participation of women. It was not for nothing that when the preparations for the murder were being made, Felix had written to Irina "Malanya's also taking part." It was not for nothing, either, that the police had information about the presence of women that night, and that Tsarskoe Selo had the information, too...

I easily found the ballerina's name in the Department of Police case file. There were several whole reports about Vera Karalli, whom police suspected of taking place in the  murder night. "Vera Karalli, a performer with the  Ballet company of the Imperial theatres, 27 years old. During her stays in the capital, she was visited by Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich" an agent reported. Her presence at the Yussoupov palace that night was also claimed by Simonovich, who went to the police station on the Moika Canal on Dec. 17 with Bishop Isador....

But Karalli was also not the only woman at the Yussoupov palace that night. They knew in Tsarskoe Selo of the participation of another lady, a much more important one. Vyrobova names her straight out: Marianna Derfelden, daughter of Grand Duke Paul's wife Olga by her first marriage to Alexander Pistolkors...

the police evidence against Marianna was so serious, that she, the stepdaughter of a grand duke, was arrested!...

She was called Marianna, but her sarcastic friends mockingly twisted her French name into the peasant name, "Malanya."
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 12, 2006, 05:40:46 PM
Did Rasputin leave his home with or without a beaver hat ? What was the name of the woman who was told to burn this hat, and why did she burn it ? What else was burned along with Rasputin's hat ? Thanks again.

Tatiana
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 13, 2006, 03:39:46 AM
Tania

Rasputin left home wearing a hat.   This was the hat, along with his coat, a decoy wore when one of the conspirators, dressed as Rasputin, drove back to Gorokhavaya laying a false trail.   It was Mrs Purishkevitch who burned the hat in the stove of her husband's hospital train.

Can I say a word or two in support of Radzinsky?   He is a playwrite and writes his books in this style - a big mistake.   He was once a detective, so he knows where to go searching.   Being Russian, he has relied on Russian sources.   These sources are not easily available to those in the west.   We must bear in mind the possibility that Radzinsky has uncovered material discovered in Russian archives.   Although there will now be no-one alive who could be a first hand source, Radzinsky also had access to the relatives of those directly involved.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 13, 2006, 07:46:40 AM
Quote
Tania


Can I say a word or two in support of Radzinsky?   He is a playwrite and writes his books in this style - a big mistake.   He was once a detective, so he knows where to go searching.   Being Russian, he has relied on Russian sources.   These sources are not easily available to those in the west.   We must bear in mind the possibility that Radzinsky has uncovered material discovered in Russian archives.   Although there will now be no-one alive who could be a first hand source, Radzinsky also had access to the relatives of those directly involved.

tsaria


I don't have a problem with him, but was hesitant to post from his book knowing a lot of people here dislike and discredit him. You are right, he does use mostly Russian sources, you can see that in his notes. He even used the Russian version of books also published in other languages. He had access to many police records that only came out in Russia after Communism fell. This is where he found the evidence of the two women being present. There have also been mentions of 2 women being put out the door just at sunrise, I think in King's book? Radzinksy quotes AV as saying she named the woman outright, and if this is true, it is a huge connection because her book written in 1923 matching up with recently released police reports from back then would do a lot to bolster the claim of women being present, and put more doubt on the stories of Felix and Purishkevitch. I have been reading through her memoirs, but unfortunately she skips around so much, as Felix was also prone to do, I can't find it. It seems I did see it before, but it's not in with the original Rasputin murder story. I keep trying to read it, but the print is so small it gives me a headache. I will keep trying, if anyone else finds anything on this please post.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 13, 2006, 07:49:18 AM
I need to make a number of points here - Radzinsky has based much of his work on the Stopford 'Police Report' the contents in that report in no way equates to the witness statements of Efimov or Vlasuk, or even Y and P's own accounts.

Why did women have to be there, the ballerina mentioned was alelgedly a lover of Dimitri, easy target.  In fcat the police report says she was in the hotel at the time.  Ok we can play conspiracy theory and say this was so meticulously planned that she sneaked out of the hotel.  The involvement of M in this doesn't mean she was there, she could well have been involved in the planning, but I doubt it.

I am afraid the story of the women goes out of the window with Efimov and Vlasuk's statements.  If the 'police report' was real then Vlasuk would have heard and seen the things that were alleged to have happened.

I am not a fan of Radzinsky he tried to make a case that does not hang together that the killer was Dimitri and I am afraid like so many other people who have written about the murder he quotes selectively.  If is detective skills are so great why didn't he pick out the fact that R was shot at point blank range through the forehead?

I typed in a lot of work last night but the web-site went down on me and I lost it.  If I have time later in the day I will take the alleged 'police report' upon so much is based to pieces.

If I recall correctly Mrs P didn't burn anyhting it became all too difficult, but I need to read his (P's) book when I get home.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 13, 2006, 09:16:12 AM
Once again, I think we need to take a good hard look at the "tale" that ANYTHING was burned. Please go back a couple of pages and look at the facts that almost certainly nothing was burned. the only missing items are the hat and one snow boot (probably went into the Neva and never found)...This part of the tale is one of the weakest factually - unless we conclude that the murders stripped R. naked, took the clothes to Mrs P and Mrs L who declined to burn them as too much work, brought them BACK again, re-dressed R and THEN wrapped up the bleeding corpse again....which seems unlikely to me...

I think EVERYONE at this point must stop citing anything as "facts" from the Y, P and Stopford accounts as they are totally discredited as reliable, and do as I have done and examine the extrinsic first hand evidence and THEN compare it to these sources not the other way around...doing this, you will see that obviously the tale of wearing the clothes and burning anythig is simply not true, as everything is accounted for except a fur hat, (exactly like those worn by 95% of Russian men in Petrograd at that time.)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on January 13, 2006, 09:54:07 AM
One note about Radzinsky.  He was trained in his youth for a career at the Historical Archival Institute of Moscow.  He expected to spend his life buried in an archive somewhere, but his tallent as a playwright freed him from that.

I personally like his STYLE very much!  I like the characters he brings into his writing, like Vera Leonidovna Yureneva his 90 year old landlady who had been in the theater at the turn of the century and knew everyone.  I looked her up on the internet and she is very much real.

But I will bow to your research Richard and Rob and will of course believe what you come up with.  Your hard work really impresses me.  I am enjoying this thread more than any other.

But I do believe Radzinsky knows his way around an archive and I love his interesting books, I have them all. Just have to defend him when and where I can.  OK??  If this makes me stupid and a dodo....so be it.

..Arleen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 13, 2006, 10:01:35 AM
FA (Rob)

I agree 100%, the problem is that we do resort to what Y and P say all the time.  In fact Andrew Cook has said in his book that we accept teh evidence of attempted poisoning - how on earth can we, there is not a shred of evidence to support it?  people can put up various reasons as to why the poison may not have worked or for why Kosorotv may not have detected it, but the simpla fact is there is not any forensic evidence to say he was poisoned.

The problem is that people accept what has been written by Radzinsky and others as being 'facts' for which there is credible evidence to be found amongst Russian documents.  there is not, and so much is based on rumour and Stopford's flawed 'police report'.  below is Vlasuk's statement it shows (if yuo refer back to the police report I typed in some days ago that the police report is rubbish)  I do doubt his time of 4.00am as efimov says 2.30pm but both men are clearly talking about the same incident.  Vlasuk would have seen all the alleged comings and goings referred to in the police report.  he was there at 6.00am when so much is alleged to have happened and Y had left the Palace sometime before.


'Two police officers heard what sounded like shots these were Flor Efimov Efimov who was on duty at the police post across the Moika from the Yusupov Palace.  He says:

“During the night from 16th to 17th of December I was on my post at Morskaya Street next to building 61.  At 2.30am I heard a gunshot and 3-5 seconds later three more shots followed fast one after another.  The sound of gunshots came from Moika Street, in the region of the building number 92.  The first gunshot was followed by a low scream, as if it was a woman’s, there was no noise.  In 20-30 minutes following the shot no car or carriages went along Moika Street.  Only half an hour later a car drove along Moika from the Blue Bridge towards Potselyev, it did not stop anywhere.  I reported the shots by phone to the 3rd Kazan Police Station and went towards the place of shooting.  I noticed point duty policeman Vlasuk at Pochtamtsky Bridge, he also had heard the gunshots and thought they were fired at Morskaya Street, he went towards me to find out who had fired shots and where.  I told him that those shots had been fired near to building number 92 at Moika Street.  Then I returned back to my post and did not see or hear anything.  I remember that since the shooting to 5-6 in the morning I did not see any other car driving along Moika Street, apart from the above mentioned.”

It is important to note that Efimov whom Radzinsky relies on to suggest that a car stopped at the Yusupov Palace after the shootings in fact says that the car travels from the Blue Bridge, thus from right to left of the map at Figure 3 and ‘it did not stop anywhere’.

Stepan Fedoseev Vlasuk, a policeman of the 3rd Police Station of Kazansk Corps states:

“During the night of the 16th to the 17th December I was at my post at the corner of Prachechny and Maksimilianovsky Lanes.  At about 4am I heard 3-4 gunshots soon after another.  I looked around everywhere was quiet.  I thought the sound of the shots came from the right from the German Kirha on Moika Street.  I went to the Pochtamtsky Bridge and called point duty policeman Efimov, who was at his post by the building number 61 along Morskaya Street.  I asked where the shots were fired from and Efimov replied that it was on ‘our side’.  Then I approached the yard keeper of the building number 92 at Moika Street and asked him who fired the shots.  The yard keeper whose name I don’t know although I know his face replied that he did not hear any shots.  At the same time I noticed looking above the fence that two people wearing tunics and no hats were walking along the yard of that building towards the wicket.  When they approached us I recognised them, it was Prince Yusupov and his butler Buzhinsky.  “When I did not find anything suspicious I went back to my post. I did not report the incident to anybody because previously I often heard similar sounds being made by burst car tires. About 15 – 20 minutes after I returned to my post above mentioned Buzhinsky approached me and told me that Prince Usypov wants to see me. I followed him and he took me through the front entrance to the building number 94 into the Prince’s study. As soon as I entered the study (the study was located to the left of the front door from Moika street) Prince Usypov and a stranger walked towards me. The stranger was wearing khaki colour tunic with shoulder-pieces of an active counsellor. He had a small blond beard and moustache. I had not noticed whether he was bald or had hair and whether he had glasses. This stranger asked me: “are you a Christian orthodox?” I replied yes. “Are you a Russian person?” Yes. “Do you know me?” I replied that I didn’t. “Have you heard anything of Purishkevich?” Yes. “I am Purishkevich. Have you heard about Rasputin and do you know him?” I replied that I did not know Rasputin but had heard of him. The stranger then told me that “he (Rasputin) had perished and if you love the Tsar and fatherland, you have to keep quite about it and not to tell anything to anybody.” Yes, sir. “Now you may go”. I turned around and went back to my post. It was very quite in the house and I did not see anybody apart from the prince, the stranger and Buzhinsky. I do not know Purishkevich and never saw him before, however there was some likeness between the stranger and Purishkevich photo in a magazine which was shown to me by the Head of police yesterday (17th December). I checked the street and the yard again, but everything was still quite and I did not see anybody. In about 20 minutes inspector Kalyadich approached me at my post and I told him about the incident. Then Kalyadich and me went to the front entrance of the building number 94. We saw a car ready to go at the front entrance. We asked the driver whom the car was waiting for; he replied that it was for the Prince. Then Kalyadich ordered me to stay there and watch who was going to use the car and went to make his round. I recall that when we approached the building number 92 Kalyadich entered the head yard-keeper’s room and questioned him. When he came out of the yard-keepers room I followed him to the building number 94. I don’t know precisely where the car had come from. Prince Usypov alone came out of the front door (of the building number 94) and drove away towards the Potselyev Bridge. When the prince had left I asked Buzhinsky who opened the door for the Prince to wait for Kalyadich, but he (Buzhinsky) stated that he did not sleep the whole night and would talk to Kalyadich in the morning (meaning 17th December). I waited by the door of that building for some time, I did not notice anyone else and returned to my post. It was shortly past 5am. Kalyadich returned from his rounds in 10 – 15 minutes, I told him what I saw and we went to the building number 94 again. We did not notice anyone there other than the duty yard-keeper. Then Kalyadich went to the police station and I remained there. At about 6am he returned again and called me to go and see police officer Colonel Rogov, whom we were supposed to report the incident to. Then I went home. The car belonged to the Prince; he had always been using it. I know this car well; it’s small and brown in colour. I had not noticed any signs of a murder, and explained the conversation with the stranger in the study as some kind of test of my knowledge of my responsibilities. Meaning a test of my actions following such an announcement. I did not notice that the Prince or the stranger showed any signs of anxiety or embarrassment, only the stranger pattered. I can’t tell for sure whether they were not sober. I have nothing more to say.”

I am always suspicious when people quote selectively it makes better reading but often hides the truth and leaves it open to the author to create a different story.  I believe in using all the detail contained in statements not just the bits that support the case someone is trying to create.  That is why I have spent and will continue to spend so much time researching this case.

Richard







Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 13, 2006, 10:36:31 AM
There is a feature on the murder of Rasputin in today's Daily Mail.   It is based on Andrew Cook's book.

Even in a newspaper feature, lack of proper research is evident.   Cook writes about four shots being fired 'just before dawn'.   Just before dawn in St Petersburg on the 30th December is close to 10.00 a.m.

I watched the last television documentary on Rasputin.     Once upon a time I made documentaries for BBCtv.   My husband was head of documentaries for the BBC.   It was very obvious this documentary was made 'out of house'.      It would never have passed the rigour of the BBC in the days when its programmes, produced 'in-house', were exceptionally well created and crafted - and the envy of the broadcasting world.

I find it very difficult to believe Rayner actually had either the time, or the presence of mind, to retrieve a bullet from the Yusupov Palace.   Although he destroyed all his papers, he had the bullet set in a ring - a strange sense of priority.        

Recalling earlier discussions regarding the whereabouts of the bullets, there was no reference to any being found, or by whom.   Therefore, how does Cook know the calibre of the gun and the type of ammunition used?

To be frank, much though Radzinsky's writing style is not to my taste - this is probably exacerbated through translation - Cook's book bears no comparison to Radzinsky's work.   To state definitively 'We know that British Intelligence officers were involved' is rather dangerous.   The evidence to support this assertion is tenuous at best.

It is worrying that the glaring errors in the face of recorded history and stated as facts, could be perpetuated by Cook's endeavours.

tsaria    
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 13, 2006, 11:01:14 AM
I can't remember where I read it, but wasn't there also some strange tale of some of the perpetrators driving away in an open car with one of them dressed in  R's clothes to make it appear they were taking him home and he was okay?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 13, 2006, 11:07:32 AM
Tsaria

If you've seen the memo that Andrew showed on the TV show from major Alley to Major Scale which talks about Rayner "attending to odds and ends" or somesuch (I'm afraid I'm not near my notes), you must surely admit that 3 British Intelligence Officers are talking about the killing and, at the very least, are involved in the clear up operation.  The "Dark Forces" they talk about are a euphemism for Rasputin cf Sir Samuel Hoare's book "The Seventh Seal".  Andrew also shows in the book, from the chuaffeiur's diary, that all 3 were regular visitors to Y's palace before the murder.  Rayner also translated (or more likely "ghost wrote") the book for Y.

Though I've not seen the original memo I've freeze-framed, as it were, through the video of the programme and the memo looks genuine compared to other Intelligence Mission documents I've seen, though I wouldn't mind a proper look at the signature.  I have copy documents  from the Foreign Office files and other sources which show inconrevertibly that they were secret service officers.  they were certainly "involved" though quite exactly how is debateable.

Phil Tomaselli
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 13, 2006, 12:53:49 PM
Phil,

I am really enjoying the strand you have created but have been so busy on this that I haven't had time to comment.

Annie I think you might be confused and FA will tell me off - you are referring to two different parts of the Y and P story.  Y says P's car that they collected R in was opne, P says it had a top on and so does the yard keeper at R's address - suspicious or what?  P says the plan was for them, after the murder to drive to R's address with Lazovert as the driver Shukotin dressed in R's clothes.

Tsaria - Lion TV made the programme and the problem as I have said in my paper the material we collected could have filled three programmes.  I have spoken to the people involved in the programme, Scales' daughter, who i thought was tremendously impressive and Rayner's nephew.  It is a Rayner family story Y presented rayner with a gold ring into which was inlaid one of the bullets.  the story was it had been donated to a museum but our search proved futile.

As regards to the weapon used I have an audited trail of my research from the moment the producer asked me to look at R's murder and see whether 2 and 2 make 4.  Well they didn't before I spoke to Zharov I had analysed the wounds, as best i could and it was my belief that the bullet to the head was fired by a .445 Webley.  I copied a photograph from the web of the weapon I believed was involved.  Andrew in writing his book approached Professor Pounder, of Dundee university, a Home Office forensic Pathologist who by microscopic analysis came to the conclusion the head wound was caused by guess what a .455 Webley, by an unjacketed bullet.

I disagree with a considerable amount of what Andrew says about the murder and will tell you about that when I have an opportunity.  But Andrew has built on what was discovered during the Time Watch programme and as he reproduces it in his book has relied on the Stopford 'Police Report'.

Hope this helps have a good weekend.  Phil Rudy is coming over to London in the Spring I am going to meet him fancy joining us?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 13, 2006, 12:54:14 PM
I like Radzinky's books as well. They are entertaining reads but I can understand now why some think his conclusions flawed. At least as far as Rasputin is concerned.
And, I did not know [or had long forgotten] that Rayner "ghost wrote" Felix's book !  Like most people, I took Y's version of events as the only version and left it at that.  Any idea why it has taken so long to re-open this case, at least for discussion ? Obviously there is no one to prosecute, the political situation is vastly different and the relevancy is questionable.  Nonetheless, I am totally fascinated by the research and postings here.  A true case of making history come alive, in my opinion.
Keep it coming, as I try to read every word and boy, have some of my thoughts been re-arranged !
A big thank you and CHEERS !
Robert
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 13, 2006, 12:58:16 PM
Tsaria,

My suggeston of teh similarities is that they have both used the 'Police report' and they have both quoted Vlasuk selectively.  Hope this clears up where I am coming from.

By the way nice to have you back after your few days away.

Just a thought for all of you budding detectives, the height of the snow piled against the fence of the yard of 92 Moika, is by extrapolation, a maximum of 22" or 55.8 cms high - why is this important?

Just a teaser for the weekend.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 13, 2006, 01:02:23 PM
SORRY

I should have said from the scene of crime photograhs of the yard taken at about lunchtime on the 17th.  A clue - it is nothing to do with the side gate never being open.

R
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 13, 2006, 01:35:54 PM
Arleen

I don't think I or naybody else would suggest you are stupid or a dodo.  As a person interested in the facts of history I dislike author who write about history in a novel type way.  It makes the books very interesting but often allows for embellishments, or suggestions to be taken as fact.  Radzinsky got it wrong, why I don't know the evidence was there for him to see - the post mortem, the photographs of the wounds all said that the murder could not have happened as P or Y suggest or as Radzinsky suggested.  That is a truth that cannot be challenged - the forensic evidence is absolute.

Robert asked why was it not challenged for so long?  I don't know, I had read about it, looked at pictures, but I had never looked at it as a detective.  It is a boy's own story, it could almost be a new Lord of the Rings - the forces of good against the forces of evil, so I as many others believed what we were told by Y and P and Radzinsky.  I was unaware of Shiskin's work until I was well into my research, but he idnetified that the story was wrong, Kosorotov knew it was wrong in 1916, Stopford reports that the bullet to the forehead was fired at point blank range, but people (we) have ignored that fact for years and years.

I said before in other strands on AP that everyone is entitled to their views and those views are often how they feel or perceive things to be.  there is nothing wrong with that, I find Radzinsky good entertainment, i just think he is factually incorrect on too many instances and does use witnesses selectively.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on January 13, 2006, 01:54:58 PM
Richard, Is there any way that we can see the autopsy photographs?  Or are you saving them for YOUR book?  You must write one.  You are our final historical source.

You hit it on the head, Radzinsky entertains me!  (I know what to believe and what not to believe.)

Personally I think you are wonderful to share your knowledge and give us so much of your time! I wouldn't miss a word!

..Arleen



Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 13, 2006, 01:59:25 PM
What evidence is their to support the assertion that Rayner was Yusupov's ghost writer?  Why would Rayner be any more able to write the story of the murder than Felix Yusupov - who was educated at Oxford?

We shot at a ratio of 10/1, sometimes even 15/1.   Sorry Richard, but from what I've seen, I just don't think Lion cuts the mustard so far as documentary programme making is concerned.  

I have Andrew Cook's book.   Do be honest, I did not find it a work of quality.   It was poorly researched, poorly written and, in view of the glaring errors, untrustworthy as a record of history.

Sorry for appearing critical - it is an objective opinion.   I very much look forward to reading your paper, Richard.   I know your work has taken you well beyond where Cook left off.  

Rudy coming to the UK in the Spring!   Where is the meeting likely to take place?   It promises to be quite an event.   I'd like to be kept posted on plans.

tsaria    

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 13, 2006, 03:20:07 PM
Arleen, the autopsy photos are published in Andrew Cook's  "To Kill Rasputin" [UK title].
Like Tsaria, I found the book dissapointing but worthwhile nonetheless.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 13, 2006, 03:22:50 PM
Tsaria

having sounded of at other people for their unsubstantiated opinions elsewhere I have to own to this being a personal opinion based on some half-hearted attempts to find the original document.  The book is most definitely described as being a translation.  The style is also reminiscent of Rayner as evidenced in some reports and letters of his that I have, though this may be a function of his role as "translator" if the original was written in Russian.

Richard - keep in touch with me via my "other" address about meeting Rudy.  I'd love to be there.  Let us hope the great technochangeover goes ahead without problems.

Phil T
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 13, 2006, 03:46:40 PM
Phil, with reference to the word 'translation' don't you think that might have been from the French original?

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 13, 2006, 03:56:26 PM
Richard,
Been meaning to tell you that Spiridovich's papers are in the Yale University Library, New Haven Connecticut. If you get to the New York area you should make time to visit. I wonder what surprises may be lurking there re: Rasputin.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 14, 2006, 02:56:18 AM
FA

I will be in New York sometime this Spring so will go and research the papers - I my wife allows me to.

Tsaria

I was only there for teh shots that involved me, the re entactments part I was already back in England.  But it was former BBC Producer/Director who led it.

As for Andrew's book I cannot comment as I was not involved in it.  I only met Andrew once to film the shot that is shown in the programme with him.  At that time he said he wasn't writing a book but subsequently when I suggested there was a book in the programme I found he had the book rights from Lion.  Not that that matters to me in the least but I wasn't consulkted on the book itself and I am afraid it does come to some conclusions that I cannot support in repsect of teh forensic and re-investigation, two of teh PM photographs are wrongly described.

Tsaria, Rudy will be here 21 to 24 April over a weekend I will keep you informed.  We could have quite a meeting?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 14, 2006, 04:58:19 AM
Arleen,

Thank you for your nice comments.  I have all the photographs adn they will be published on the AP web-site with my paper when it is finished.  FA (rob) has seen the early draft of the paper and Greg King, Phil Tomaselli and Joe Fuhrmann who wrote a book about Rasputin have done some brilliant editing work on it.  That being said every time I get close to releasing it, something else comes up.  The photographs are interesting and they are all in the public domain already but I wanted to make sure I had all the permissions I needed before I included them in a document.  My friends in the St Petersburg MVD University sorted all that out for me.

I am determined to write what is as close to a definitive version of events, so that means taking to pieces stories that are not based on fact.

We will never know what happened that noght, unless we stray across something that has been hidden for nearly ninety years.

Rudy is proving to be a tremendous source of information and he corrects my Russian spellings.  So there is still some work to be done and it does help to put my thoughts together by chatting to all of you.

Rudy

Did you send me some recent pictures of the yard at 92 Moika recently, my computer crashed before Christmas and I lost them.  If you did could you re-send please?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 14, 2006, 05:22:14 AM
THE 22" PILES OF SNOW AGAINST THE FENCE

Andrew Cook (pp 209 onwards) has chosen to follow the 'Police report' view of events on the night which does not equate with the statements of Efimov and Vlasuk.

I cannot explai the differences in time that the teo policemen, Efimov across the road from the 92/94 Moika and Vlasuk who was about half way down the side of the Palace on the 92 Moika side of the building (I have marked this all on a map) hear the sots.  Efimov says 2.30, Vlasuk 4.00.  I do not know how they knew the time, did they have watches, did they take the time from clocks in the vicinity or was it their perception of time.  Whatever the case there is no doubt they are talking about exactly the same incident.  The description of the number of shots is the same.  Efimov doesn't suddenly say 'and a hour and a half later constable Vlasuk appeared and said hello, hello, hello what is going on here then?'  They are talking of the same single set of shots.

Andrew Cook accepts the dubious 'police report' as an authentic source, had it been why do Vlasuk and Efimov not recall the contents of that report.

Shots through study window is an interesting concept and there is a window that is broken and filled in the scenes of crime photographs, but no glass was found by the forensic examiners in the yard - why not, old damage?

Andrew suggests the snow banks (22") would have concealed R's body - but Vlasuk says he went into the yard and after speaking to Y and his butler he looked into the yard again and saw 'nothing'.  A 22" inch snow bank will hide nothing.

Andrew also pours scorn on the story about the dog being killed with a view to concealing R's blood, but the police report  within the GARF Files (not Stopford's dubious document) says:


‘Supreme Commander in Chief Headquarters
To Colonel Patko

On the night from 16th to 17th the point duty policeman had heard several revolver shots by the building 94 at Moika Street owned by Prince Yusupov.  Soon after that the policeman was invited to the study of the young Prince Yusupov, where the Prince and a stranger who called himself Purishkevich were present.  The latter said: ‘I am Purishkevich.  Rasputin has perished.  If you love the Tsar and fatherland you will keep silent.’  The policeman reported this to his superiors.  The investigation conducted this morning established that one of Yusupov’s guests had fired a shot in the small garden adjacent to the house number 94 at around 3am.  The garden has a direct entrance to the prince’s study.  A human scream was heard and following that a sound of a car being driven away.  The person who had fired the shot was wearing a military field uniform.  Traces of blood have been found on the snow in the small garden in the course of close examination.  When questioned by the Governor of the city the young prince stated that he had a party that night, however Rasputin was not there, and that the Grand Duke Dimitry Pavlovich had shot a watchdog.  The dog’s body was found buried in the snow.  The investigation conducted at Rasputin’s residence at 64 Gorohovaya Street established that at 10pm on 16th December Rasputin said that he was not going to go out any more that night and was going to sleep, he let off his security and the car in his normal fashion.  Questioning the servants and the yard-keeper allowed to establish that at 12:30am a large canvas top car with driver and a stranger in it arrived at the house.  The stranger entered Rasputin’s apartment through the back door.  It seemed that Rasputin was expecting him because he greeted him as somebody he knew and soon went outside with him through the same entrance.  Rasputin got into the car which drove off along Gorohovaya Street towards Morskaya Street.  Rasputin has not returned home and has not been found despite the deployed measures.  There are many reasons to assume that he had been assassinated in Yusupov’s garden and his body had been taken out of the city and hidden.  The judicial inquest has not been opened due to the absence of the object of the offence, still the investigation in accordance to the Article 23 of the Martial Law has been assigned by the Minister of the Internal Affairs to the commission general Popov.  On receipt of new information will send a supplementary wire.’

A bit of a mish mash of what happened but he does state the 'body of the dog was found'

Richard




Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 14, 2006, 05:31:29 AM
A BIT MORE HEARSAY

From Memoirs of the Russian Court, written by Anna Alexandrovna Vyrubova in 1923 at Chapter XIII

‘The police, at their commands, went to the deserted Yusupov palace, first searching for and finding the body of the dog which Felix said they had shot. But the bullet hole in the dog's head had let out little blood, and when the men entered the palace they found it a veritable shambles of blood and disorder. Evidences of a terrific struggle were found in the downstairs study of Prince Felix, on the stairs leading to an upper room, and in the room itself. Then, indeed, the whole power of the police was invoked, and somebody was found to testify that in the dead of night a motor car without any lights was seen leaving the Yusupov Palace and disappearing in the direction of the Neva. Winter nights in Russia are very dark, as everyone knows, and the car was soon swallowed up in the shadows.’

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 14, 2006, 07:14:04 AM
If a shot was fired from the outside into the basement room, the shattered glass would have been found inside that room.   It would have taken an expert shot to hit their target.   Given the windows are at ground level, the assassin would have had to lie flat on the ground - in the snow.   He would have left behind the imprint of his form on the snow.

Anya Vyroubova's recollection is interesting.   It points to the fact that it was quite possible there was more than one car on the Moika that morning.   In the dark - there was no electric street lighting as there is now - and with the snow swallowing up all sound - a car without lights could easily have been missed by the policemen.  

Richard, the policemen almost certainly had watches and torchlights.   It would have been easy to misread the time given the tension, the excitement and the deep darkness.

I think we can safely say the report of shots 'just before dawn' is completely erroneous.

Thanks for the enormous amount of effort and work you are putting into this, Richard - Rudy and Phil too.   As I wrote earlier,  discussion like this is the very essence of the Alexander Palace Discussion Board and we have all of you to thank for stimulating interest.

tsaria



Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 14, 2006, 07:25:27 AM
Can I remind posters of another Russian/Romanov story of the period which included British Intelligence involvement.   It records a rescue of the Grand Duchess Tatiana Nicholaevna by aircraft from the House of Special Purpose in Ekaterinburg.   It concerns a gentleman - Colonel Richard Meinhertzhagen of British Intelligence.  

I cannot find my copy and cannot remember the title.   It was written by Michael Occleshaw.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 14, 2006, 08:27:09 AM
Tsaria

You are a big part of the discussion and have a good deal of knowledge about this subject.  

Andrew Cook suggests that the shots were fired from inside the Study from the window overlooking the yard.  As I said the window is damaged, but it is only guess work which says it was caused by a bullet and when it was caused.  he suggests a drunken person fired at Rasputin in the yard as he was trying to escape and the shots forced Rasputin down to the floor????

Richard

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 14, 2006, 10:57:21 AM
Hi all

Rob has asked me to draw up some details of what we know to be facts and what we might accept as facts in relation to the murder.  I suppose it is all getting rather confusing.

I will try and do this tonight if I can find time.  Rob has offered to put some of my maps etc into the strand and I will send these to him soonest

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 14, 2006, 01:27:56 PM
Tsaria, I think the Occleshaw book you may be thinking of is "Romanov Conspiricies" . He also wrote "Armour Against Fate" [British Military Intellingence and the Secret Resuce of G.D. Tatiania].
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 14, 2006, 05:14:21 PM
On the eve, at Gorohovaja No. 64, app. 20:
Whom did Rasputin see in his apartment, before leaving in the middle of the night?

As we try to stick close the the “facts”, on request of FA, we read the official Police report of the interrogations, made on Dec 17th and 18th:

Maria Evgenievna Golovina: On Dec. 16th this year 1916, I arrived at Grigory Efimovich Rasputin’s apartment at about 12 o’clock and stayed till 10 o’clock in the evening.

Matrena Grigorievna Rasputina (Rasputin’s daughter): On Dec. 16th 1916, I left our apartment at 7 o’clock in the evening and returned at about 11 o’clock.

Varvara Grigorievna Rasputina (Rasputin’s daughter): On Dec. 16th this year, I left together with my sister Matrena to visit someone, and returned at about 11 o’clock at night.

Anna Nikolaevna Rasputina (Rasputin’s niece, living also in his apartment): On Dec. 16th at about 1 o’clock my uncle Grigory Efimovich returned from the sauna and went to sleep. On this day only a few people, that have been visiting him before, came to see my uncle. At about 10 o’clock in the evening came a corpulent blond woman, who was called “sister Maria”, although she was not a “sister of mercy” (= nurse). Just after 1 o’clock at night, my uncle went to lay on the bed, dressed.

Maria Vasilievna Zhuravleva (concierge at Gorohovaja No. 64): On Dec. 16th I saw Grigory Rasputin only once, when he returned from the sauna at 3 o’clock, whereto he had left from the back stairs. In the morning he had not received anybody, as he was very drunk. Even from the sauna he returned not completely sober. From 3 o’clock till 12 o’clock at night not more than 7 people, that had been before, came. Only at about 10 o’clock in the evening came one lady, that I had not seen before, and left, having been at Rasputin’s till 11 o’clock. Description of this lady: blond, about 25 years old, average height and corpulence. She was dressed in a dark brown coat and shoes of the same color, just a bit more dark, a black hat, without voile, on her head. When I locked the main entrance door at midnight, Rasputin was at home.

Ekaterina Ivanovna Poterkina: On Dec 16th this year 1916, Grigory Efimovich Rasputin did not receive many people, no outsiders, in total over the whole day not more than ten people; of the people who came to see Rasputin I remember only Maria Evgenievna Golovina, who came at about 12 o’clock and left home at about 9 o’clock in the evening.  At 9 o’clock in the evening in the apartment was nobody besides Grigory Rasputin and his family. At about 11 o’clock at night Rasputin’s children, daughter Maria and Varvara Rasputin and his niece Anna Nikolaevna Rasputina went to bed, Rasputin himself lay on his bed, dressed and with his boots on.

My question: who might have been this blond lady, that apparently visited Rasputin in his apartment, Dec 16th at night, between 10 and 11 pm?     Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 14, 2006, 05:37:19 PM
Rudy,
You forgot to include Anna A. Vyrubova, who was indeed another visitor. "corpulent" seems to probably describe her, no? I think it was Vyrubova, who was there until 9pm or so. Go back to page 10 of this thread to read her report of the evening.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 14, 2006, 06:17:12 PM
You are right FA, but I thought Anya Vyroubova called earlier than 9.00p.m.   Alexandra Feodorovna asked Vyroubova to present to Rasputin, on her behalf,  the icon she received from the very old nun in Novgorod the day before.   (This is the icon Alexandra and her daughters signed and which was buried alongside the body of Rasputin.)  

The description of the female seems to fit Vyroubova.   What does not is the lack of recognition.   I would have thought, given Vyroubova was a regular visitor to the Rasputin household, she would have been instantly recognised.

I know the banya Rasputin visited on the last day of his life.   It still exists - and works.   It is situated near the Mariinsky Theatre.   My husband has been in this banya.   I can't tolerate them.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 15, 2006, 01:33:32 AM
No, I did not forget to include Anna Vyrubova. I am aware, from other sources, that she met with Rasputin on Dec 16th. In the interrogations I quoted, however, there is no mention of her.
I do not believe the blond lady is Anna Vyrubova. For the first, like Tsaria mentioned, she is known at Raputin’s, for the second, her age in 1916 is 32 years, not “about 25”. And last, the time, 10 pm, would be suprisingly late, for somebody coming from Tsarskoe Selo. Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 15, 2006, 03:23:26 AM
Hi all

I have sent Rob the first ten pages that includes photographs etc.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 15, 2006, 07:13:28 AM
Hi

I thought I would just post this bit, the visitor was not Anna, but she was not an unknown to Rasputin's family.  Although this is in the piece I have sent to FA for posting on here, which takes us factually to the Yusupov Palace and deals with the victim, what we know leading up to the crime etc.  I will do some more work on the chronology later so i cans end Rob more to post later in the week.

But just to clear up the Anna point:

Maria Vasilievna Zhyravleva, the door lady at Rasputin’s block of flats reports the arrival of an 'unknown' woman who arrives to see Rasputin at 10.00pm and leaves at about 11.00pm (16 November).  The woman is described as having ‘blond hair, about 25 years of age, medium build, medium height.  She was wearing a flared dark brown coat and same colour only slightly darker boots and a black hat with no veil’

Source: GARF File

The presence of the ‘unknown' woman is confirmed by Anna Nikolaevna Rasputina, she identifies here as ‘Sister Maria’ she was called sister ‘although she wasn’t a nurse’.

Source: GARF File

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 15, 2006, 11:03:44 AM
This shows, that the GARF file is published in July 1917 in magazine "Byloe" No. 1 (23), Petrograd. I quoted from this source above. Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 16, 2006, 07:16:19 AM
I spoke with a weapons expert last evening and he told me a .455 bullet leaves a small entry wound (he has given me a cartridge casing - horrible), but that it would blown off the back of the head.   An unjacketed bullet, or a dum-dum bullet, would 'mushroom' leaving particularly gross injury - half the head would have been rent asunder.

So far as the Webley is concerned, I believe this pistol, was not issued, but had to be purchased by British officers during the First World War.   The Webley was carried on the side, attached to a lanyard.   Britain did sell weapons to Russia.   The Webley .455 was widely available through, for example, India.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 16, 2006, 01:14:24 PM
Tsaria

The wound to the forehead as I have said is consistent with a shot fired by a .445 Webley.  Webley's were almost standard issue to all British Army Officers at the time and certainly it would have been the sidearm that Rayner and other members of the SIS would carry in uniform.

Professor Pounder has confirmed that the shot is a 'best fit' with a Webley and in real terms the entry hole is small.  We have no photographs of the back of Rasputin's head but I suspect from the matted look of his hair that there was a substantial hole in the back of his head, whcih would be consistent with all other point blank (forehead) gun wounds I have seen, even from smaller calibre weapons.

There are a number of web-sites with forensic photographs of firearm wounds.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 16, 2006, 01:14:59 PM
Sorry typo .455

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 16, 2006, 02:37:31 PM
As I mentioned before, I was presented with the casing of a .455 last evening.   If that is small, I hate to think what a larger calibre would be like.   It must be not much less than half an inch in diameter.   I've just measured it and it is closer to half than a quarter of an inch.

In our friend's opinion, it would have blown out the back of Rasputin's head.   After the ordeal he had been put through, I would have imagined his hair would have been well and truly matted.   I am still a bit surprised that, judging from  photographs, the head seems to have retained its shape.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 16, 2006, 03:40:51 PM
Tsaria,

The casing is under half an inch but it has to hold a bullet that is .455.  However at contact range the hole is not much greater than the diameter of the bullet however it causes a 'starring' effect, that can be seen on the post mortem picture of Rasputin's head which is published in one of the other strands.

He head generally reatins its shape but obviously there is most frequently a large hole at the back of the head and the brain matter is blasted out by the force of the bullet.

If you want to see real damage a high velocity rifle or a shotgun produce some spectaular and sometimes unpredicatble contact injuries.  

Rob (FA) has said that the work I have sent him is so complex he is going to create a web page on the site for it.  I will put some detailed pictures in that document through Rob, but will try and get him to post some sample photographs in this strand of contact wounds - not the back of the head as that is not for the faint hearted and may well offend some people.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 16, 2006, 03:45:53 PM
Sorry I should have added I have some photographs of post mortem impressions, models, etc., that show how the bullet gradually increases the space around it as it travels through the skull and brain.  There is no gore but it does show in a 'nice' sort of way the mechanics of what happens.

As I have said in a previous post there are a number of web-sites connected to University and Hospital Forensic Pathology web-sites where you can research gun shot wounds etc.  Dundee University has a good site on which you can research many issues.  Some of the American sites are more graphic.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 16, 2006, 03:47:44 PM
Excellent, thanks so much Richard.   I am very much looking forward to reading the results of your labours.  

Yes, I agree the subject is very gruesome and I, for one, have absolutely no wish to see the exit wound.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 16, 2006, 04:57:32 PM
I have been attempting to apply some lateral thinking to the murder of Grigory Rasputin.

Let us return to the early morning of 17th December 1916 and the gathering at the Yusupov Palace on the Moika Canal.   Yusupov's story of serving Rasputin poisoned cakes and Madeira has rung down the ages.   We know now, if indeed Rasputin did consume the cakes and Madeira, the poison had lost its potency.

Could the following be an equally plausible explanation.

The conspirators plan was to kill Rasputin using poison.   This would have led to him suffering a relatively speedy and much less brutal death.   In this scenario, there would have been no reason for them to conceal the corpse.   It would have been simple for them to dispose of the evidence - the poisoned cakes and wine - call the medics and the police and present Rasputin as having suffered a fatal heart attack.

However, this failed and, as a result, they were confronted with a terrifying prospect.   The knew they now had to get rid of Rasputin, but did not know how.   This could explain both the bungling of the event and the variation in the accounts.  

Richard, I know you have mentioned the forensic scientist, Professor Pounder of Dundee, what I cannot recall is how the conclusion was reached that Rasputin's head wound was caused by a Webley 455.   Would you please be kind enough to remind me.

tsaria  

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 16, 2006, 08:24:33 PM
Maybe if the two other shots wounded Rasputin so that he was lingering in pain, they executed him with the shot to the head to end it....perhaps not for mercy's sake, but for time's sake.

I don't have access to any of the photos of Rasputin's corpse except the one I traced for this board and that I got from the internet. That one is very odd indeed, as Richard (I think) stated, his head is thrown back instead of lolling forward like it would if the corpse had been floating. There seems to be a dark mass, maybe a shadow, maybe just hair, under the head of the corpse. I'm trying to imagine what it looked like when he was given that shot to the forehead (between shudders) and I wonder if the force of it would have forced his head back permanently or would, after death, the corpse just turn all loose and unwieldy. Whichever, if the wound was as you've surmised, there must have been one hell of a mess to pick up.
I suppose it isn't possible that the blood and hair, etc, from the back of his head could have coagulated and made his head stick back like it did, stuck to the fabric of his shirt perhaps?

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 16, 2006, 10:00:44 PM
I was wondering about the make of the gun. That surely wasn't the one Y said he used, which was Dmitri's pistol. Were there 3 confirmed guns? Or was P totally lying and there were just 2?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 16, 2006, 10:21:44 PM
Grishka,

Wasn't the last shot, where R was shot in the head, one where R was already on the ground trying to escape ? But certainly with a close shot as that, the head would react with both the impact and the exit of the bullet, wouldn't it ? It's one reason i kept asking about R's hat. I don't know if he was wearing it when he left, probably not. As to the mess of the injury it does to the head, indeed it is terrible. I have seen what the impact of different type of bullets do to the head region. Glad it is not shared at all here. Thanks.

Tatiana

Quote
Maybe if the two other shots wounded Rasputin so that he was lingering in pain, they executed him with the shot to the head to end it....perhaps not for mercy's sake, but for time's sake.

I don't have access to any of the photos of Rasputin's corpse except the one I traced for this board and that I got from the internet. That one is very odd indeed, as Richard (I think) stated, his head is thrown back instead of lolling forward like it would if the corpse had been floating. There seems to be a dark mass, maybe a shadow, maybe just hair, under the head of the corpse. I'm trying to imagine what it looked like when he was given that shot to the forehead (between shudders) and I wonder if the force of it would have forced his head back permanently or would, after death, the corpse just turn all loose and unwieldy. Whichever, if the wound was as you've surmised, there must have been one hell of a mess to pick up.
I suppose it isn't possible that the blood and hair, etc, from the back of his head could have coagulated and made his head stick back like it did, stuck to the fabric of his shirt perhaps?


Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 17, 2006, 03:44:47 AM
Annie

Kossorotov asserts that the three gunshot wounds were caused by three different calibre weapons.  By microscopic analysis Zharov and his colleagues confirmed this in 1993.  The first two shots were from guns with a calibre equivalent to (the side shot) a Browning, the back shot a Sauvage (Savage) and the third by a larger calibre weapon.

Tsaria

Derrick Pounder conducted a microscopic analysis of the woun to the forehead and established that it would be a .455 Webley.  derrick is a senior Home Office Pathologist and the Professor of Forensic Medicine at Dundee University.  Independently I had already carried out similar work and established back in early 2004 that the wound to the forehead was most probably caused by a .455 Webley.

Your scenario could be quite right about the failed drugs, but I think it is a complete lie - there never was poison and in any case a post mortem would have revealed poison if it had been suggested he had just died of a heart attack.  Neither does that scenario, I believe, allow for the violent assault that obviously took place.

Grishka and Tania

We simply don't know enough about the extent of the wound to the forehead to comment.  The body could well have been in rigor or cadaveric spasm.  see below the section from my paper on this:

'Rigor mortis

For option one to be realistic rigor mortis would needed to have set in within a maximum of 1.5 hours if my calculations of the time the shots were first heard, a consensus time is 0230 hours, with disposal of the body by 0400 hours at the latest.  This is well outside the very unpredictable rule of thumb that rigor commences within 6 hours, takes another 6 hours to become fully established, remains for 12 hours and passes off during the succeeding 12 hours.

The Dundee University web-site usefully highlights research by Niderkorn’s in 1872 that observed the onset of rigor in 113 bodies.  In only two of the observations was rigor complete in 2 hours; in fourteen cases within 3 hours and thirty-one cases within 4 hours.

The site goes on to say that if the temperature is below 10 degrees centigrade it is exceptional for rigor mortis to develop, but if the environmental temperature is then raised, rigor mortis is said to develop in the normal manner.

The joints of fingers and toes are often markedly flexed during the development of rigor.  This could account for the positions of Rasputin’s fingers in the photographs.

My thoughts were around the suggestion reported in Nicholas and Alexandra, the Last Imperial Family, which states Rasputin had been sitting when shot by Yusupov.  Visualise the scene a drunken Rasputin sprawled across the dining room table, his head on the table and his arms out to his front also supported by the table.  

We know from Radzinsky’s research into the Rasputin Files that Rasputin had previously been observed by police in a similar position when in a drunken stupor on board a boat.  

Shot one to the left side, shot two to the back, the fatal shot, across the table, to the forehead.  The body is left in the room, by the log fire, while the conspirators celebrate upstairs.  We know the room was warm because Rasputin had taken his coat off and was dressed in his shirt and trousers.  The heat could have induced earlier rigor mortis if he was close enough to the heat?

The conspirators come back down to wrap and dispose of the corpse; rigor mortis has started or is in place.  The body is wrapped in cloth and in Rasputin’s fur coat, bound and placed in the car.  It would have been inconvenient to say the least to wrap the body in the position shown above, load it in the car and then convey it to the bridge.  If Rasputin was about 5’9” tall then with the arms extended it would have to have been a large car, to take such a stiff body.  Certainly the pictures of car of this era I have seen would not have been large enough to convey a stiff Rasputin.

There is a condition known as cadaveric spasm that is a form of muscular stiffening which occurs at the moment of death and which persists into the period of rigor mortis.  Its cause is unknown but it is usually associated with violent deaths in circumstances of intense emotion.  It has medio-legal importance because it records the last act of life.  It can affect all muscles but most frequently involves groups of muscles only, such as the muscles of the forearms and hands.

Rasputin’s death was violent and emotional so cadaveric spasm could have occurred. '


Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 17, 2006, 07:26:15 AM
Very illuminating Richard, thanks. I would like to think that Rasputin was passed out drunk when he was murdered, it makes it better somehow. So, we can imagine three people with three different guns all shooting him at rather close range (the head shot a contact wound) as a sort of fellowship of murder, then kicking him and committing the damage you've reported that was done to his testicles. They must have hated him very much.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 08:46:19 AM
Richard - how can you say definitively that the conspirators' initial was not not to dispatch Rasputin with the use of poison?  Post morten records the presence of a grey substance, smelling of alchohol in the stomach.  

The conspirators had no way of knowing their chosen poison had a short 'shelf-life'.   It is speculation on my part that this was their chosen method of murder and, when it failed, they panicked.   It seems, to me, to make perfect sense.   This would account for different weapons being used, as each of the conspirators, in turn, realised their plan had failed and the implications of this, terror set in and they lost control.   The shooting of Rasputin was so haphazard, it is obvious this was far from planned.   Rasputin's reputation of being almost super-human with, what was perceived as, his healing and psychic powers,   would have served to heighten their fears.

It would have been a very much 'cleaner', less problematic, way of getting rid of this Dark Force who threatened their entire way of life.    In my scenario, the disposal of the corpse would not have been an issue.   After disposing of the incriminating evidence - the poisoned cakes and Madeira - they would simply have called the authorities, tell them Rasputin had been partying with them when he appeared to suffer a sudden, fatal heart attack.

tsaria  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 17, 2006, 09:01:48 AM
Actually Tsaria, the autopsy revealed "several teaspoonfulls of a brownish liquid smelling of alcohol" in his stomach. This is EXACTLY what you would expect if he had just been drinking the madeira (a brownish wine of rather high alcohol content, about 15%)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 09:28:46 AM
Sorry, FA, I see I wrote 'grey'.  

Why would the presence of a brown substance smelling of alchohol presuppose that Rasputin had not ingested an impotent poison contained within the alchohol?  

As for the quantity of stomach contents, this would depend on the amount of time which elapsed between ingesting the food and the post mortem taking place.  

As Richard will bear out, corpses continue digesting food and male corpses' beards continue growing for up to two days after death.   So the quantity of stomach contents tells us absolutely nothing.

As for the cakes, Maria Rasputina stressed quite firmly that her father did not eat cakes or sweets.

Can someone place reveal definitive evidence, as well as the source of the evidence, that there was no attempt to poison Rasputin in the Yusupov Palace.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 17, 2006, 09:50:55 AM
Quote
Annie

Kossorotov asserts that the three gunshot wounds were caused by three different calibre weapons.  By microscopic analysis Zharov and his colleagues confirmed this in 1993.  The first two shots were from guns with a calibre equivalent to (the side shot) a Browning, the back shot a Sauvage (Savage) and the third by a larger calibre weapon.



Richard


That is what I have suspected, now I know there is proof! This, excuse the pun, 'shoots holes' in Y and P's story for sure (though it was leaky anyway, this sinks it) Thanks!

This is very interesting. I wanted to do a trial for Felix and bring out all the evidence to see who really killed him, this is almost like that. Thanks!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 17, 2006, 10:12:14 AM
Quote

Can someone place reveal definitive evidence, as well as the source of the evidence, that there was no attempt to poison Rasputin in the Yusupov Palace.

tsaria


Spirdovitch "Raspoutine". page 402:

"In the stomach the doctor found some 20 soupspoons of a brownish liquid smelling of alcohol.  The autopsy did not reveal the presence of poison."

(Dans l'estomac, le docteur trouva un vingtaine de cuillerees a soupe d'un liquide brunatre sentant l'alcool.  L'autopsie ne revela pas la presence de poison.)


I had forgotten that it was as much as that in the stomach. I have several Russian soupspoons of the period and they are MUCH larger than todays spoons. 20 soup spoons of liquid would be rather a lot, I'd say R was probably drunk, more especially since the autopsy also revealed that his other tissues smelled strongly of alcohol.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 10:53:36 AM
FA  - the whole point is that the poison was impotent.    It would not have been possible to detect this during the post mortem.   Is there evidence of further laboratory tests being performed on tissues post mortem.?...   or was the pathologist using naked eye?   Since Alexandra Feodorovna's intervention brought about the premature cessation of the autopsy, they probably did not have the opportunity to take tissue samples.   This would most certainly mean there was absolutely no way they could have detected the presence of poison, active or inert.

I have been making further enquiries regarding ballistics.   A British 'spy' in 1916 would obviously have been in plain clothes.   He would not have chosen a gun such as a Webley .455.   This is too bulky and it also would have snagged in civilian clothing.   A member of British Intellingence would have used a pistol rather than a revolver.  

The Webley was not restricted to British use.   It was universally available.   The British Army chose the Webley over its rival, the Smith and Wesson, for its strength.      The Webley Mark 1 was created in 1880.  At the time of the Boer War, British officers were using the Mark 4 - .455.

I must also enquire, how did Zharov in 1993 and Professor Pounder in 2004/5 identify the weapon and bullet used in the head wound?    How, for example, can they be certain it was not a Colt semi-automatic 45 ACP?   The experts with whom I have been discussing this issue - including a forensic scientist - are of the opinion this would have been the most likely weapon to be have been used given the period and the circumstances propounded here.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 17, 2006, 11:29:19 AM
Tsaria.
The specific poison mentioned that they allegedly used is Potassium Cyanide. According to the US Centers for Disease Control and EPA websites, Potassium Cyanide is listed as a highly stable substance.  It does not lose its potency. While it will react with humidity in the air, the reaction produces highly toxic Hydrogen Cyanide gas and reduces the mass of the remaining Potassium Cyanide powder. In short, it will disappear, but not lose its toxicity. If R had ingested Potassium Cyanide in any form they would have been able to detect it.

I personally now think they created the poison myth to further the "super powers" of Rasputin as part of the whole tale.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 11:41:38 AM
Yes, the cyanide of 2006 might be a stable substance, but what do we know of the cyanide of wartime Russia 1916.   Knowing Russia, Dr Lazovert could easily have been sold a substance pupporting to be Potassium Cyanide - this does not prove it was.

Why would the conspirators wish to heighten Rasputin's supernatural powers?

I am quite deliberately playing Devil's Advocate in an effort to make us think laterally, but as inclusively as possible.

I have yet to see evidence which supports the poisoned wine and cake story was nothing more than fabrication.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 17, 2006, 11:55:56 AM
At this point Tsaria, what I have suggested we do to ACTUALLY arrive at the truth is this: since we already know that substantial portions of the Y and P stories are simply not true, we must look to the extrinsic evidence and reliable/dis-interested witness statements. With that in mind, permit me to also be devils advocate and ask you What evidence is there (outside of the Y and P statements) that there WAS poison in the madeira or cakes and that R actually consumed it.

The chemical compound of Potassium cyanide has been known for centuries and the compound of 1916 was virtually the same as today's. Being used even then as a very common rat poison, there would be no real reason for anone to have sold 'bogus" potassium cyanide on the black market. It was available readily in many shops even during WWI in Petrograd.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 01:04:10 PM
FA - you overlook the queries raised  as to whether it atually was Cyanide Lazovert provided.

However, history relies on the first hand account of eye witnesses to the event.   Having decided, but failed to prove, the evidence recorded by the principals in this murder is unreliable, anything else is purely conjecture.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 17, 2006, 01:18:56 PM
Tsaria

An interesting debate and I come from the same position as FA (Rob) on this, what evidence is there that he was poisoned?  The answer is none other than what Y, P and Lazovert say.  Makalov says that it is a lie that it was obtained from him.

Rob's analysis of what Kossortov says is correct about the liquid in the stomach.  Two issues here which I cover fully in my paper:

1. ' There was no evidence of poison and the tell tale smell of almonds associated with potassium cyanide was not detected' - several theories have been put forward to support this - the potassium cyanide was beyond its shelf life.  Wee Lazovert must have been an awful doctor not to have worked that out. (b) that Kossorotov could not smell the poison (some people cannot detect almond smell), that the effect of sugars in the petit fours could have neutralised the acid - you would need an awful lot of it to do this, and the acid created by alcohol speeds up the efect of cyanide poisoning.

Kossorotov, because he obviously knew the story of teh murder as circulating in St Petersburg at the time specifically and unusually I would suggest for a murder involving extreme violence says 'no evidence of poisoning'.

2.  Stunning if he had consumed the cakes that there were no solids in his stomach

'Kossorotov makes the following points I respect of Rasputin:

1.      The cerebral matter gave off a strong smell of alcohol
2.      The stomach contained about twenty soup-spoons of liquid smelling of alcohol.
3.      At the moment of death the deceased was in a state of drunkenness.

What is even more telling is that Kossorotov states:

‘The examination of the stomach reveals no trace of poison’.

Stomach contents

Time since death can be approximated by the state of digestion of the stomach contents. It normally takes at least a couple of hours for food to pass from the stomach to the small intestine; a meal still largely in the stomach implies death shortly after eating, while an empty or nearly-empty stomach suggests a longer time period between eating and death (Batten 1995). However, there are numerous mitigating factors to take into account: the extent to which the food had been chewed, the amount of fat and protein present, physical activity undertaken by the victim prior to death, mood of the victim, physiological variation from person to person. All these factors affect the rate at which food passes through the digestive tract. Pathologists are generally hesitant to base a precise time of death on the evidence of stomach contents alone.

There is no evidence of any solids.  By both Yusupov’s and Purishkevich’s accounts Rasputin was dead within two hours of consuming the petit fours.  My analysis of timings against the witness reported times of hearing the shots would mean that he was dead within 1.5 hours at latest after arriving at the Yusupov Palace.  Therefore it would have been reasonable to expect solids to be discovered in the stomach contents.

Richard


Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 17, 2006, 01:23:56 PM
Just as an additional point no one has ever suggested that Lazovert produced the poison.  Both Y and P say that felix produced it and paleologue says it didn't come from Makalov but from a doctor friend of Felix's.

BUT I must stress there is not one shred of evidence that Rasputin was poisoned.  We know he was drunk in the morning, not very sober in the afternoon and Kossorotov tells us the fluid in the stomach smelt of alcohol as did the brain matter.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 17, 2006, 01:27:52 PM
Grishka,

The drunken body lurched over the table is just one option that fits the various trajectories of teh bullets, but I fear he suffered a very violent and drawn period of torture before he was shot.  There is no romanticism in how he was killed, no heroic group of nobles saving Mother Russia but a horrible and violent death that no one deserves.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 17, 2006, 01:32:00 PM
Tsaria

Sorry four posts one after the other, I will have to make a list of the questions in the foregoing posts and then respond to them all in one hit.

I think Y and P created a story that did make him sound supernatural - 'look this devil'.  Poisoned him, shot him, beat him and he still didn't die until he drown in the Nevka. It really is a Boys Own story and I honestly believe that they created the illusion of a virtually indestructible Rasputin.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 17, 2006, 02:00:12 PM
Richard,

Thank you very kindly for your reply to my question. I look forward to your findings, and all you share. I'm not quite understanding of your comment about him being tortured before his demise. Would you explain please ?


Tatiana


Quote
Annie

Kossorotov asserts that the three gunshot wounds were caused by three different calibre weapons.  By microscopic analysis Zharov and his colleagues confirmed this in 1993.  The first two shots were from guns with a calibre equivalent to (the side shot) a Browning, the back shot a Sauvage (Savage) and the third by a larger calibre weapon.

Tsaria

Derrick Pounder conducted a microscopic analysis of the woun to the forehead and established that it would be a .455 Webley.  derrick is a senior Home Office Pathologist and the Professor of Forensic Medicine at Dundee University.  Independently I had already carried out similar work and established back in early 2004 that the wound to the forehead was most probably caused by a .455 Webley.

Your scenario could be quite right about the failed drugs, but I think it is a complete lie - there never was poison and in any case a post mortem would have revealed poison if it had been suggested he had just died of a heart attack.  Neither does that scenario, I believe, allow for the violent assault that obviously took place.

Grishka and Tania

We simply don't know enough about the extent of the wound to the forehead to comment.  The body could well have been in rigor or cadaveric spasm.  see below the section from my paper on this:

'Rigor mortis

For option one to be realistic rigor mortis would needed to have set in within a maximum of 1.5 hours if my calculations of the time the shots were first heard, a consensus time is 0230 hours, with disposal of the body by 0400 hours at the latest.  This is well outside the very unpredictable rule of thumb that rigor commences within 6 hours, takes another 6 hours to become fully established, remains for 12 hours and passes off during the succeeding 12 hours.

The Dundee University web-site usefully highlights research by Niderkorn’s in 1872 that observed the onset of rigor in 113 bodies.  In only two of the observations was rigor complete in 2 hours; in fourteen cases within 3 hours and thirty-one cases within 4 hours.

The site goes on to say that if the temperature is below 10 degrees centigrade it is exceptional for rigor mortis to develop, but if the environmental temperature is then raised, rigor mortis is said to develop in the normal manner.

The joints of fingers and toes are often markedly flexed during the development of rigor.  This could account for the positions of Rasputin’s fingers in the photographs.

My thoughts were around the suggestion reported in Nicholas and Alexandra, the Last Imperial Family, which states Rasputin had been sitting when shot by Yusupov.  Visualise the scene a drunken Rasputin sprawled across the dining room table, his head on the table and his arms out to his front also supported by the table.  

We know from Radzinsky’s research into the Rasputin Files that Rasputin had previously been observed by police in a similar position when in a drunken stupor on board a boat.  

Shot one to the left side, shot two to the back, the fatal shot, across the table, to the forehead.  The body is left in the room, by the log fire, while the conspirators celebrate upstairs.  We know the room was warm because Rasputin had taken his coat off and was dressed in his shirt and trousers.  The heat could have induced earlier rigor mortis if he was close enough to the heat?

The conspirators come back down to wrap and dispose of the corpse; rigor mortis has started or is in place.  The body is wrapped in cloth and in Rasputin’s fur coat, bound and placed in the car.  It would have been inconvenient to say the least to wrap the body in the position shown above, load it in the car and then convey it to the bridge.  If Rasputin was about 5’9” tall then with the arms extended it would have to have been a large car, to take such a stiff body.  Certainly the pictures of car of this era I have seen would not have been large enough to convey a stiff Rasputin.

There is a condition known as cadaveric spasm that is a form of muscular stiffening which occurs at the moment of death and which persists into the period of rigor mortis.  Its cause is unknown but it is usually associated with violent deaths in circumstances of intense emotion.  It has medio-legal importance because it records the last act of life.  It can affect all muscles but most frequently involves groups of muscles only, such as the muscles of the forearms and hands.

Rasputin’s death was violent and emotional so cadaveric spasm could have occurred. '


Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 17, 2006, 02:29:58 PM
Tania

Quite simply that R had injuries that were caused by something like a cosh.  He had been systematically assualted, the force required to crush the testicles is immense.  The story of Yusupov's violent assault on him after he was shot in the yard does not stand up to examination.

Zharov ststes and I agree that had Y carried out the violent assault as described he would have been covered in blood.

P says that immediately after the assualt Policeman Vlasuk returns and sees Y and P in Felix's study - Vlasuk reports no blood soaked Y.

It is most likely, other than injuries asocited with him hitting the bridge support as he was thrown into the Nevka he was beaten.  Fun maybe on beahlf of his murderers, but in fact torture it was.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 17, 2006, 02:37:01 PM
Richard,

Again, a very deep and heart felt thank you for your taking time from your very busy schedule to respond.

Best Wishes,

Tatiana
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 02:56:49 PM
Richard - Purishkevitch recruited Dr Stanislaus Lazovert to the conspiracy for the sole reason of accessing and delivering the poison.  

Reasons given for the poison failing to take effect vary from it having lost it potency to Lazovert supplying a non-poisonous powder, aware that to do otherwise would directly implicate him in murder.  

Lazovert delivered the powder to Yusupov prior to the evening of 16th December.   When Lazovert arrived at the Palace on the evening of the 16th, Yusupov retrieved the poison from the ebony cabinet in the basement room.

From the point of view of Rasputin being served cakes or petit fours, Maria Rasputina was emphatic, her father never ate sweet things.   We do know, however, he enjoyed alchohol.  

Richard states Rasputin was inside the Yusupov Palace for no more than one and a half hours.   Given Yusupov, Rasputin and Lazovert arrived at approximately 1.00a.m. and the sound of shots were heard around 4.00a.m., Rasputin was in the Palace for well in excess of one and a half hours.  

I await an explanation as to how it is possible to be selective with first-hand accounts of the murder.   History relies on eye-witness evidence.   It appears a decision has been made here that this evidence be discounted.   In the absence of reliable eye witness evidence, what does that leave us with?   Speculation.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 17, 2006, 03:07:29 PM
Looking into the source of the alleged poison, I found two interesting notes in Spiridovitch's Raspoutine.

1. He cites P.'s journal, pg. 27: "At ten o'clock in the evening on November 24 there was a second meeting of the conspirators in P.'s hospital train at Warsaw Station.  P. presented Dr. Lazovert; Yussupov showed them the poison that he had obtained 'Potassium Cyanide, some in the form of crystals and some in a solution'." So, he says Yussupov got the cyanide. [deJonge in his book "The Life and Times of Grigorii Rasputin" also cites P.s journal, confirms the date of Nov 24 as the date of the second meeting at which Yussupov shows the Potassium cyanide he had obtained, and when they decided on Dec. 16 as the date soonest that Dmitri was able to participate.)

2. MOST intersting to me however is this footnote to page 358:
"Prince Yussupov's book has come to be a valuable document on the affair of Rasputin's assassination. Unfortunately it contains a very large number of errors ...(he goes on to cite many of them)...These errors on the part of the author which concern the facts and persons requires one to not make use of his book except with the greatest caution." (emphasis added)

Spiridovtich, a former police officer, first hand witness to much of the history involved, highly methodical, reliable and dis-interested in anything except the truth, spent a decade researching and interviewing all those still alive with first hand knowledge to produce the first complete biography of Rasputin, and less than fifteen years after the murder itself cautions against relying on Yussupov's account as being accurate. WHY another seventy five years later should we be any less "wary" of Yussupov's story?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 17, 2006, 03:14:02 PM
The person Richard calls Makalov is actually V. A. Maklakov, Duma-member, lawyer.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 17, 2006, 03:19:29 PM
Rudy,

Can you offer a short bio or profile on Makalov ? Thanks in advance.

Tatiana

Quote
The person Richard calls Makalov is actually V. A. Maklakov, Duma-member, lawyer.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 17, 2006, 04:06:51 PM
Richard, Tsaria,
Perhaps just a thought which occurred to me. I think Yussupov did maybe have potassium cyanide, but maybe only the cakes were poisoned, not the wine, and Rasputin simply kept refusing to EAT them and instead got drunk(er). Perhaps THIS was the trigger for the sloppy secondary plan of shooting him, and maybe enraged Y as well.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 04:15:57 PM
In a court of law whose evidence would be more compelling, an eye witness or someone who was over a thousand miles distant at the time, dependent on other peoples' accounts writing fifteen years after the event.

This remarkably circuitous route brings me back to invite convincing evidence that the Yusupov Palace was not the location of Rasputin's murder:  that poison was not used in an attempt to murder Rasputin:  that an officer of British Intelligence delivered the immediately fatal wound to Rasputin's head.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 17, 2006, 04:21:49 PM
In a court of law, an alleged eyewitness is easily "impeached" by inconsistencies, contradictions, fabrications or outright lies as to be wholly discredited as being unreliable.

Please see above where Spiridovitch himself comes to the very same conclusion such that Yussupov's account  "requires one to not make use of his book except with the greatest caution"

Speaking as a retired attorney, I personally believe Y.'s testimony to be sufficiently impeached such that any decent jury charge by a competent court would direct them to discredit much of what he says. Richard??
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 04:38:44 PM
So, who would be found to be guilty of the murder of Grigory Efimovich Rasputin?

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 04:45:38 PM
Sorry FA, I missed your post re the cakes alone being poisoned.   I think this is perfectly feasible.  

My reason for feeling there is good reason to believe there is at least some truth in the story of attempted poisoning is the apparent lack of preparation in their chaotic murder attempts.

It appears much more preparation went into setting up murder by poisoning than there is to support murder by a gunman or gunmen.  

Three different weapons were used to despatch Rasputin.   A planned assassination using a single firearm would have required only one good shot.   These grand dukes and princes were all good shots - it was part of their education and an integral part of their sporting lives.  

It strikes me they were virtually, literally 'shooting from the hip'.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 18, 2006, 02:32:49 AM
Tsaria,
Vasily Alexeevich Maklakov,(1869-1957, Switzerland), member of the Duma, lawyer, (his reactionary brother, Nikolai, was a former minister of Interior affairs), moderate member of the Cadet Party. In 1915 he published an article in “Russkie vedomosti” called “Tragic situation”, about a driver, who cannot drive, and is bringing disaster to himself and others, but sticks to his wheel, and does not admit others, although they know to drive. In this driver it was easy to recognize the tsar!
He was an excellent orator, after an attack in the Duma on Stürmer and Protopopov he was asked by Yusupov to join in killing Rasputin. He refused, but expressed support. Met with Purishkevich in the end of November, and a second meeting with Yusupov beginning December. At that meeting Yusupov took (got) the steel-rubber club, with which he hit Rasputin according his own story.
At the time of the Revolution, he was ambassador in Paris. He was first active for the “whites”, later in an emigration committee. Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 18, 2006, 03:15:15 AM
Tsaria

The murder is only chaotic because we believe what Y and P said.  I repeat there is not one shred of evidence to support the poisoning theory.

I would love to interrogate Y and P in a court they woudl fall to pieces in seconds, they are serial liars, in fact their evidence is so tainted we should not one word of what they say occurred in the Yusupov Palace that night as the truth.

They lie about who shot Rasputin, when adnwhere, they lie about teh assault on the body, they are completely muddled on every single piece of evidence.

What I suspect is someone wrote a script, this is what we will say happened and P firstly then Y built on the story.

But other than the forensics which are compelling we have nothing else and the problem is people stillignore the forensics.

I don't think the fact that three weapons were used means that this wasn't a coldly calculated murder.  Were we to be able to 'try' Y and P before a court, if they were convicted of 'murder' it would be a total miscarraige of justice, given what we know, and always have known forensically.  They may well have been party to the murder as conspirators, (before the fact) but the murderers based on their own evidence when compared against the proven forensics they were not.

I don't know who pulled the triggers, I am convinced on a balance of probabilites that Rayner fired the fatal shot, but would that stand up in a criminal court on the basis of 'beyond reasonable doubt' then the answer is 'NO'.

But what i do know is that the evidence of Y and P is so tainted that they do not get beyond 'GO' on the credibility stakes.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 18, 2006, 03:23:00 AM
Tsaria

On the subject of British "spies" Rayner worked on censorship of commercial cables with another British officer and various Russians.  As far as I'm aware he wore a British officer's uniform (though probably a Russian greatcoat) while on duty and presumably carried a Webley as standard.  I have some of his correspondence from Russia for the period (though nothing, sadly, touching on the killing) and will check it out to see if he talks about what he habitually wore.

I'm not aware of any work done on weapons used by British intelligence so I'd be interested in your source.  What little evidence there is suggests that if the British wanted someone "removing" they got someone else to do it.  Anyone wanting to carry out a "hit" would be unwise to use an automatic pistol as it would eject the cartridge case and leave evidence, whereas a revolver would take the caseaway with it.

Phil T

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 18, 2006, 06:29:36 AM
I cannot reveal their identities Phil until I ask their permission which may not be forthcoming.   What I will do is refer them to the website and to this discussion.   One gentleman is a retired forensic scientist and the other an authority on weapons and ballistics.   They might be willing to participate but purely from a general scientific point of view and not Rasputin in particular.

I'm beginning to think I am really thick for I have failed to understand how it is possible to be so assertive that the Yusupov and Purishkevitch accounts of the last hours and death of Rasputin are pure myth.

I also fail to understand why Yusupov, Grand Duke Dmitri and etc would want to perpetuate a myth.   The myth of Rasputin's supernatural powers.   How on earth could this be in their interest or in the interests of Russia?

Additionally, would British Intelligence run the risk, because risk there would have been, in becoming embroiled in this totally domestic issue?   Had British involvement been uncovered, this most certainly would have destroyed British/Russian entente.  As I have already speculated, in view of Nicholas' resignation from a prestigious British regiment, relations between the two countries may have been more fragile than appeared.  

Rasputin was against the war, but, of course, the war went ahead irrespective of his views.   As I said previously, by 1916 the British knew of American plans to enter the war, they also knew of the rampant revolutionary movement in Russia.   The British only pursued their own interests.   What was in it for them?  

Although the abdication of the Emperor and the introduction of revolutionary 'Provisional Government' in Russia was welcomed by a totally disloyal British  Government, a  foreign power murdering an unsuspecting, defenceless,  Russian peasant would have met with violent hostility from rulers, revolutionaries and the Russian populace and almost certainly would have backfired.

As for Yusupov being squeamish about weilding a weapon - handling weapons was a cultural necessity.   His older brother had been killed in a duel.  

So, let us suppose there was British involvement in the murder of Rasputin, what, specifically was their interest?

tsaria  
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 18, 2006, 07:23:49 AM
Quote

As for Yusupov being squeamish about weilding a weapon - handling weapons was a cultural necessity.   His older brother had been killed in a duel.


He was, and by his own admission in his memoirs. He hated hunting, and the military. He, and his brother, had both failed to follow Russian tradition and join, or go to military school, though their father was head of the Cavalier Guards. He later only used the Corpes de Pages to get a uniform and shut up those who said he wasn't serving his country. During WW1, as Russian casualties mounted, a healthy young man not in uniform was scorned, even spat upon. People were making comments about his failure to serve, though as the last of his line he was exempt. The Pages were a school for teenage boys, and he didn't go there until he was almost 30, which left him ridiculed by some. He also hated hunting, and was so disturbed by the cries of a small rabbit he shot he gave it up for good and gave away all his hunting rifles. He expressed a distaste for his family's hunting estate, Ratkinoe, and the hunts that went on there. He stated that once he was older, he refused to go on trips there with his parents. At the time of the murder of Rasputin, he owned no guns, this is why Dmitri's was used.  So he was not a gun happy person at all.


Quote
us suppose there was British involvement in the murder of Rasputin, what, specifically was their interest?

tsaria  


I can't personally see the British gov't being involved for their own purposes. If Raynor did it, I think it must have been an alliance with Y as a friend rather than a hit by the government.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 18, 2006, 07:56:03 AM
Tsaria

There seems to have been a general feeling, quoted by the Daily Telegraph correspondent:

"The reactionaries at the top hate us bitterly, and I suppose any criticism would have to be worded so as not to give them any opportunity of jumping into the embraces of Germany, which they are very ready to do."

IF Russia had been persuaded to come out of the war in early 1917 the 50+ divisions they moved West in early 1918 would have been available for the Western Front before the USA even entered the War, let alone before she was in any position to send troops in any numbers.

On the subject of Anglo-Russian relations it has long been said that HMG has no friends, only interests and if that meant welcoming a new Government committed to continuing the war and hopefully in a more efficient manner (which is what actually happened) the Devil take the hindmost.

When the Provisional Govt fell to the Bolsheviks there were attempts made to persuade them back into the war (detailed in George Hill's book amongst others) as well as to overthrow them.....duplicitous is not the word.

Part of the problem is that anything done by the Intelligence Mission is difficult to locate (and should, in fact, be impossible) so that I doubt if there are any smoking gun memoes to be found.

I do share your concern that a British Officer, if found standing over the corpse with a smoking gun, would be a horrific liability and prone to producing unanticipated results.  However, remember that Nicholas did say that he'd heard Y's "friend from Oxford" was involved but seems to have accepted Buchanan's assurances to the contrary.

Phil T
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 18, 2006, 08:41:19 AM
Why would Yussuopov and Dmitri amd P. create the myth?
As I said before, to proctect the actual triggermen. Look at what happened, in reality. The Emperor immediately stopped the entire investigation and prosecution into the murder because members of the Imperial House were directly involved. Y and Dmitri were given light punishments of exile, and frankly hailed as heroes by most of their peers. Would this have happened if "lesser" men or foreigners had been involved in the eyes of the public? I think not

Why the Superman strength myth? It elevates R in the eyes of the public as even more truly dangerous and evil than if here was just some stupid drunken muzhik beaten and shot like a dog. I mean, honestly, a lot of the public would feel sorry for him if they knew the truth of his frailty, being lured into a murder trap and violently killed. HOWEVER if he had these "powers" then Y and P and dmitri were battling EVIL and destroying it. Remember that most of the lower classes believed in these mystical powers of R (heck even a lot of the aristocracy for that matter...) so why not play that up to even more cover the truth.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 18, 2006, 10:15:39 AM
Another book which deals with British "duplicity" in 1918 is "Honoured By Strangers" by my old friend Roy Bainton which came out about 3 years ago.  It deals with the British Naval Attache, Capt Francis Cromie and his simultaneous negotiations with Trotsky about keeping the Baltic Fleet out of German hands and his plotting with the remaining officers to blow it up!

Phil T
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 18, 2006, 10:18:39 AM
Quote
It elevates R in the eyes of the public as even more truly dangerous and evil than if here was just some stupid drunken muzhik beaten and shot like a dog. I mean, honestly, a lot of the public would feel sorry for him if they knew the truth of his frailty, being lured into a murder trap and violently killed.


This sentence struck me. It's a sentiment I've been thinking, but didn't have the words to say. I've always thought that the method of Rasputin's death, even if Y's story was true, was a very horrible thing and nobody deserved to die like that. It led me to wonder why they killed him in the first place. If they didn't believe he had any extraordinary powers (even of persuasion) then why kill him at all? If he was just a drunken muzhik (which I believe he was, and yet perhaps a bit more than that) why did he need to not only be killed, but perhaps tortured as well? Was it maybe a result of panic for the events that were unfolding, a sort of lashing out against the coming terrors? Was he the scapegoat for everything they perceived as causing the downfall of the monarchy? I think Rasputin was merely just one of the many people who took advantage of the weakness and the arrogance of the Czar and probably not the most dangerous.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on January 18, 2006, 11:04:48 AM
A Russian author named Oleg Shishkin produced a book about 3 years ago in which he claimed (I believe) that Rasputin was some kind of German agent of influence.  Unfortunately, not having read the book, I can't comment other than to say that Steven Alley, one of the British officers involved in the murder, was Counter-Espionage officer with the Intelligence Mission specifically tasked with investigating German agents and liaising with the Russian authorities.

It may be that there's more on this in the German archives, which are horribly neglected by  "British" historians.  A friend of mine is in there at the moment and says it is a goldmine of neglected material on the plot to get Lenin into Russia, for example.

Oh for more time, resources and an ability to read Russian and German!

Phil T

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 18, 2006, 01:02:26 PM
Tsaria, Phil and FA

Rudy has Shishkin's book and can undoubtedly tell us what the theme of his book was.  In fact Rudy has a tremendous amount on Rasputin.

Tsaria - my issue is (and anyone can believe what they want) why on earth, if Y and P did commit the murder why tell so many lies - the lies about how he was shot - we know it was a lie.  I posted on here sometime ago the descrepancies between the two tales, why if the were the murderers did they lie so much.

They, if they were covering for Dimitri, or someone else have said and we shot him in the side and then the back and then we shot him point blank in the head.

I followed their story it is only now that I challenge it as fundamentally flawed and have to say wre they there?  They may have been in the Palce, they may have fronted the police, but were they there when he was killed?

Richard
Title: Zharov Vladimir Vasilievich, Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 18, 2006, 02:13:33 PM
Tsaria

I think it would be great if you could get your sources into the discussion, however I think we have to be clear that Kossorotov, Zharov plus his colleagues, and Derrick Pounder are all at one on three different calibres, the shot to the forehead being caused by the largest calibre weapon - Zharov and Pounder - we don'y know what Kossorotov thought.

I think it would be pretty stunning coincidence if Derrick Pounder and I had come to the same flawed conclusion, having conducted our work in isolation.  Derrick is even precise about the type of bullet.

These are the Zharov team:

Zharov Vladimir Vasilievich, the head of the forensic medical analysis bureau, with a Ph.D in medicine, who has worked in this capacity for 29 years has got a the highest qualification degree and is a professor of medicine. Zharov is Russia's leading pathologist.

Panov Igor Yevgenievich (Ph.D in medicine), deputy head of the same bureau, a specialist in forensic medicine, having a 34 year experience of working in this field,

Vasilevskiy Valeriy Konstantinovich, the deputy head of the same bureau a specialist in forensic medicine with 22 years of experience and has the highest qualification degree,

I also interrogated Zharov about the wounds when i interviewed him.  He says of course Purishkevich lied the forensic evidence disproves his story.

You mention Dimitri, but he insisted that he had not been involved in the murder - I can dig out the extracts from the letters etc if needed - In fcat Rudy has the extract because he e-mailed it to me the other day.

There has to be some reason that D did not tell his version of events and why he didn't associate with Y when they were both in Paris.  They were so close, what happened to split that friendship?

When I interviewed Gordon Rayner - not on the TV but at his home pre the TV interview he told me about his parent's having a book about Rasputin it was kep on a bookshelf.  When Oswald came to visit Gordon's father hide the book because he was terrified at what Oswald would say if he saw a book about Rasputin in the house.

Muriel Scales was a brilliant person you could feel the hatred that her father had for Rasputin, she really believed he was evil.  It was obvious her father had openly discussed his involvement in the plot.

Over my years a a detective I have seen many people lie, convincigly about the crimes they have committed.  there are people who serve out their terms of imprisonment not admitting the crime they have committed.  Some people suggest that they might be innocent but where they have been properly convicted and the forensics is there they still convince people 'it was not me'.  I have equally wasted hours of my time on murder inquiries when people have 'admitted' murders, they did not commit.  It would have been easy to charge them, but they hadn't committed the crime.

Richard





Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 18, 2006, 02:20:47 PM
Grishka,

Hate is a dreadful thing and it can inspire or provoke people to do horrible things to the subject of that hate.  Can you imagine how the extended IF and the nobles felt about a peasant being that close to the Tsar and Tsarita and the IF.  I don't think R can be reasonably blame ofr the Revolution or what else was to befall Tsarist Russia but hate can cause people to see things that aren't there - conspiracies with the Germans being one of them.  The same applies to racists, homophobes, etc. etc.

They did believe, the ordinary folk and I think Y and co. that he was a 'devil' P and Y both use that word - powerful stuff.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 18, 2006, 03:25:24 PM
Two points to interject.
1. Re Dmitri. Dmitri felt it primary that he be able to swear, as he actually did, to his father, and the Emperor (and I think the exact words are critical) "I swear on the memory of my depararted Mother that my hands have not been stained by Raputin's blood." The cover story myth clearly achieves this goal.

2. Accurate or not, the Y,P, and Dmitri stories all concur that they believed Rasputin was an agent of German influence over Alexandra and thus the Emperor, and that his interference (perceived or genuine) in the government in general was becoming so detrimental that it became critical to remove R. from the picture.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 18, 2006, 03:39:07 PM
Sometimes when you are looking for something you find it right under your nose, as I did on Page 1 of this thread where 'Todd' posted a partial account of Professor Dmitry Korosotov's post mortem findings -

'There were a number of injuries, many of them caused post mortem.'

'''The right side of the head was shattered and flattened as a result of contusion to the body during its fall from the bridge.   Death followed resulting from abundant loss of blood from a wound to the stomach.   The shooting took place, as I concluded, from almost point blank range from the left to the right side through the stomach and liver shattering the right half of the liver.   There was a huge loss of blood.   A gunshot was also found in the back, in the area of the spinal column, which shattered the right kidney and another wound at point blank range in the forehead (as he lay dying or was already dead).....

'''.....In my opinion Grigory Rasputin was killed by gunshot wounds from a revolver.   One bullet was extracted, the other shots were made at close range and passed on through the body, so it was impossible to conclude how many people shot him.....

'''.....The smell of cognac exuded from his body.   His brain was normal in size and showed no signs whatsoever of any pathelogical aberrations.....'''

Kosorotov noted that Rasputin was fifty years old when he was murdered and he recalled that, during a break in the post mortem, they were having a cup of tea and, when discussing Rasputin, they all agreed he could have lived for another fifty years.

What happened to the bullet fired at point blank range into Rasputin's head.   Even I know, without reference to forensic experts, that an unjacketed bullet would have blasted off the back of Rasputin's skull and, along with it, most of his brain.   How, therefore, was Kosorotov able to report that Rasputin's brain was of normal size and showed no signs whatsoever of any pathelogical aberrations?

Korosotov recorded that, in his opinion, the serious damage inflicted to the right side of Rasputin's head was as a result of it coming into violent contact with the bridge post mortem.

'I have often had to conduct various and difficult and unpleasant autopsies.   I am a man of strong nerves who has seen just about everything there is to see.   But seldom have I experienced such unpleasant moments as happened during that terrible night.   The corpse made an unpleasant impression on me.   The reedy expression on his face and the huge wound on the head were difficult to look at even for experienced eyes.'

Kosorotov's conclusion is not at all surprising, that is if the wound had been at the back of the head and not on the right side as he records.

When Spiridovitch wrote that Rasputin was killed by the head bullet, he had no way of knowing.   Even the pathologist who carried out the post mortem could not confirm whether or not Rasput was alive or dead when that bullet was fired into his head.

On the 16th October 2005, Richard wrote - 'However, it seems the bullet did not pass through the head.'   Where, then, did the bullet go?

What conclusions do Professors Zhorov and Pounder draw from this aspect of Professor Kosorotov's report?

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on January 18, 2006, 04:03:00 PM
Yes, I too would like to know.

Arleen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 18, 2006, 04:46:15 PM
Oleg Shishkin published two books about Rasputin. In 2000: “To kill Rasputin” (Doesn’t the title sound familiar?), but the Cook-connection is worked out in his second: “Rasputin. The history of a crime” 2004. However, a principle role is reserved for Samuel Hoare. But the books follow more or less the lines of our discussion on this forum: the impossibility of the stories of the murder by Purishkevich and Yusupov, and possible British participation.
“To kill Rasputin”: This documental detective by O. Shishkin, based on new materials, tells about the unknown sides of Rasputin’s international activity, about his contacts with representatives of secret German societies, about the participation of the “holy starets” in a court-revolution, planned for end 1916, and discloses the mechanism of the attack on the favorite and the name of one of the murderers. In this book also the notes of the former chief of the Police Department S. P. Beletsky, a contemporary of Rasputin, as well as sensational archive documents”
“Rasputin. The history of a crime”: There is not one person in Russia, who has not heard something about the murder of Rasputin. Many books are dedicated to this theme, but do we know all about the circumstances of this crime? The motives are more or less clear, but what is known about the criminals? Who were they? Is their list complete? New details about the identification of the murderers of Rasputin you will find in this book by O. Shishkin “Rasputin. The history of a crime”
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 18, 2006, 05:18:59 PM
About the circumstances under which the autopsy by prof Kosorotov was performed, let me quote Shishkin, who quotes Samuel Hoare:
Oleg Shishkin: “To kill Rasputin” pp. 149-150
“All the actions by pathologist Kosorotov and special prosecutor Sereda, who was present at the autopsy, were followed by agents of Samuel Hoare. The British resident describes extensively the autopsy and all the difficulties involved in his coded report of February 5th: “Although the premises did have electricity, not one lamp was burning, and it was not possible to switch them on. The three policeman present said, that there was no light, because “the dead did not need light”. The prosecutor and chirurg explained, that they needed light. In the end they got two small lamps, that could be hung on the walls, and one policeman kept holding a lantern. After some time the pliceman told, that he felt unwell and was not able to hold the lantern any longer. So, Sereda and Kosorotov were left alone in a badly illuminated room. They noted, that, although Rasputin was 46 years old, he looked like being 36.”
This Shishkin quoted from S. Hoare: Das vierte Siegel. Das Ende eines russischen Kapitels. Meine Mission in Russland 1916/17. Berlin – Leipzig 1936  
Title: TsariaRe: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 19, 2006, 03:10:50 AM
tsaria

I think Todd's posting is a very over egged version of what Kossorotov said, I will try and post the paper on the original PM later today - but I am afraid it is no where near as graphic or descriptive as the Todd posting and I use the version that Zharov has also used.

the problem is we have to yet again deconstruct the fiction of the autopsy, the various versions that have appeared and establish the facts.

We know the first bullet passed through the body, we are told the second (kidney shot) did not.  We can surmise that in the normal and expected event that the bullet to teh forehead would have passed through the brain.

I think there is a misread of what Kossorotov said, he says that individually the shots to the side and back would have been fatal, but someone might have been capable of movement after the shot until they bleed to death.  He says that the last shot would have been fatal and there could be no more activity.

he deos not assert that theinjuries to the face were all caused by hitting the bridge support and it is Zharov more than Kossorotov that explores this point.  Kossorotov states and zharov agrees that R was subject to an assault by a weapon ankin to a cosh.

'I, professor Kossorotov, declare that I have been to Fexamen and to the autopsy of Rasputin’s dead body, on 20th December 1916 at 10 o’clock in the evening, in the mortuary room of the Tchesma Hospice.  The body was recognised by his two daughters, his niece, his secretary and various witnesses.

The body is that of a man of about 50 years old, of medium size, dressed in blue embroidered hospital robe, which covers a white shirt.  His legs, in tall animal skin boots, are tied with a rope, and the same rope ties his wrists.  His dishevelled hair is light brown, as are his long moustache and beard, and it’s soaked with blood.  His mouth is half-open, his teeth clenched.  His face below his forehead is covered in blood.  His shirt too is also marked with blood.

There are three bullet wounds.

1)      the first has penetrated the left side of the chest and has gone through the stomach and the liver

2)      the second has entered into the right side of the back and gone through the kidney


3)      the third has hit the victim on the forehead and penetrated into his brain

Bullet analysis

The first two bullets hit the victim standing
The third bullet hit the victim while he was lying on the ground
The bullets came from different calibre revolvers

Examination of the Head

The cerebral matter gave off a strong smell of alcohol

Examination of the stomach

The stomach contains about twenty soup spoons of liquid smelling of alcohol.  The examination reveals no trace of poison

Wounds

His left side has a weeping wound, due to some sort of slicing object or a sword.
His right eye has come out of its cavity and falls down onto his face.  At the corner of the right eye the membrane is torn.
His right ear in hanging down and torn
His neck has a wound from some sort of rope tie
The victim’s face and body carry traces of blows given by a supple but hard object
His genitals have been crushed by the action of a similar object

Causes of death
•      Haemorrhage caused by a wound to the liver and the wound to the right kidney must have started the rapid decline of his strength.
•       In this case, he would have died in ten or twenty minutes.  
•      At the moment of death the deceased was in a state of drunkenness.  The first bullet passed through the stomach and the liver.  This mortal blow had been shot from a distance of 20 centimetres.  
•      The wound on the right side, made at nearly exactly the same time as the first, was also mortal; it passed through the right kidney.  
•      The victim, at the time of the murder, was standing.  When he was shot in the forehead, his body was already on the ground.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 19, 2006, 03:13:51 AM
MY COMMENTARY

There are no pictures of the rear of Rasputin’s head, probably because of the massive injuries that were likely to have been caused.  I do believe that photograph 22 shows considerable matting and blood soaked hair.  I have usefully used descriptions from the assassins of the Romanov Royal Family in the basement of the Ipatiev House in Ekaterinburg on 17 July 1918 from King’s and Wilson’s book:

‘When Yurovsky entered the room, he saw Botkin, covered in blood, held his Mauser close to Botkin’s head, and pulled the trigger.  The bullet ripped through the doctor’s head, exiting out the lower right side of his skull, its force slamming his body against the floor in a shower of gore.’

‘Yurovsky, standing behind Tatiana, aimed his Colt and fired.  The bullet tore into the rear of her head; it ripped through her skull instantly, blowing out the right front of her face in “a shower of blood and brains”.

Yurovsky’s Mauser was a .32 calibre (7.63mm) larger than the calibre of Mauser or Browning that Zharov and colleagues say caused the left side body wound to Rasputin.  His Colt was .45 calibre (11.43mm).


Zharov

Conclusion

1.      It is possible that the lethal dose of potassium cyanide didn’t cause Rasputin’s death. The poisoning did not occur, either as a result of cyanide changing its chemical status... (ineligible)  The nature of Rasputin’s complaints about feeling unwell after he took the poisoned cakes and wine, are characteristic of light poisoning.

2.      The autopsy of Rasputin showed three gunshot wounds where the bullets went in the body and one wound where the bullet came out; one cut and many bruises on the head caused by a heavy, blunt object. It is impossible to determine the type or the calibre of the gun from which he was shot (pistol or revolver), but we can assume that it was a 6.35 mm weapon.  

3.      It is also impossible to conclude the sequence, and the distance, from which the shots were fired. We can only suppose that out of three gunshots, the one into the head was the last. This shot shows all the signs of being fired at close range. The shot into the chest and back were probably fired from quite a close distance as well.

4.      The mechanical injuries (the ones not caused by gunshots) in the region of the head were caused by a succession of blows inflicted by heavy, blunt objects. These injuries could not have been caused by the body hitting the pylon of the bridge from which it was thrown off.

5.      The cut on the back was caused by a sharp object, possibly a knife or a razor blade. It is not possible to say whether this injury happened before or after death.

6.      After Rasputin was wounded in his stomach and liver, it is possible that he could walk, run; put up resistance during the next 5-15 minutes.

7.      After he was wounded in the head, it is dubious that he was able of to act with purpose and co-ordination.

8.      The injury most likely to have caused the death is the shot in the head, which caused the damage if the brain matter.

9.      There was no evidence of drowning in the studied materials

Expert of forensic medicine of the highest qualification
PhD in Medicine
Senior Lecturer
                                                       V.V.Zharov


Expert of forensic medicine of the highest qualification
PhD in Medicine
Lecturer
                                                        I.Y.Panov

Expert of forensic medicine of the highest qualification

                                                       V.K.Vasilevskiy


The Zharov Interview

As part of the Time Watch production I had the opportunity to interview Professor Zharov about his findings.  A short piece of the interview is included in the transmitted programme.

Three of the questions I asked Professor Zharov and the answers he gave are I believe of particular importance.


Question:

“I wonder if you could give me your opinion about Professor Kossorotov’s evidence that the three bullet wounds were caused by different calibre weapons.”

Answer:

“Yes I think that is the case, if we accept the wound to the left side was caused by a Browning, the one to the back by a Sauvage, and then the one to the forehead was caused by a larger calibre weapon than both of the other guns.”

Question:

“In your view does the contact wound to the forehead discredit Purishkevich’s evidence?”

Answer:

“Of course it does, Purishkevich said he fired at Rasputin from behind at a distance of twenty paces and hit Rasputin in the back of the head.  The picture of Rasputin’s forehead shows an entry wound, the Standsmark around it means it was fired at close range.”

Question:

“In your view, as the forensic evidence tells us that three weapons of different calibre were used does this mean that there was a third person involved in the shooting?”

Answer:

“As a scientist I cannot say that a third person was involved in Rasputin’s murder.  What I can say is that as an individual I am certain someone else was involved, because neither Purishkevich nor Yusupov mention the close quarter shot to the forehead – if they didn’t do it, who did?”

My Commentary on the Kossorotov Post Mortem and the Zharov, Panov and Vasilevskiy Report

There is no forensic evidence that Rasputin was poisoned by the use of cyanide.

At the time of his demise Rasputin was in a state of drunkenness

Rasputin did not die of drowning

There is evidence that Rasputin was shot three times

All three weapons were fired from a range of no more than 20 centimetres

All three bullets were from different calibre weapons

It is impossible to know the sequence of the shots but the shot to the forehead would have been immediately disabling and was therefore in all likelihood the last.

Both the shot to his left side (stomach/liver) and right side of back (kidney) would individually have been fatal in 10 to 20 minutes.

The head and body had been beaten with a hard but supple weapon consistent with the cosh Yusupov refers to.

The gentiles were crushed with the same weapon.  This is indicative of a sexual/revenge attack.

The face was considerably disfigured

It is impossible to identify whether certain injuries were caused ante or post mortem – for instance hitting the bridge supports.

Richard




Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 19, 2006, 03:15:43 AM
My Commentary on the Kossorotov Post Mortem and the Zharov, Panov and Vasilevskiy Report

There is no forensic evidence that Rasputin was poisoned by the use of cyanide.

At the time of his demise Rasputin was in a state of drunkenness

Rasputin did not die of drowning

There is evidence that Rasputin was shot three times

All three weapons were fired from a range of no more than 20 centimetres

All three bullets were from different calibre weapons

It is impossible to know the sequence of the shots but the shot to the forehead would have been immediately disabling and was therefore in all likelihood the last.

Both the shot to his left side (stomach/liver) and right side of back (kidney) would individually have been fatal in 10 to 20 minutes.

The head and body had been beaten with a hard but supple weapon consistent with the cosh Yusupov refers to.

The gentiles were crushed with the same weapon.  This is indicative of a sexual/revenge attack.

The face was considerably disfigured

It is impossible to identify whether certain injuries were caused ante or post mortem – for instance hitting the bridge supports.

Richard


























Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on January 19, 2006, 10:34:59 AM
You make it clear Richard....

Arleen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: leushino on January 19, 2006, 11:25:54 AM
Quote
You make it clear Richard....

Arleen



Well... almost clear. Just one small exception, Richard.

You say his gentiles were crushed with the same instrument. Don't you mean, his genitals? lol

Otherwise, good summary. Carry on.  ;)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 19, 2006, 01:43:21 PM
quite right - sorry

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: DavidP on January 19, 2006, 06:30:10 PM
Quote
My Commentary on the Kossorotov Post Mortem and the Zharov, Panov and Vasilevskiy Report

The gentiles were crushed with the same weapon.  This is indicative of a sexual/revenge attack.


Do we then have two different motivations for Rasputin’s murder? Is this what the evidence suggests? We  have the testimony from Felix, Pureshkevich etc which says that the motivation for Rasputin’s murder was to preserve the integrity of the Romanov Dynasty which had been damaged by  association with Rasputin.
Yet, the autopsy evidence suggests that the damage inflicted to Rasputin’s genitals had a sexual/revenge motive. Doesn’t this then suggest that there was something else (as opposed to the stated motive of removing a perceived threat to the monarchy) going on in the heads of at least one of the assassins?

Why do you think  the assassin (s) would  feel the need to attack Rasputin’s body in this manner?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: leushino on January 19, 2006, 07:26:50 PM
Quote

Why do you think  the assassin (s) would  feel the need to attack Rasputin’s body in this manner?



Just a thought, but it seems to me that they were giving vent to their indignation over the licentious manner in which Rasputin had behaved among the upper class. He degraded them (even though they willingly participated) as well as contributed to the decline of the dynasty and simplyl killing him did not give enough personal satisfaction.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 19, 2006, 10:09:38 PM
If they killed Rasputin for purely social reasons, then they killed him because he was a peasant and had more power than a peasant should have, in their eyes. The upper classes were getting away with more licentious behavior than Rasputin ever dreamt of, but they were entitled to it, apparently. I'm thinking of Yusopov's propensity to dress like a woman and pick up men.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 19, 2006, 11:44:05 PM
Those seem to me pretty shallow justifcations for a calculated murder. Not saying they are incorrect, just that I would think that there must have been a more political purpose. If it were just a "society" murder, why go through all the subtrefuge ?  Just hire it done and be over with it.
I am sure, even with his connections to the IF, that he could have "dissapeared" convienently with no fanfare.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 20, 2006, 03:04:29 AM
Hi

I think there could be many reasons for why he was killed and many people had different motivations for wanting him dead, war, his influence, possibly sexual inferences.

Equally we don't know who was PRESENT when he was killed, I am not talking about the actually murderers but other 'witnesses' - watchers if you like.

I was concerned when I saw that his testicles had been crushed and consulted a friend and work colleague of mine who is a well respected Professor of Forensic Psychology.  he was of the view that such injuries would tend to show a pseudo sexual motive.

Equally I have seen and studies cases where damage has been called to sexual organs as a way of cusing intense pain (obviously) and on the other hand demeaning an individual.

So it is quite open.  I think the higher level motives prompted the murder, but some of the lower level motivations may have come into play.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 20, 2006, 08:30:26 AM
Quote
So it is quite open.  I think the higher level motives prompted the murder, but some of the lower level motivations may have come into play.


I agree. I think they planned on killing him as an extermination and then when they were actually doing it, their rage (for whatever purpose) got the better of them. We know that Rasputin slept with many women, a lot of them wives of people in power. Maybe one of the husbands of one of those women was involved in the murder and was the one to inflict the genital damage. Or, like you say, it was a gesture meant to demean the staretz, to make him pay for his reported sexual debauchery.

Someone in an interview I saw said something about Yusopov having tried and failed to seduce Rasputin and got his revenge by damaging him sexually during the murder. I find that extremely far fetched, almost as far fetched as the story that Rasputin's penis was cut off and preserved.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: leushino on January 20, 2006, 11:11:12 AM
Quote
Those seem to me pretty shallow justifcations for a calculated murder. Not saying they are incorrect, just that I would think that there must have been a more political purpose. If it were just a "society" murder, why go through all the subtrefuge ?  Just hire it done and be over with it.
I am sure, even with his connections to the IF, that he could have "dissapeared" convienently with no fanfare.



I completely agree, Robert. What I was responding to was the question:  Why do you think  the assassin (s) would  feel the need to attack Rasputin’s body in this manner? In other words... why brutalize the body in such a manner? Why crush the genitalia? Why disfigure the face?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 20, 2006, 12:33:09 PM
well, a few kicks in the groin is pretty common is violent murders. Crimes of passion, so to speak.  Obviously the motives were highly emotional as well as political.  As for the face, perhaps the same ? Beat a man while he is down and can't fight back.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 20, 2006, 12:52:55 PM
I think the idea of some sort of revenge may be correct.  There was a famous scandal when I was a child.  A school mate's father discovered his wife was cheating on him, and shot the man deliberately in "the family jewels", right outside the door to Chasen's restaurant in Beverly Hills...
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 20, 2006, 01:11:57 PM
Robert,

Crushing of testicles is pretty rare, I have seen people at rugby and judo suffer extreme accidential pain to their testicles but the most that resulted in was bad bruising.  The force required to crush is quite immense.  I am not unconvinced that yusupov may have been seduced by Rasputin, although it is not of great significance to my way of thinking.  But Yusupov does describe, if we can beleive anyhting he says, a visit to rasputin where he was hypnotised and just watched what happened around him and was unable to respond.  Unfortunately it is yet another variable in the story.

On the other hand it could be just part of an extremely sadistic murder.

A.P. and D.A. Kotsyubinsky in their book ‘Grigory Rasputin – Private and Public’ (Limbus Press, 2003, St. Petersburg) analyse Yusupov’s various memoirs and conclude from this and other evidence that Yusupov was probably gay or in any case bi-sexual.

You may find the following abstract from my paper interesting:

'Being a homosexual and in a position of power was oxymoron in the early 20th century.  The arraignment of the Kaiser’s principal advisor Phillip von Eulenburg in 1908 on a charge of homosexuality caused a major scandal and a lack of international prestige.

Against this background the letters of a relative of Nicholas II, Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich (KR) to be found in ‘A Life Long Passion’ shows homosexual activity was not uncommon amongst the nobility.  Despite expressing his disgust at his sexual activities the writer explains in a further letter how he made homosexual love to the bath house attendant and his son.  Sexual acts between males were a serious criminal offence in Russia at the time.  It is suggested that Sergei Alexandrovich, Dimitry’s guardian, until his death as the result of a terrorist bomb in 1905 was gay and this is speculated as the reason that Sergei and Ella did not have issue.

Much has been made of Yusupov’s sexuality over the years.  Outwardly a happily married man with a daughter, this superficial exterior hides a very complex and probably confused man.  Whether Yusupov was gay, bisexual or merely a cross dresser makes little difference to me, but one paragraph in the original autopsy report gives me reason to suspect that a one time Yusupov had been in a sexual relationship, whether out of desire or necessity with Rasputin.

We first hear of Yusupov’s sexuality in his memoirs (pages 47-48) “Then one day, the truth was brutally revealed to me by a chance encounter at Contrexeville, where my mother was taking the waters.  I was then about twelve.  I had gone out alone one evening after dinner, for a walk in the park.  I happened to pass a summer house, and glancing through the window I saw a pretty young woman in the arms of a stalwart youth.  A strange emotion swept over me as I watched them embracing with such obvious pleasure.  I tiptoed closer to gaze at the handsome couple, who were of course unaware of my presence.” He goes on to say, “Troubled and fascinated by what I had seen, I spent a sleepless night.  The next day, at the same hour, I went back to the summer house only to find it empty.  I was just going home when I met the young man coming up the path.  I went up to him and asked him point-blank whether he had an appointment with the girl that evening.  He stared at me in astonishment, then began to laugh and asked why I wished to know.  When I confessed that I had watched them in the summer house, he told me he was expecting the girl at his hotel that same evening, and asked me to join them there.  Imagine my feelings at receiving this invitation …….. Furthermore, the young man’s hotel was near ours.  He was sitting on the veranda waiting for me.  He congratulated me on my punctuality and took me to his room, and had just begun to tell me that he was from Argentine when his girlfriend appeared.  I don’t know how long I was with them.”

“As for the Argentinean, to whom I owed my initiation, he had disappeared the next day and I never saw him again.”

“I was amazed by what I had learned that, in my youthful ignorance, I failed to discriminate between the sexes.”

Fact or fantasy, if fact was this as it appears to read as a bi-sexual encounter?

He admits wearing his mother’s jewellery.

Certainly he writes about his desires elsewhere in his memoirs and is open about dressing as a woman and with a friend visiting bars and talking to young male army officers.

His father interrupted a strange role playing game when Yusupov acted out the master/servant role with the servants in the Egyptian Room of the Yusupov Palace.

He appeared in music hall dressed as a woman until his thespian activities were curtailed by his parents.

Irina’s parents intervened at one stage to place a sanction their marriage.  It was only Yusupov’s smooth talking that allowed the engagement to continue to marriage.  Yusupov claims that the problem was caused by rumours about his behaviour.

Yusupov would say that as part of the plot to lure Rasputin to 92 Moika, he forged a friendship with the person he was later to describe as ‘Satan’.  We are taken through sessions where Rasputin allegedly hypnotised Felix when Felix was completely under his control and unaware of what happened.

The following are extracts from Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich’s diaries:

“Felix laid out the whole story for me.  Grishka (Rasputin) had taken a liking to him at once.. and soon afterwards came to trust him – to trust him completely.  They saw each other almost every other day and talked about everything… and Rasputin initiated him into his schemes, not being shy at all about such revelations.”

“I cannot understand Rasputin’s psyche.  How for example, is one to explain Rasputin’s boundless trust in the young Yusupov – the trust of someone who trusted no one at all… afraid that he would be poisoned or killed?”

“It remains to propose something rather incredible, and that is that (Rasputin) was infatuated with and had a carnal passion for Felix that darkened the strapping peasant and libertine and led him to his grave.  Did they really just talk during their endless conversations?  I’m convinced there were physical manifestations of friendship in the form of kisses, mutual touching, and it may be, even something more cynical.  Rasputin’s sadism is not open to doubt.  But just how great Felix’s carnal perversions were is still little understood by me.  Although before his marriage there were rumours in society about his lasciviousness.”'
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 20, 2006, 01:47:00 PM
Yes, all this is well known about Felix.  I for one have reason to believe he was "gay", but that is neither here nor there for this discussion.
"Crushing the testicles" may be rare,but I have personally seen several cases where such violence was inflicted. Often post-mortem. In my experience it has been the victim of gang violence. It is the same humiliation as rape to a woman. [at least in the eye of the perpetrator].
A violent attack on R in his genitals suggests to me a very emtional situation, as opposed to a cold, calculated murder gone wrong.
As for the penis legend, in a box in Paris, a museum in St.P.- well, just nonsense, in my opinion.  Castration would surely have been noted in the autopsy.
I wish now, that I am re-interested in all this, that there was a really reliable description of the dis-internment and ultimate disposal of his body.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 20, 2006, 02:13:59 PM
Quote
I wish now, that I am re-interested in all this, that there was a really reliable description of the dis-internment and ultimate disposal of his body.



We have it Robert. From Spiridovitch's "Rasputine" biography.  Kerensky ordered R. to be disinterred and brought to Petersbourg. He ordered it then to be taken elsewhere to be reburied. On the way, just outside of TS, a group of locals stopped the cart and discovered it was R's body, the soldiers and students taking the body then took the body into the forest, doused it with gasoline and burned it totally and did indeed scatter the ashes to the winds.  There is a sworn deposition of the events in GARF.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 20, 2006, 02:46:37 PM
I think I have some more on this, I can't think where to find it, that's the problem of having so many books and papers spread round the house like some mad professor's residence.

It may have been in some information that Rudy has sent me recently or in a book, I will see what I can find and if successful post it.

Rudy do you have anything on the final disposal of the body.  Rudy does has the most amazing collection of books and articles on Rasputin and has run exhibitions on him.  He has sent me tons of information and is so very well informed.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 20, 2006, 03:02:13 PM
Quote
but one paragraph in the original autopsy report gives me reason to suspect that a one time Yusupov had been in a sexual relationship, whether out of desire or necessity with Rasputin.


What evidence could this be? I can't imagine Rasputin involved in a homosexual affair, but maybe I'm just reading things wrong.


Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 20, 2006, 03:56:16 PM
Thank you FA. Why did Kerensky order the dis-internment ? What would be the reason for such an act ?
[ if I have Spiridovitch, I cannot find it!]
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: David_Pritchard on January 20, 2006, 07:50:55 PM
Quote
If they killed Rasputin for purely social reasons, then they killed him because he was a peasant and had more power than a peasant should have, in their eyes. The upper classes were getting away with more licentious behavior than Rasputin ever dreamt of, but they were entitled to it, apparently. I'm thinking of Yusopov's propensity to dress like a woman and pick up men.


The concept that Rasputin was killed because of his social origins is simply Marxist. I do not believe that this was the case.

At the time, adultery was considered to be much worse a crime in the criminal law code than cross dressing. In the canon law of the Orthodox Church, adultery was a much worse sin than homosexual contact. The difference between the two, adultery and homosexual contact are that adultery is a property crime based upon the concept that women are chattel and that adulterated women are unrepairable damaged property; homosexual contact is a social crime which can be stopped by the participants through guidence.

Note to modern women, I am writing about how these actions were viewed in early 20th Russia. I am aware that things have changed. The concepts stated above are historical and not my own views.

It is adultery, fornication and whore mongering in public view that ultimately led to Rasputin's death. Had Rasputin not been so obvious with his affairs or sexual encounters with married noblewomen, unmarried noblewomen and not intimated that he knew the Empress better than he ought to have known her, as well as made comments about the Grand Duchesses, I doubt that he would have been killed.

David
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 20, 2006, 08:28:37 PM
Pardon me, David. You know how much I respect your opinions but I think that is a rather simplistic attitude for killing someone.  All the things you say are indeed true,  but to me, it was his influence that was his downfall, not his social behavior. He certainly was not an exception in St.P. society.
I also doubt that Felix had any sexual relationship with the man. He may very well have done the damage to R's genitals, but that to me would be rather typical of a "silly queen" over his head in a situation.
Perhaps I am naive.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 22, 2006, 05:47:11 AM
Hope you are all enjoying your Sunday

I have just received a reply from the Historical Diving Society of Russia, it is amazing the things you can find when you dig around.  I have asked them a couple of other questions and when I get their response I will post their comments.

Richard
Title: But current in that part of NRe: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 22, 2006, 07:53:53 AM
Hot off the Press

From the Historical Diving Society (Russia):

'But current in that part of Neva River is not so slow and body swam and catch on the ice of the board of unfrozen patch of water and toe of high boot and part of coat sticked out above the ice.'

This is very interesting and confirms, if correct, that the body was floating face upwards and not in the normal legs down, head down, bum up (excuse me) position.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 22, 2006, 12:06:51 PM
What does this mean, Richard ?
Is there a possibilty then that R was still [barely]  alive when dumped into the Neva ?  What a horrid thought. After all that he had already been through. I think I am missing the significance of the body position in the river.
I am still curious to know why Kerenesky ordered R's dis-internment and re-burial.  Of all the chaos around him, what an odd thing to be concerned about ? [I do not question that it happened, just why ?]
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 22, 2006, 02:02:27 PM
There are two main publications on the dis-internment of the body of Rasputin and its final disposal.
Ya szheg Grigoriya Rasputina (I burned Grigoy Rasputin). ed. by V. V. Klaving:  SPb., 2001.  On pp. 49-59: The memories of F. Kupchinsky, Authorized Comissioner of the Provisional Government in the matter of disposal of the corpse of Rasputin.
E. I. Lagansky: How Rasputin was burned. Ogonek, 1926 No 52 pp 3-4;1927 No 1 pp. 11-12.

At this time A. F. Kerensky was minister of Justice of the Provisional Government.
Members of the new Cabinet were worried, that the place of the grave of Rasputin would become widely known and provocations could be expected there. Also the grave could become a place of worship by the followers of Rasputin and of monarchistic propaganda.
Therefore the ministers of the Provisional Government ordered their colleague A. F. Kerensky to handle this matter.
He contacted some close journalists (V. I. Lagansky from “Birzhevye Vedomosti” and A. A. Suvorin from “Novoe Vremja”) to find the grave.
Why journalists? A. G. Kalmykov from the Museum of Political History says: The Provisional Government existed only three weeks. They did not have any adequate resources. The old police system was destroyed by the revolution, a new not yet created. Besides, the Government feared the responsibility of such an act and prefered to do it more secretly. So jounalists were the best candidates for such an operation. They were determined, initiatives, and had experience in researches. And the journalist were interested in sensational discoveries.
With the help of Capt. Klimov the grave was found. (March 8th, 1917)
The news, that the grave of Rasputin had been found in the Alexander park, spread fast, people started to gather. This was not what the Provisional government had in mind.
Now appears another person, F. P. Kupchinsky, journalist of the paper “Petrogradsky List” (with a rather doubtful past!). He was charged by the Provisional Government to destroy Rasputin’s corpse.
First Rasputin’s coffin was moved into a train wagon for further transport. Next day, March 9th  the coffin was transferred onto a lorry. Of this there is a document, signed by Kupchinsky and the Head of the Tsarskoe Selo station Skryabin, witnesses Suvorin and Kobylinsky, Chief of the garrison.
From now on Kupchinsky acted without Suvorin and Laginsky.
In the night from March 10th – 11th on the way into the forest to burn the body, the lorry got stuck after Lesnoe, near the station of Piskarevka. With the help of some student-policemen from the nearby Polytechnological Institute. (Lesnaya and Polytechnichesky Institute are today metro-stations, not that far from the Centre, but in those days these were surroundings of the city).
Here the corpse of Rasputin was burned, as was witnessed in another Document, between 3 and 7 o’clock in the night. This document was sent to the president of the Provisional Government, Prince G. E. Lvov.  

A new version tells, that they did not succeed to destroy the whole body in the fire, and that the remaints were taken to the boiler room of the Polytechnical Institute.  

In this matter there is still one article I would like to mention, by historian Sergei Fomin "How they burned Him" in Russky Vestnik, May 5th, 2002. (in russian)
Rudy

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 22, 2006, 02:18:02 PM
WOW, Rudy ! Thank you very much indeed. Not reading Russian, I never knew the details of the actions. Surely the burial place was open knowledge, at least in the town?  Do you think he was really that much of a "cult" figure" to warrant such a threat ? Not that many people were, in reality, within his circle, after all. As for the monarchists, I would think they hated him more than anyone !
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 22, 2006, 02:23:31 PM
To give you an idea about the “cult”
From the place of the grave, people took home snow, from the Malaya Nevka, in which he was thrown, people took home water. I think these gests tell us more than words could do!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 22, 2006, 06:50:09 PM
I understand your point, Rudy.  People flock to a piece of toast that they think has a holy image, so yes, there was a following for the man. But enough to warrant  such diversion from putting a whole new government together and run a war at the same time? What an odd thing for Kerensky to prioritise.
I suppose the scenario might have also provided the opprotunity the "dis-member" the dis-intered as well ?
In any case, I do not see how  R dead was any threat, even with a "loyal following". Perhaps I am missing something.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 22, 2006, 07:52:36 PM
Robert,
Father Gennady and Father Markel of the Feodorovsky Cathedral both know the exact spot of R's original burial and refuse to identify the exact spot even today for these very same reasons, some 90 years later.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 23, 2006, 02:53:51 AM
Robert et al,

I have to say that I seem to learn something new every day from this debate and Rudy's latest posts are brilliant.  I agree with FA that there is still extreme secrecy about the site of the burial even today.

Regarding the body in the water you can be assured he was dead before he went in the water - the lungs were clear, so he couldn't have been breathing.

I think I go back to my original thoughts on this; that rigor had set in before he was thrown into the Malaya Nevka - given even the longest possible time scale it would have to have been early onset of rigor for the body to be stiff.

As you know I have always said the arms would not have been bound, they had to be loose so people could lift and swing the body (a neck lift is just about impossible).  So the body would have gone into the water in something like the position that it was recovered.

Had it landed on its back, remember the fur coat would add bouyancy he might just have gone under the ice and floated along face up.  There are so many factors to consider and I need to ask some of my pathologist friends more about this.

Rudy sent me some material that showed a Russian Comic Strip of the time with the body on the ice, with the arms bound into the side - like a mummy - with rope.  You can see on the scene of crimes photographs that the torso was obviously bound in material and tied.  But unfortunately we don't have any pictures of his recovery from the Nevka, only ones of him lying on the ice when the material has been removed as has his fur coat.

Pity because the truth lies in the forensics and this is a big gap.

Richard

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 23, 2006, 08:26:27 AM
Richard, a thought for your pathologist friends. Does cold affect the time of rigor setting in? don't forget Rs body was mostly in the snow, outside, and in an unheated car (I've been in antique open cars with the canvas roof up, like Dmitris, and even with the canvas roof and isinglass side curtains in place, if its cold out, its cold in the car too...
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 23, 2006, 10:34:11 AM
(FA) Rob

I suppose we are falling into the trap of believing the story again because how do we know he spent anything but the shortest time in the snow?  equally the car issue is interesting because you refer to Dimitri's car as being a soft top, which comes back to teh question I ahve often raised on here, why change from P's car to D's.  P's was a soft top with the hood on; although Y says open?

To answer your question heat does affect rigor.  It will be slower in the cold and if a body is forzen rigor can set in after de frosting I will post the relevant bits later.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 23, 2006, 01:40:02 PM
As promised

'The Dundee University web-site usefully highlights research by Niderkorn’s in 1872 that observed the onset of rigor in 113 bodies.  In only two of the observations was rigor complete in 2 hours; in fourteen cases within 3 hours and thirty-one cases within 4 hours.

The site goes on to say that if the temperature is below 10 degrees centigrade it is exceptional for rigor mortis to develop, but if the environmental temperature is then raised, rigor mortis is said to develop in the normal manner.

The joints of fingers and toes are often markedly flexed during the development of rigor. '

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 26, 2006, 09:36:30 AM
Here are some pieces of letters to Zenaida Y. from her cousin, Anna Rodzianko, wife of Duma president Michael Rodzianko (Mischa in these letters). They show just how the nobility felt about Rasputin and what they believed of his influence on A and how they thought this was destroying the country. This is some more insight into reasons behind the plot to murder him.

All letters were found on this site, and date from 1916. I have taken parts concerning this subject out of several letters, this is NOT all one letter.

Everything - all appointments, changes, the fate of the Duma, the negotiations for peace, are in the hands of a mad German [the Empress] and of Rasputin, Vyroubova, Pitirin, and Protopopov. The abominable outburst of Markov [who abused Rodzianko, in the Duma] was paid for by Protopopov with the sum of 10,000 roubles.

.............

the interference of Alex. Feod. [the Empress] and Rasputin in affairs of State, of the whole country's hatred for both of them, of,the appalling condition of the State in all its departments, of the government's inactivity, and finally of the danger threatening the army and of the ever-increasing dissatisfaction among the ranks.

........................

Most people are afraid that Rasputin might hasten the conclusion of peace, regardless of the Allies, now that the official communique's suggesting peace negotiations with Germany and Austria have been published. Anything is possible. The French and English Ambassadors have complained to Misha that they find difficulty in obtaining audiences, and that Germany, with A. F.'s [the Empress's] complicity, is influencing the Tsar against the Allies.

...............

He [the Tsar] is completely browbeaten and incapable of doing anything, while she and her agent - the equally mad Pr[otopopov] - are ruining us all.

..................

I hope and pray that God may enlighten this unhappy man [the Tsar]. Samarin will speak in the same strain on behalf of the nobility, pointing out the harm which is being done by A. F. and her protege. Protopopov is quite mad and cannot possibly last for long; it seems to me that his encounter with Misha, and the fact that he quietly settled down after having insulted him, refusing to accept Misha's challenge or send his seconds, has lowered him in the Tsar's estimation. The Tsar laughed when Misha told him that he now thought himself justified in giving Protopopov a thrashing. But when mention was made of her [the Empress], he grew pale and silent. He is terrified of her, and without assistance he will not be able to save us from her pernicious influence.


..............

This one after his death

When Misha mentioned the words "forces of darkness" the Tsar said: "But there are none left now" - "No, but things have not improved generally." She [the Empress] visits the grave [of Rasputin] daily, and always finds it couverte d'ordures.



and as the revolution approaches. I can't believe they still believed in the German spy rumors!

The Composite Battalion is said to have left Tsarskoe, as it was found unreliable. There is even a rumour current that one of the officers shot at her [The Empress] and wounded her in the arm. The first Cavalry Guard Division, which had already been entrained for Tsarskoe, has declined the privilege of forming the Imperial Guard; the, Gvardeisky Equipage, "the Wild Division" and the Regiment of Cossacks have since been detailed to undertake the task. I have just had a visit from an officer at the front, who told me that the troops are more than ever incensed against both of them. On the Riga front it is openly said that she protects all German spies, whom the heads of the military departments, acting on her instructions, leave at large.






Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 26, 2006, 01:34:51 PM
Thank you, Annie, for posting those. It's odd how they mistrusted Rasputin because he wanted peace.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 26, 2006, 05:55:50 PM
Oh boy, now I'm thoroughly confused ! What on earth are you defending ?

Grishka, would you kindly enumerate if any, what you define of what you know of what 'peace filled ventures' Rasputin offered, who he was involved in and with, and to whom that you know of, and not just the ones Annie has just cited ?

Can you as well cite specifically why anyone at that time mistrusted Rasputin, and why for what particular reasons that you know of ? Why should he not have been mistrusted ?

I've known russian priests, and even they have stated, Rasputin was anything but what some have depicted him to be. They said Rasputin blackened the name of the priesthood.

To my knowledge, a good priest does not deflower women, drink to drunkness, go without cleansing themselves, etc. etc., in other words, priests are anything but that would impugn the good name of a cleric anywhere, most of all themselves. [My goodness, Rasputin was involved to that of sexual exploitation, to others, which even nowdays, here in America, people in the clergy with such actions are found out, expelled, and or jailed, the church fined]. In those days laws had not even been as yet established to counter such actions, let alone give comfort for the many whom were attacked, and victimized, etc. [For boys, girls, women, men !]

If one priest is involved in any one such issues as stated above, how could anyone feel respect for them, let alone, feel they had any 'peace filled intentions, short or long term' ? How do you think it leaves their victims, families, their communities. You read about how it affects people today. Just think how it must have been back then, where those were silenced even more by society, etc. !

These actions then or now, never invoke respect, and least of all leave any healthy human heart with a kindred feeling that these type of people are peace filled. What they have offered to any one person, let alone from representation of their community, is shame!

How can any person identifiably wanting to join, let alone lead their families to a church, or church official with this profile ?

Murder of course is not an answer for anyone. Do I feel that Rasputin should have been murdered, no. But, on the other hand, Rasputin should have not been left out to continue the debauchery he continued to do, under the guise of being a priest. His picture, his name should have been plastered round the globe to warn people of this sham of a man, who was a wolf in sheeps clothing asking for respectability. Makes my skin crawl just to think of this rogue !

Just my opinion, but then again, I'm quite sure, i'm not alone in my thinking about this man they called Rasputin.

Tatiana


Quote
Thank you, Annie, for posting those. It's odd how they mistrusted Rasputin because he wanted peace.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on January 26, 2006, 06:13:21 PM
Rasputin was not a priest. He had no Holy Orders whatsoever.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Grishka on January 27, 2006, 07:30:35 AM
Tania, I was simply commenting on what Annie had posted.

Quote
Most people are afraid that Rasputin might hasten the conclusion of peace, regardless of the Allies, now that the official communique's suggesting peace negotiations with Germany and Austria have been published. Anything is possible. The French and English Ambassadors have complained to Misha that they find difficulty in obtaining audiences, and that Germany, with A. F.'s [the Empress's] complicity, is influencing the Tsar against the Allies.


My contention that others in positions of power were much more dangerous to the welfare of the Russian people at that time has nothing at all to do with Rasputin's reported debaucheries.

No matter what people think, the story of the last Imperial family of Russia is not a fairytale and I refuse to put anyone into a cliched role of either a saint or a devil.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 27, 2006, 08:05:58 AM
He's right, Tania. That letter was written by the wife of the Duma president to Felix Y.'s mother. They really did see Rasputin as a bad influence on the government and one reason is that he wanted peace! That does sound strange that anyone would dislike him for trying to stop the war, but it's true. That's how the nobles and royals felt about it at the time, and this letter is proof of that attitude.

Rasputin never wanted the war and advised against it. He knew that millions of poor Russians would die, and it would be disasterous for the country. The rich wanted to go on fighting to victory and glory, but that was not coming, only the doom and revolution that did come. When Lenin took over, he stopped the war. If the Tsar had listened to Rasputin, the country would have been better off, and maybe the government would not have fallen.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 27, 2006, 01:40:38 PM
Hi

I think things are far more complex because the reference to 'Dark Forces' includes the Tsarita.  She was never really accepted by mnay Russians and her aloofness played into the hands of her opponents when the First World War started.  Her German origins left her open to speculation about which side she was on - Russia and the Entente or the Central Powers?

Rasputin had opposed the Russian war with Japan and the various Balkan conflicts.

The British Ambassador at the time noted that Rasputin supported Russian involvement once War was declared.  greg King is very firm that there is no REAL evidence that rasputin was working to negoitate a peace with Germany or that he was a spy.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 27, 2006, 02:47:16 PM
Spiridovitch also is firm, like Greg, about there being no evidence whatsoever that R was a German spy.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 27, 2006, 05:09:36 PM
After an enforced absence of nine days - because my computer link failed - I have been catching up with this fascinating topic.

Regarding the burial and exhumation of the corpse of Grigory Rasputin...   This was carried out by a rabble of red sailors and students who descended, in the dead of night, on the Alexander Park.    The Imperial Family were still under house arrest in the Alexander Palace.   By this time they were used to hearing the noise of roistering bolsheviks outwith the security of the walls of the Alexander Palace.  

On finding the church which Anna Vyroubova had been constructing in the depths of the Park, they dug up the grave, removed the coffin, opened the lid to find the icon, which had been signed by Alexandra and her daughters, lying with the corpse.   This icon has disappeared.   Rumour has it found its way to a private collection in the US.

The corpse was in a state of decomposition.   The red soldiers lifted it from the coffin using sticks.    The corpse was placed in a piano box and onto the back of the lorry.   It was taken to a building of Tsarskoe Selo.   (I cannot recall which building, but I will try to find out).

From Tsarskoe Selo the corpse was driven north of Petrograd, to a place called Pargolova, where it was incinerated right outside the house of Dr Badmaev.   The funeral pyre burned for hours.  

Rudy is correct, it is impossible to completely destroy a human body outwith a very controlled environment.

There is not a trace of Anna Vyroubova's hospital or church in the grounds of the Alexander Park.   It is impossible to imagine what took place not far from the peaceful, sylvan setting of the Llama Pond.   FA is absolutely correct.   The Orthodox Church does not want the place of Rasputin's burial to be known.   They are concerned it could, even now, become a focus for practitioners of the occult.   I know the place, and have photographs of its environs, but cannot not reveal it.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Tania+ on January 27, 2006, 05:20:21 PM
Welcome back Tsaria ! You were really missed. Don't ya just hate it when your computer goes banannas ? Sorry to hear the link failed.

Thanks again for helping us along on information regarding Rasputin's Murder. It's more than fascinating.

Nice to have you back dear lady !

Tatiana


Quote
After an enforced absence of nine days - because my computer link failed - I have been catching up with this fascinating topic.

Regarding the burial and exhumation of the corpse of Grigory Rasputin...   This was carried out by a rabble of red sailors and students who descended, in the dead of night, on the Alexander Park.    The Imperial Family were still under house arrest in the Alexander Palace.   By this time they were used to hearing the noise of roistering bolsheviks outwith the security of the walls of the Alexander Palace.  

On finding the church which Anna Vyroubova had been constructing in the depths of the Park, they dug up the grave, removed the coffin, opened the lid to find the icon, which had been signed by Alexandra and her daughters, lying with the corpse.   This icon has disappeared.   Rumour has it found its way to a private collection in the US.

The corpse was in a state of decomposition.   The red soldiers lifted it from the coffin using sticks.    The corpse was placed in a piano box and onto the back of the lorry.   It was taken to a building of Tsarskoe Selo.   (I cannot recall which building, but I will try to find out).

From Tsarskoe Selo the corpse was driven north of Petrograd, to a place called Pargolova, where it was incinerated right outside the house of Dr Badmaev.   The funeral pyre burned for hours.  

Rudy is correct, it is impossible to completely destroy a human body outwith a very controlled environment.

There is not a trace of Anna Vyroubova's hospital or church in the grounds of the Alexander Park.   It is impossible to imagine what took place not far from the peaceful, sylvan setting of the Llama Pond.   FA is absolutely correct.   The Orthodox Church does not want the place of Rasputin's burial to be known.   They are concerned it could, even now, become a focus for practioners of the occult.   I know the place, and have photographs of its environs, but cannot not reveal it.

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 28, 2006, 02:30:07 AM
Tsaria

A welcome back from me, we wondered what had happened to you.

I have received some more corrspondence regarding diving in Russia in 1916, it really is fascinating stuff and it appears that the Russians were quite well advanced with a diving school having been established at the nanal base in 1883.  At about this time they were experimenting with new equipment designed by the French to test it in cold weather (iced over) conditions.


Richard
Title: typo - naval base!Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 28, 2006, 02:31:05 AM
typo - 'naval' base
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 28, 2006, 05:11:49 AM
Thank you Tania and Richard for your warm welcomes.

A couple of points.   The correspondence between Felix and Irina without doubt indicates she knew something of his plans.   She wrote that she planned to return from the Crimea on either 12th or 13th December.   I cannot find any reason for her delay.   Therefore it would seem that Yusupov fully anticipated his wife would be at the Palace on the night of the 16th December.   Perhaps Yusupov's invitation to Rasputin to meet Irina, was based in fact and not just a ruse.   In Irina's absence, their plans went ahead.

According to the records of Diving School record, the body of Rasputin was not totally submerged.   Another indication of frenetic speed, fear and mismanagement.

Rasputin's corpse seems to have had almost as active and varied  a 'life' as it did as a live body!

tsaria

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 28, 2006, 08:42:46 AM
Tsaria

I need to get into the loft to find some copies of correspondence, but I know I have something that indicates she or their child (if she, the child, was born in December 1916 was ill (I can't recall whether it was Irina or the child who was ailing)  Shukotin's brother brough the letter, it may be one from Felix's mother, I just need to look around?

I think it is safe to assume that they presumed the body would float out to the Gulf of Finland and vanish for ever.  P's story of putting the chains in the fur coat is obviously false.

Had they moved a few metres towards the centre of the bridge their palns would have materilaised and R's body would have disappeared for ever.

Have you managed to get your friends (the forensic scientist and the ballistics expert) to join us for teh discussion?

Regards as ever

Richard

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Annie on January 28, 2006, 09:04:43 AM
Richard-

Felix and Irina's daughter was also named Irina. She was born in March 1915, and yes she was ill at the time. The letters you seek are on the AP time machine.

And if you make a typo, click  'modify' and you can fix it.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 28, 2006, 11:24:15 AM
Tsaria,
you wrote: “..the burial and exhumation of the corpse of Grigory Rasputin...  This was carried out by a rabble of red sailors and students who descended, in the dead of night, on the Alexander Park.” and “The corpse was in a state of decomposition. The red soldiers lifted it from the coffin using sticks. The corpse was placed in a piano box and onto the back of the lorry. It was taken to a building of Tsarskoe Selo. (I cannot recall which building, but I will try to find out). From Tsarskoe Selo the corpse was driven north of Petrograd, to a place called Pargolova, where it was incinerated right outside the house of Dr Badmaev. The funeral pyre burned for hours.”  

I do not know, what or who is your source.

Here is what Fuhrmann wrote (1990): ““The revolution settled accounts with Grigory Rasputin on March 9, 1917, the same day Nicholas rejoined his family at Tsarskoe Selo. At midnight a band of soldiers broke into the church under construction around his grave. They opened the coffin. The embalming of Rasputin’s body made it seem as if he were still alive, though the disfigured face made a fearsome sight.The soldiers stripped the dead man and “took measurements” of his penis with a brick. The body was brought to the imperial stables in Pargolov Forest just outside Petrograd, placed on a pine-log funeral pyre, drenched with gasoline, and set on fire. The cremation lasted over six hours, until 7 o’clock on the morning of March 10, 1917. Several hundred peasants crowded around, undeterred by the icy wind and fetid smoke. “Silent and motionless, they gazed in horror-stricken stupor at the sacrilegious holocaust ... slowly devouring the martyred starets ...”
The soldiers stole the icon and a metal that had been lovingly placed on Rasputin’s corpse. An American collector supposedly bought the icon for a large sum. The soldiers finally gathered Grigory’s ashes and buried them under the snow.”

Greg King wrote (1996): “Rasputin remained in his grave for less than three months. A week after the Revolution, in March 1917, a group of drunken soldiers broke into the unfinished church and disinterred the body. When the coffin was opened, Rasputin’s face had turned black and the body smelled horrible. The icon laid on Rasputin’s chest by the empress was stolen; subsequently, it was sold to an american collector. The soldiers apparently battered the rotting corpse and defecated on it. According to at least one source, the soldiers used a brick to measure Rasputin’s penis, which, if true, would disprove the castration story. [see Fuhrmann]. The men put the corpse into a packing case and transported it to the old imperial stables in the Pargolovo Forest nearby. A funeral pyre was hastily constructed out of pine logs and the body placed on it and drenched with gasoline, then set ablaze. For over six hours, the fire burned as groups of terrified peasants watched from the forest. When it was over, the soldiers gathered up what remained and buried it in the snow, casting the ashes into the icy wind. It all happened as Rasputin had once predicted: After his death, he said, his body would not be left in peace but burned and his remains carried away by the wind.”  

Please compare these texts, with the ones I published above, by Lagansky and Kupchinsky.
Just some details: Pargolovo lies north of St. Petersburg, not close to Tsarskoe Selo. I do not think the grave was opened “by a rabble of red sailors and students”. There were no “Imperial stables in Pargolov Forest”. And then those “six hours” in both stories, seems too reliable information. His body was transferred into a train wagon on a side-track in Tsarskoe Selo. And that the corpse was incinerated “right outside the house of Dr Badmaev” is not right. Badmaev died (1920) on Yaroslavsky Prospekt 85. Well, it is the same direction, not too far from Lesnoe, but still.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 28, 2006, 11:50:24 AM
Maybe it is good to quote here still another writer, Brian Moynahan: “Rasputin. The saint who sinned” 1997, who seems rather well informed:
“It was over. It took only a week for the revolution to obliterate the mortal remains of Grigory Rasputin. His body was exhumed on March 9 by members of an anti-aircraft battery stationed in the imperial park at Tsarskoye Selo. The task was overseen by an artillery officer, Klimov. Rasputin’s face was found to have turned black, and an icon was found on his chest. It bore the signatures of Vyrubova, Alexandra, and her four daughters. The body was put into a packing case that once held a piano and was driven in secret to the imperial stables in Petrograd. The next day it was loaded onto a truck and taken out of Petrograd on the Lesnoe Road.
Eight men were aboard the truck. Koupchinsky, a representative of the Duma provisional committee, which was emerging as the revolutionary government; V. Kolotsiev, a captain in the Sixteenth Lancer Regiment; and six student militiamen from the Petrograd Polytechnic. They signed an affidavit saying that they burned the body at the roadside near the forest of Pargolovo, “in the absolute absence of persons other than the signatories.”
It was, perhaps, inevitable that even this final accounting for Rasputin was untrue. Koupchinsky later admitted that he had been ordered by Alexander Kerensky, soon to be head of the new provisional government, to rebury the corpse at an unmarked spot in the countryside. But the truck broke down on the Lesnoe Road. A crowd gathered. They forced open the packing case looking for gold, and discovered the corpse. Koupchinsky decided to burn it on the spot. His men cut down trees for a pyre, doused the corpse in gasoline, and set fire to it by the roadside.
The ashes were lost to the wind and the mud.”

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on January 28, 2006, 12:17:45 PM
Rudy - I was uncertain whether it was sailors or soldiers.    Given the time, they were probably indistinguishible.

I will try to get hold of my sources.   I cannot remember if it originated when I was visiting Russia or whether I have references to it here.

I know Dr Badmaev's granddaughter.   She is a doctor (orthodox) in St Petersburg.  

Dr Badmaev's house, in those days, could well have been close by the 'forest of Pargolova' and that's is why it was identified as such.   Given the close associations between  Rasputin and Badmaev, this could fit.  

My understanding is that Rasputin's corpse was in a state of putrefaction, which does accord with one of your accounts.   To remove it from its coffin using sticks, would seem rather difficult.   This description was probably used to indicate that they avoided coming into physical contact with it - something which is extremely dangerous without adequate protection.   The mystical sense could also apply.  The corpse was taken, in the first instance, to a municipal building in Tsarskoe Selo.   Again, I will endeavour to locate my source.

Richard - We will be seeing those friends in approximately half an hour.   I will ask.

tsaria
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 28, 2006, 02:53:53 PM
Ah but I think 'sticks' might be in the translation and in fact my understanding (but I could be totally wrong) is that 'sticks' represents pieces of wood.  These could have easily have been used to lever a body that was 'going off' out of the coffin.  Pulling at limbs could have meant that bits would have fallen off!

Not the most pleasant of subjects.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 28, 2006, 03:00:31 PM
Rudy

The body was moved from the river in a case (not a coffin) if I remember some of the sources on this - one you posted I think.  I would have thought he would have been buried in a coffin, or in the box that he was moved from the river to the place of the autopsy in.

I don't have a clue about the rituals of the Russian Orthodox Church when it comes to burial.  Is it in a coffin or a shroud?

He was taken from the river in a 'box', if a coffin could not have been found for his burial I would have thought, maybe totally incorrectly that he would have been buried in that or a coffin, they did have two days to make one.

The suggestion that those who removed his body from the grave in a box might refer to the 'box' he had been buried in?

Do you know which Hilton you are staying in yet when you come to London?

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on January 28, 2006, 03:25:10 PM
In Greg Kings book we can read:
"When Empress Alexandra learned that Professor Kossorotov had taken it upon himself to conduct a postmortem examination, she gave orders that the investigation be stopped at once, saying, “Just leave the body of Gregory Efimovich Rasputin in peace”. [Minney]  Kossorotov’s findings thus remain incomplete.”
“The empress asked a nun named Sister Akulina to prepare the body for burial. She washed the corpse and dressed it in a white shroud. Finally, Rasputin’s body was placed in a plain, polished-oak coffin, purchased by Alexandra.”
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on January 28, 2006, 03:47:34 PM
Spiridovitch:
Three months passed after the assassination of the staryets. Revolutionary torment raged across Russia.  The Emperor abdicated.  The Imperial Family was imprisoned in the palace at Tsarskoe Selo.  In the unfinished chapelwhere Rasputin was interred, soldiers crunched through the snow.  A revolutionary came from Petrograd and gave the order to exhume the corpse.  The work was directed by the artillery officer Klimov, who had belonged to the canon battery, before the Emperor's abdication, which defended the Palace from aerial attack.

They found the coffin.  They opened it.  The face of the dead man had become completely black.  On his chest they found an icon of the Holy Mother bearing the signatures of: Alexandra, Olga,Tatiana, Marie, Anastasia. On the left it read: Novgorod 11 December 1916; on the right the signature "Anna". This was the icon which A.A. Vyroubova had brought to Rasputin on behalf of the Empress the day of his assassination.

The soldiers then engaged in sacreligious joking.  Officer Klimov asked the revolutionary to give him the icon so that he could take it to the commandant of Tsarskoe Selo, which he did.  The revolutionary then telephoned to Kerensky, at the Duma after they found the coffin. Kerensky gave the order to secretly bring the body to Petrograd.

The placed the coffin in a packing crate which had previously been used to ship a piano and, that night, they transferred the body to Petrograd, where it was hidden in the former Imperial Stables. On March 10 the packing crate was loaded onto a truck by a plenipoteniary delegate from the provisional Committe of the Duma, named Kuptchinsky, who accompanied a representative of the Petrograd Governor, one certain Kolotsyev and many students.  The truck left the city and set off in the direction of Lesnoe.  At Lesnoe they burned the body just off the main highway, about one half verst into the forest. They then wrote up the following oral affidavit:

Affidavit of the incineration of the body of Grigori Rasputin:
The undersigned declare to have together and in the presence of Captain Vladimir Pavlovich Kolostyev of the 16th Regiment of the Novoarkangelsk Lancers, representing the public governor of Petrograd, burned the body of the assassinated Grigori Rasputin, which had been brought in the automobile of Captain Petrovski Kuptchinsky, plenipotentiary delegate of the Provisional Committe of the Duma.  The incineration took place next to the main highway to Lesnoe, about one half verst into the forest, in the total absence of any other person other than the undersigned:
V. Kolotsyev, Captain of the 16th Regiment of the Novoarkanglesk Lancers, representative of the Public Governor of Petrograd
Kuptchinsky, plenipotentiary delegate of the Provisional Committe of the Duma
S. Bogatchev, N. Moklovich, M. Chabalin (and three other illegible signatures), militiamen, students of the Petrograd Polytechnic Institute.

"This affidavit has been prepared and sealed in my presence, and I certify the authenticity of the signatures. Karpov, on duty police.
(Krasnyi Ogoniok No.1)

Kuptchinsky later said that the burning of the body was for the simple reason following: He had received the order from Kerensky to rebury Rasputin's body somewhere far out in the countryside. While they were driving the packing crate with his companions, the car broke down and had to stop at Lesnoe. A crowd gathered, and men started to say that they had gold in the crate and demanded they open it.  They found the body.  Kuptchinsky decided that they had to burn the body. They cut down trees, built a bonfire which they set on fire after dousing it with gasoline.
(also cited to Krasnyi Ogoniok No. 1)
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on January 29, 2006, 04:15:43 PM
Please tell us what you now know Tsaria.

Arleen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: DavidP on February 18, 2006, 08:40:35 PM
I came across these quotes in "The Duff Cooper Diaries" by John Julius Norwich published in 2005. Duff Cooper was a diplomat and statesman. In 1917 he was working at the Foreign Office in London.
January 4 1917
"We have had at the Foreign Office such thrilling telegrams about the murder of Rasuptin. It appears to have been done by Felix Elston whom I used to know intimately at Oxford. It took place at a supper party in his palace. The telegrams read like pages from Italian Renaissance history."

December 6 1917
."..Eventually Bertie Stopforth drive me home. He is a notorious bugger and was very attentive to me, saying I looked younger than when he last saw me which was in Venice before the war. He has been in Russia for some time and talked to me about the murder of Rasputin. After Rasputin was dead, Felix Elston fell on the body and beat it. Felix told Stopforth this himself. He suspects that there had been some relationship between Felix and Rasputin."

September 11 1919
"...I met Felix Elston at lunch with Diana. I hadn't seen him for years. He seemed in no way altered by having murdered Rasputin-but rather sillier...."

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Arleen on February 19, 2006, 04:08:25 PM
That is so interesting David.....is there more anywhere?  

Arleen
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Chelsea on March 17, 2006, 11:35:18 PM
I recently watched a special on the Discovery Times channel, Rasputin: Marked for Murder, in which a retired Scotland Yard officer named Richard Cullen discovered that Rasputin was actually murdered by a British Secret Service officer named George Rayner.  Here is a 2004 article from mosnews.com with specifics of Cullen's research: http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/09/20/rasputmurder.shtml
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on March 18, 2006, 10:05:07 AM
ummm, Chelsea, perhaps you ought to read the entire thread first. If you had bothered, you would notice that Richard Cullen is a regular and honored user here and has given us all the benefit of his research here for some time now.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: dp5486 on March 28, 2006, 05:49:52 PM
A few months ago I was searching for information on Tesphe, the Abyssinian Negro valet of Felix's and came across a thread that mentioned he played a part (a small one setting up or serving the food for that night). After several searches I cannot find this thread. I was wondering if what I did read was true or not.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on March 29, 2006, 09:56:35 AM
I am afriad that is a piece of pure fantasy on someone's part.

Richard
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: dp5486 on March 29, 2006, 10:13:22 AM
Thank you. I had an idea that it probably wasn't true being that I couldn't find anything about but I just wanted to be sure.

Thanks again!
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on March 29, 2006, 10:36:17 AM
Although Felix does mention having a servant with that name, it was not in the Rasputin scenario at all.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on March 31, 2006, 02:04:10 AM
Oleg Shishkin, in his book "Rasputin. The history of a crime" (Moscow, 2004), analyzing the murder and possible murderers of Rasputin, writes (p.275): "There exists also a rather exotic version, as if the real murderer was the ethiopian servant of Felix. Prince Sergei Obolensky, a cousin of Felix, suggested, that the murderer could have been the moor Tesphi, bought by the Yusupovs in Egypt during their honeymoon. (Serge Obolensky: "One man in his time" New York, 1958, pp 229-230). He was known for his unusual strength and loyalty towards his master."
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: dp5486 on March 31, 2006, 12:36:40 PM
That must have been what I had read about. Tesphe's refusal to allow the Dowager Empress and her sister Queen Alexandra in to see Felix and Irina while they were in England during their honeymoon gave me a good laugh when I was reading Felix's memoirs!
Title: Dispeptic?
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on April 23, 2006, 12:54:55 AM
On Rasputin's page on IMDB, I saw something about him being dispeptic, which is why the poison did not work on him. What exactly does "dispeptic" mean, and what do you think?
Title: Re: Dispeptic?
Post by: Forum Admin on April 23, 2006, 08:56:35 AM
Dispeptic is an old fashioned term meaning you have heartburn, or your stomach produced too much acid. The theory is meaningless, since if you read the wonderful thread on Rasputin's murder, Richard Cullen has shown that while poison was purchased to be used, Rasputin never ingested any of it.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Sushismom on May 04, 2006, 10:54:01 AM
I agree that Alexandra knew about Rasputin's dark side. But, in addition to her perception of him helping her son, she never witnessed first-hand that dark side. Alexandra also believed that most of the aristocracy was out to get her and thus would refuse to believe what they had to say about Rasputin. Regardless, it's obvious that her most important concern was how Rasputin appeared to prevent Alexei from dying.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on August 20, 2006, 11:02:46 AM
And here we are ninety years on and still debating the murder of a rather strange individual.  I wonder had he not been murdered whether we would have been still interested in him as a character.

Do you realise but other than teh stories of Purishkevich and Yusupov both of whom are serial liars and a rather a bizarre short meoir from De Lazovert which is in total variance with the other stories the last time anyone saw Rasputin was at about 1.00am on 17 December 1916 when he left his flat.  The next time anyone sees him is when is body is recovered from the Malaya Nevka?

No one esle sees him, or no one that has told the story.  The possible sound of shots in the environs of the Yusupov Palace on the Moika.  Purishkevich's admission to Vlasuk that he and Felix had killed Rasputin.  But no forensic scene, no evidence from inside the palace, a trail of blood in the snow, but was it the trail of the killed dog's blood?

Interetsing really that all we have to rely on are two absolute liars.

Richard

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 20, 2006, 12:52:40 PM
Well, Richard, obviously someone saw him- his murderer.
 What I find interesting is that his murder should have been a wake-up call to Alexandra. Instead, it just pushed her trolley further off it's tracks. She became even more insular, her shell just hardened more.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Richard_Cullen on August 26, 2006, 02:04:52 AM
I agree his murderer or murderers but all we have is what Y and P say with some rather fringe rantings from Colonel the Dr De Lazovert.

R
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on August 26, 2006, 09:34:02 AM
Robert,

I think your assessment of Alexandra is a bit harsh on this point.  ie: trolley off the tracks further. Please remember several points. Alexandra was deeply religious, and believed that R. was a genuine Staryets.
Reports had been sent to the Emperor on FOUR occassions with respect to R. and his "behaviour".  Nicholas had every single one checked out independently, even the last one from Stolypin and found they were all either outright fabrications or gross exaggerations of the truth.  As a result, Alexandra was convinced, and I think "reasonably so" that there was a simple hate campaign against R. due to his closeness to the IF.
Most importantly, regardless of "HOW" it happened, the genuine fact remained that R. had a genuine healing effect on the Tsarevich when the best doctors in Europe threw up their hands and told Alexandra to prepare for her son's imminent demise. 

It was not an act of "insanity" or some mental defect when Alexandra mourned the death of R., nor was it "burying her head in the sand".  Rather, his murder was the final and "conclusive" proof in her mind that the anti-R. cabal was genuine and had succeded.  Don't forget, the same social circle that aided, abetted and encouraged R.'s murder also were calling for Alexandra's removal to a convent at this same time.  I myself would feel "hard" and anti-social in similar circumstances. Such comments are nothing more than "monday morning quarterbacking" without standing for a moment in Alexandra's shoes.

Alexandra may indeed have had some emotional issues, and anxiety attacks, however, she was not "crazy" by any means. There is a genuine logical and reasonable explanation for her actions and responses.

Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: ChristineM on August 26, 2006, 10:57:16 AM
Thank you FA.

tsaria
Title: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: vladm on May 23, 2007, 04:04:38 AM
I finally found some more or less reliable  information related to the guns and real info about shooters:
prince Youssopov shot 1st bullet from Browning pistol the 9 mm Model 1903

Purishkevich shot 4 total shots, 2 of them missed Rasputin, and 3rd shot hit his spine, and probably when Rasputin, turn he shot Rasputins forehead from 20 feet distance from pistol Savage model 1907/1915 .32 or .380 calibers


last two shots, am questioning because I think it could be prince Dimitry
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: vladm on May 23, 2007, 10:10:41 AM
I forgot to say, one more important part, in Russia, back than - beginning of XX century, as Revolver was referred all of the handguns.
I was puzzled myself, why Browning, was referred as Revolver, same story about Savage, last Savage revolver was made, during US Civil War, and I seriously doubt noble person in Russia would take that old gun for Rasputin hunt. Same story about Kosorotov, when he extracted bullet, he referred as Revolver bullet, again, during this time word pistol would not be adapted yet, I think until 1930th period of time.
Supporting my theory you can find even on this site, where princess Paley mention several time "Browning revolver":
http://www.alexanderpalace.org/memoriesrussia/chapter_XXXII.html (http://www.alexanderpalace.org/memoriesrussia/chapter_XXXII.html)
For your information Browning never produce revolvers, only pistols as handguns.
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: Bob_the_builder on May 23, 2007, 10:46:56 AM
I can't recall how to spell his name, but Purshkevick (?) after the execution ran to a guard who heard the shots and shouted. "I killed Rasputin!" If the British secret service was involved, wouldn't the guard have seen them??
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: vladm on May 23, 2007, 11:55:24 AM
I can't recall how to spell his name, but Purshkevick (?) after the execution ran to a guard who heard the shots and shouted. "I killed Rasputin!" If the British secret service was involved, wouldn't the guard have seen them??

I am not questioning involvement of British MI, it was very unlikely they participated in the event, I am questioning if prince Dimitry was part of the murder (final shooting), and now I have detail information about Youssopov's and Purishkevich guns  (probability for correct guns more than 75%).
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: Bob_the_builder on May 23, 2007, 03:30:43 PM
Sorry, I posted that in the wrong thread. I meant to post that in the "Who's responsible for Rasputin's death?" thread.
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: vladm on May 24, 2007, 05:42:26 PM
One more thoughts about guns and bullets. I know one person, who makes bullet's for guns herself (she like to shoot a lot), and because this is expensive "sport", she could go over 1000 rounds per weekend, making bullets she saves thousand dollars literally. Now, Savage, had Imperial metrics type of bullets, and I doubt it was freely available at the store, rather "special order". Purishkevich was not poor, but he could also make his bullets himself, because it was difficult to get, that could explain his poor performance, and stuck bullet in the liver of the Rasputin (20 feet away shot).
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: Belochka on May 24, 2007, 06:55:11 PM
... Purishkevich was not poor, but he could also make his bullets himself, because it was difficult to get, that could explain his poor performance, and stuck bullet in the liver of the Rasputin (20 feet away shot).

Sorry Vlad but I must disagree here. Since Puriskevich was offiicially issued with a weapon, it would have come with bullets!

Perhaps his "poor performance" only indicates that Puriskevich's marksmanship in the heat of the moment was less than ideal?

Margarita  ;)
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: vladm on May 24, 2007, 07:15:01 PM
... Purishkevich was not poor, but he could also make his bullets himself, because it was difficult to get, that could explain his poor performance, and stuck bullet in the liver of the Rasputin (20 feet away shot).

Sorry Vlad but I must disagree here. Since Puriskevich was officially issued with a weapon, it would have come with bullets!

  ;)

Margarita, we are talking about nobility of Russia, I doubt, they had a single gun, also according to this article: http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/pistols.htm (http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/pistols.htm), a lot of Russian officers did not have standard guns, and Purishkevich had Savage, or he may took Savage for the murder, because it was relatively small compared to others. Also, bullets for guns like that are not standard, so I believe, he had to get it from store by himself, or make it himself.
Title: Re: Rasputin's death could be from 2? shooters
Post by: Belochka on May 24, 2007, 07:27:13 PM
... Purishkevich was not poor, but he could also make his bullets himself, because it was difficult to get, that could explain his poor performance, and stuck bullet in the liver of the Rasputin (20 feet away shot).

Sorry Vlad but I must disagree here. Since Puriskevich was offiicially issued with a weapon, it would have come with bullets!

  ;)

Margarita, we are talking about reach nobility of Russia, I doubt, they had a single gun, also according to this article: http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/pistols.htm (http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/pistols.htm), a lot of Russian officers did not had standard guns, and Purishkevich had Savage, or he may took Savage for the murder, because it was relatively small compare to others. Also, bullets for guns like that are not standard, so I believe, he had to get it from store by himself, or make it himself.

I believe the article which you have kindly provided was more applicable to officers who were in the battle field. Puriskevich's circumstances were rather different.

BTW the Minister of Internal Afffairs, Khvostov had a Browning.

Margarita :)
Title: Real cause of death?
Post by: Katharine on June 13, 2007, 02:57:46 AM
So I'd always heard about the "accepted" Yusupov version of events - that he was poisoned and shot then dumped in the Neva and that despite all that the autopsy later revealed the actual cause of death was drowning.

But I just saw the Time Watch documentary yesterday whose conclusion is that whilst all that did occur, the actual cause of death was a gunshot to the centre of Rasputin's forehead which neither Yusupov nor Purishkevich mentioned or "took credit" for, caused by a British secret agent. And yet this documentary never mentioned the drowning ...

Was the drowning made up? Or did this documentary conveniantly ignore that in order to make their conclusion seem more plausible?
Title: Re: Real cause of death?
Post by: Forum Admin on June 13, 2007, 11:10:17 AM
The original autopsy has been put up several times here in the forum, go search for it. The original autopsy showed NO evidence of drowning, no evidence of poison. The original autopsy revealed the gunshots  were the cause of death. The rest is myth.

"There were three gun shot wounds.  The first bullet had penetrated in the left part of the chest and went through the stomach and liver; the second entered in the left part of the back and went through the kidneys; the third hit Rasputin in the face and penetrated into the skull.  The first two bullets hit the staryets standing, the third hit him when he was laid out on the ground.  The brain matter gave off an odor of alcohol.  In the stomach, the doctor found 20 tablespoons of a brownish liquid seeming to be alcohol.  The autopsy did not reveal the presence of poison." Spiridovitch "Raspoutine" pg.401-402.

and Courtesy of Richard Cullen, the original report itself:

'I, professor Kossorotov, declare that I have been to Fexamen and to the autopsy of Rasputin’s dead body, on 20th December 1916 at 10 o’clock in the evening, in the mortuary room of the Tchesma Hospice.  The body was recognised by his two daughters, his niece, his secretary and various witnesses.

The body is that of a man of about 50 years old, of medium size, dressed in blue embroidered hospital robe, which covers a white shirt.  His legs, in tall animal skin boots, are tied with a rope, and the same rope ties his wrists.  His dishevelled hair is light brown, as are his long moustache and beard, and it’s soaked with blood.  His mouth is half-open, his teeth clenched.  His face below his forehead is covered in blood.  His shirt too is also marked with blood.

There are three bullet wounds.

1)      the first has penetrated the left side of the chest and has gone through the stomach and the liver

2)      the second has entered into the right side of the back and gone through the kidney


3)      the third has hit the victim on the forehead and penetrated into his brain

Bullet analysis

The first two bullets hit the victim standing
The third bullet hit the victim while he was lying on the ground
The bullets came from different calibre revolvers

Examination of the Head

The cerebral matter gave off a strong smell of alcohol

Examination of the stomach

The stomach contains about twenty soup spoons of liquid smelling of alcohol.  The examination reveals no trace of poison

Wounds

His left side has a weeping wound, due to some sort of slicing object or a sword.
His right eye has come out of its cavity and falls down onto his face.  At the corner of the right eye the membrane is torn.
His right ear in hanging down and torn
His neck has a wound from some sort of rope tie
The victim’s face and body carry traces of blows given by a supple but hard object
His genitals have been crushed by the action of a similar object

Causes of death
•      Haemorrhage caused by a wound to the liver and the wound to the right kidney must have started the rapid decline of his strength.
•       In this case, he would have died in ten or twenty minutes. 
•      At the moment of death the deceased was in a state of drunkenness.  The first bullet passed through the stomach and the liver.  This mortal blow had been shot from a distance of 20 centimetres. 
•      The wound on the right side, made at nearly exactly the same time as the first, was also mortal; it passed through the right kidney. 
•      The victim, at the time of the murder, was standing.  When he was shot in the forehead, his body was already on the ground.

Title: Re: Real cause of death?
Post by: Belochka on June 13, 2007, 05:52:56 PM
Was the drowning made up?

Yes.

Margarita
Title: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Nomine on December 13, 2007, 03:46:12 PM
I am working on a certain paper on Rasputin and I think a lot about what happened the night he was killed. I came accross several questions I can't answer:

1) In this thread http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php/topic,9633.0.html an autopsy report is written. Where did it turn up, when so many authors considered to have been destroyed by bolshevicks? Why did't the authors simply take it as the most reliable evidence?

I personally believe it more then the theory he survived the shots, but to work with it, I need a precise description of the source. Where is the report available?
2) If it is true, how did it happen that the ropes around wrists of Grigorij were loosened?

Thank you for every opinion. Please, mention only reasonable ideas with reliable sources.
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Forum Admin on December 13, 2007, 04:22:59 PM
I have the autopsy report reproduced in "Les Dernieres Annees de la Cour a Tzarskoe Selo" by Gen. Spiridovitch.  The translation from French to English is mine.   I believe it is available elsewhere also,  I believe Belochka has a copy in Russian.

To my knowledge there are NO reliable sources indicating Rasputin was alive after the gunshots.  Further, modern forensic analysis of the gunshot wounds, as described in the autopsy and visible in the autopsy photos, indicates these shots, most particularly the execution style shot to the skull were fatal immediately.

The most likely theory for the ropes on the hands being "loose" was by the body being dragged by the hands and immersion in near freezing water.


Hope this helps.

Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Belochka on December 14, 2007, 05:13:33 AM
I have the autopsy report reproduced in "Les Dernieres Annees de la Cour a Tzarskoe Selo" by Gen. Spiridovitch.  The translation from French to English is mine.   I believe it is available elsewhere also,  I believe Belochka has a copy in Russian.

... The most likely theory for the ropes on the hands being "loose" was by the body being dragged by the hands and immersion in near freezing water.


I finally purchased the French edition!

Yes indeed I do have most of General Spiridovich's books in Russian.
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Nomine on December 14, 2007, 02:21:11 PM
Thanks so much for all the information!   ;)

Well, this task was set to me during the seminar of history at my school. (Or, honestly, I chose this topic myself 'cause I've been interested in Grigorij since I was twelve.) It has been a work for 2 years and I am supposed to finish it these days. I hoped to get valuable info during my stay in Petersburg, Tobolsk, Tyumen and Pokrovskoe, where I spent a month of this summer holidays...and I actually did (especially visiting the places where that all took place), but some questions still remain and I would like to write a report as unbiased as possible.
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Forum Admin on December 15, 2007, 11:00:15 AM
I believe the complete autopsy is actually in Gen. Spiridovitch's bio "Rasputine", and only bits are in "Les Dernieres Annees".  My bad. Sorry.
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Richard_Cullen on January 06, 2008, 04:07:20 AM
I am afraid there are NO fonts of knowledge when it comes to Rasputin's death.  There never can be unless further evidence becomes available and in particular the forensic examination of Felix's basement dining room - but that is not going to happen.  therefore it necessary to deal in the FACTS as we know them.

Some of those FACTS throw the stories of Purishkevich and Felix into complete doubt, in fact they were serial liars.  The forensic facts as we know them show there stories to be the lies they are.

I have been privileged to have access to some material others have not seen and have had the time to research and consider forensically (of the court) the evidence in respect of Rasputin's death.

Rob now has my 161 page paper on the subject which will be published on the web-site in due course.

Richard
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Belochka on January 06, 2008, 06:01:44 PM
... Some of those FACTS throw the stories of Purishkevich and Felix into complete doubt, in fcat they were serial liars.  The forensic facts as we know them show there stories to be the lies they are.

Rob now has my 161 page paper on the subject which will be published on the web-site in due course.

Richard

Hi Richard,

I shall look forward to your discussion regarding Rasputin's murder. Do you have any idea when Rob will be able to upload your paper?

Yusupov and Purishkevich may have been serial liars, but IMHO they also managed to squeeze in a few truths.

Best regards,

Margarita
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Forum Admin on January 07, 2008, 10:05:51 AM
It will be up in a day or two.  We celebrated Russian Christmas Eve yesterday and had a houseful of people all day, so I lost the weekend to cleaning and cooking and general revelry. 
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Belochka on January 07, 2008, 03:50:32 PM
It will be up in a day or two.  We celebrated Russian Christmas Eve yesterday and had a houseful of people all day, so I lost the weekend to cleaning and cooking and general revelry. 

Merry Orthodox Christmas to you FA!

Thanks for the good news, and enjoy the continuing celebrations today.

Best Wishes,

Margarita
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Arleen on January 14, 2008, 03:46:43 PM
Rob, will you tell us when Richard Cullens report is put up or will we just have to look for it?  Or is it up now?

I can hardly wait to read it, and thanks to Richard for sharing with us!

Arleen
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Forum Admin on January 14, 2008, 03:56:49 PM
Hi Arleen

I apologize for the delay.  I thought it was going to be an easy task to just copy text over. However, Richard's exhausitive Paper has some 40 plus photos and figures/maps.  Every image has to be downloaded, re-sized, and uploaded to our server.  I've gotten about half done, but it's time consuming.  Add that to the routine 4 hours a day I have to spend on the Forum, and trying to finish my translation of the 1912 Kremlin Guide, oh, and did I mention my "real world" job, the dogs, cats, laundry, etc etc....

I'll have it up as soon as I possibly can!
Rob
Title: Re: The death - revealing the truth
Post by: Arleen on January 14, 2008, 04:05:00 PM
You really are a busy guy Rob!! 

I understand and now you have really whet my appetite!  It sounds wonderful.....but I will be nice and patient, promise.....

Arleen

(I would love to see a picture of Lily she must be a beautiful Scotty by now.....)

Title: One more version of the murder
Post by: Annetta on March 17, 2009, 02:18:56 PM
Hi
does anybody has info about it?
it's widely discussed one wound found on the side of Rasputin's body. it was made by a sabre or other cold steel. who did it???
sacral murder by masons? but scholars say that masons didn't accomplish bloody offerings in the beginning of 20 cent.

some days ago i read an article. sounds fantastically. that wound was inflicted by Romanov's, Irina's brothers. the author quoted her letters where she retelled that story. he states that the murder took place not in the dinner room in Felix's apartament, but in Secretary room on his grandfather's living quater, on the staircase leading to princess's bedroom. the author suggestes that it was some kind of drinked company. after the murder killers were to compose some fairy tale to look better than it happened to them.
Title: Re: One more version of the murder
Post by: nena on March 23, 2009, 02:55:56 PM
Felix invited Irina to come at Petrograd in late 1916., but she didn't.  I have never heard it, or for even wound by bayonets. It is unlikely, for me.
Title: Re: One more version of the murder
Post by: Annetta on March 23, 2009, 03:59:53 PM
yes, she lived in the Crimea, that story is known from her letters. this's one of versions and the reason is that wound. it was documented by autopsy. only water in the lungs is disputable thing (was it or not). some gun shots could be referred to english spys or someone else.
but that cut is a real secret.
Title: Re: One more version of the murder
Post by: Forum Admin on March 23, 2009, 04:17:53 PM
There is no doubt about the water NOT being in his lungs. The autopsy report is clear on that issue, and if you use search you will find the complete autopsy report has been published in the forum several times before.
Title: Re: One more version of the murder
Post by: Annetta on March 24, 2009, 02:05:44 PM
i don't argue. but the official report was stolen in 1930th, the depiction of the corpse is known from a Kosorotov's comments on that case published in news paper.
the main point i interested in is a side wound
Title: Re: One more version of the murder
Post by: Forum Admin on March 24, 2009, 02:22:27 PM
The official report was not "stolen". Here is the English translation.  While there is a cut wound, it was certainly not fatal at all...



'I, professor Kossorotov, declare that I have been to Fexamen and to the autopsy of Rasputin’s dead body, on 20th December 1916 at 10 o’clock in the evening, in the mortuary room of the Tchesma Hospice.  The body was recognised by his two daughters, his niece, his secretary and various witnesses.

The body is that of a man of about 50 years old, of medium size, dressed in blue embroidered hospital robe, which covers a white shirt.  His legs, in tall animal skin boots, are tied with a rope, and the same rope ties his wrists.  His dishevelled hair is light brown, as are his long moustache and beard, and it’s soaked with blood.  His mouth is half-open, his teeth clenched.  His face below his forehead is covered in blood.  His shirt too is also marked with blood.

There are three bullet wounds.

1)      the first has penetrated the left side of the chest and has gone through the stomach and the liver

2)      the second has entered into the right side of the back and gone through the kidney


3)      the third has hit the victim on the forehead and penetrated into his brain

Bullet analysis

The first two bullets hit the victim standing
The third bullet hit the victim while he was lying on the ground
The bullets came from different calibre revolvers

Examination of the Head

The cerebral matter gave off a strong smell of alcohol

Examination of the stomach

The stomach contains about twenty soup spoons of liquid smelling of alcohol.  The examination reveals no trace of poison

Wounds

His left side has a weeping wound, due to some sort of slicing object or a sword.
His right eye has come out of its cavity and falls down onto his face.  At the corner of the right eye the membrane is torn.
His right ear in hanging down and torn
His neck has a wound from some sort of rope tie
The victim’s face and body carry traces of blows given by a supple but hard object
His genitals have been crushed by the action of a similar object

Causes of death
•      Haemorrhage caused by a wound to the liver and the wound to the right kidney must have started the rapid decline of his strength.
•       In this case, he would have died in ten or twenty minutes.
•      At the moment of death the deceased was in a state of drunkenness.  The first bullet passed through the stomach and the liver.  This mortal blow had been shot from a distance of 20 centimetres.
•      The wound on the right side, made at nearly exactly the same time as the first, was also mortal; it passed through the right kidney.
•      The victim, at the time of the murder, was standing.  When he was shot in the forehead, his body was already on the ground.
Title: Re: One more version of the murder
Post by: Annetta on March 24, 2009, 02:53:04 PM
thanks, but in russian articles and researches they said about "stolen official report" from archives of Military Medical Academy. widespread qoutes by Kosorotov's autopsy were published in the newspaper "Russian Will" (Russkaya volya). The surger was silent until new prime minister Kerensky had stopped the inquest after tsar's abdication. In conclusion, that info was not official, just remains of the phisian.
what about the side wound...yes, it was not fatal. but who did it??? some say - masons, i heard about Romanov's, Irina's brothers... maybe somebody knows more details about it
Title: Re: One more version of the murder
Post by: Forum Admin on March 24, 2009, 03:00:08 PM
Everything you could hope to know about the murder of Rasputin is on the main APTM site, if you had looked. Richard Cullen has done a complete examination of the murder and a modern  forensic analysis of the evidence.  I'm certain it will answer your questions. and NO, masons had nothing to do with it...

go here:
http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/Rasputinmurder.html
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: wox24 on December 10, 2009, 01:28:23 PM
I haven`t any article in the site http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/Rasputinmurder.html . Is it only my problem or informations were deleted?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Ally Kumari on December 16, 2009, 01:49:39 PM
I also cannot see anything.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Forum Admin on December 16, 2009, 05:42:32 PM
Apologies.  Richard Cullen contacted me just a few weeks ago, saying that he was having his paper published, in book form, but the publishers insisted we had to take down his paper on Rasputin's murder.  I of course removed it immediately, but forgot that these links were still here.

That should explain why you can no longer see the paper.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: mishaxenia on February 22, 2010, 07:04:37 AM
it is famous where was found again the body of Rasputin,  but which it is the exact place where was thrown thec body ? today is recognizable that exact point? thanks ,
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: nena on February 22, 2010, 07:26:42 AM
Do you mean, where exactly his body was thrown, or? It was a bridge, from what I have understood. Most likely it is famous place now , I may look into his biography for the name of the bridge, if that exists. Belochka would know for sure.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on February 22, 2010, 10:18:35 AM
Please use the "search" function for "Petrovsky bridge". This matter has been discussed in different threads many times before.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on February 22, 2010, 08:50:12 PM
it is famous where was found again the body of Rasputin,  but which it is the exact place where was thrown thec body ? today is recognizable that exact point? thanks ,

Wait until you can buy and read my upcoming book (to be published in April, 2010 by Gilbert's Royal Book). Everything will be revealed!

Further details about my book can be found here: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/ImperialRussian/news/rasputin.html

Do you mean, where exactly his body was thrown, or? It was a bridge, from what I have understood. Most likely it is famous place now , I may look into his biography for the name of the bridge, if that exists. Belochka would know for sure.

Many thanks for your kind vote of confidence Nena! Belochka and I approve!  :  )

Margarita Nelipa
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: LisaDavidson on March 11, 2010, 03:34:16 PM
it is famous where was found again the body of Rasputin,  but which it is the exact place where was thrown thec body ? today is recognizable that exact point? thanks ,

Wait until you can buy and read my upcoming book (to be published in April, 2010 by Gilbert's Royal Book). Everything will be revealed!

Further details about my book can be found here: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/ImperialRussian/news/rasputin.html

Do you mean, where exactly his body was thrown, or? It was a bridge, from what I have understood. Most likely it is famous place now , I may look into his biography for the name of the bridge, if that exists. Belochka would know for sure.

Many thanks for your kind vote of confidence Nena! Belochka and I approve!  :  )

Margarita Nelipa


Margarita - very good news! I will look forward to reading it. Is Paul sending out reader copies?
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on March 16, 2010, 05:04:40 AM

... Further details about my book can be found here: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/ImperialRussian/news/rasputin.html

Margarita - very good news! I will look forward to reading it. Is Paul sending out reader copies?

Thank you Lisa. Printed copies will be available for sale in several weeks time.

Regards,

Margarita
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: I.S. Graznichov on April 02, 2010, 12:01:34 PM
Greg- You mentioned in an earlier post that there were three men present at Rasputin's murder other than  Des Lasovert, Dimitri, Sohotkin and Felix. If we add Vera Karel and Marianne Defelden that makes ten. An equal number of men and women would be socially correct and total 16. As you probably know, according to Wilton, Correspondent for the Times [quoted below], they are all upstairs having a party when someone shoots out the second story window of the palace from inside. This is when the police come.
Do you have a theory how this episode fits what really happened?

"Report from Robert Wilton, written December 31, 1916
Confidential
[File under Wilton]
...
From the reports of the police investigators cited below and from other information obtained by reporters on the staff of the Novae Vremya, it would appear that about 2.30 at night Rasputin was told that he would have to die and he was given the option of committing suicide or being killed.
A revolver was placed in his hand, but he flatly declined to commit suicide and discharged the weapon some say in the direction of the Grand Duke Dimitri. The bullet smashed a pane of glass thereby attracting the attention of the police outside. ..."
 
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: I.S. Graznichov on September 06, 2010, 06:50:57 PM
Margarita-
Bought and read your book. Fascinating!
I would like to know more about the tunnels, in particular where they are and where they run.
Is there an entrance into the Prince's wing from the Palace?
Where does the outside "basement" door go. Where do you think the shattered glass fell from the shot?
Thanks
I.S. Graznichov
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Belochka on September 06, 2010, 08:52:12 PM
Margarita-
Bought and read your book. Fascinating!
I would like to know more about the tunnels, in particular where they are and where they run.
Is there an entrance into the Prince's wing from the Palace?
Where does the outside "basement" door go. Where do you think the shattered glass fell from the shot?
Thanks
I.S. Graznichov

Many thanks for purchasing my book and expressing your interest with my work. : )

I walked only part of the way through the tunnel system located under the Yusupov Palace. The section I did see led directly out from the basement area where Rasputin was 'entertained'. It was like a rabbit warren with secondary tunnels running off at various distances along the central one - to the right and left. At the time of my visit sections of the tunnel network was undergoing renovation and I was informed that it led to various parts of the building (see photos 39 and 39a).

The outside basement door opens out into the tiny courtyard (see police photo 1 and photos 26 and 26a).

My book does not say the glass pane was shattered at the time of the shooting. In fact I go into some detail explaining why that repaired window was not part of the first crime scene (see pp 250-252).

Best regards,

Margarita
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Alan on June 11, 2011, 09:01:17 AM
In the "Royal Russia" update there is a piece about Rasputin's murder. Last year when I was in St P. I went to the Yusopov Palace and wanted to see the murder rooms as well as the rest of the Palace. I was told that the murder rooms are only open on certain days and only to a Russian speaking group! What are they hiding or don't want non-Russians to know?
Comments invited.
Alan
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: aleksandr pavlovich on June 11, 2011, 11:35:22 AM
How interesting. I can't say that I read anything "sinister" into it.  Touring hours/accomodations, etc., at sites are always subject to revision. My plans are to be in St. Petersburg in the autumn and I will perhaps look into it.  Of course, I'll be with native Russian-speaking friends.   Regards,  AP.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Alan on June 11, 2011, 11:48:46 AM
Thanks. Please let us know what they tell you.
Alan
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: aleksandr pavlovich on June 11, 2011, 11:52:07 AM
My pleasure!    Regards,  AP.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Ena on June 11, 2011, 09:28:54 PM
In the "Royal Russia" update there is a piece about Rasputin's murder. Last year when I was in St P. I went to the Yusopov Palace and wanted to see the murder rooms as well as the rest of the Palace. I was told that the murder rooms are only open on certain days and only to a Russian speaking group! What are they hiding or don't want non-Russians to know?
Comments invited.
Alan
You have to hire an English speaking guide to see the murder rooms, unless you speak Russian.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: aleksandr pavlovich on June 11, 2011, 10:20:26 PM
Thanks. I see.  ".....unless you speak Russian." If that's all, then that will not be a problem.  Interestingly enough, the Yusupov Moika Palace has never been an item on the time that I have spent previously in St. Petersburg (all private travel, never a group tour).  I'll correct that this time, since we have already decided to strike Pushkin from the list as unnecessary. Thereafter, I will plan to be spending time more "provincially," hoping to delve into earlier history/sites, since my interest does not revolve around the era of the last emperor and empress.         AP.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: rudy3 on June 12, 2011, 02:58:44 AM
Don't expect too much of the Rasputin exhibition at the Yusupov Palace. It is a kind of Madame Tussauds: wax figures telling us a history. This version of history, as told by the tour guides of the exhibition,  you can read (in short) also on the Yusupov Palace website:

http://yusupov-palace.ru/rasputin_en.htm

Nothing new, more along the versions as described in Yusupov's and Purishkevich's memoirs, including, as you can read on the webpage, "a tremendous amount of cyanide". However, as we know, no trace of poison was found in the postmortem....

But, of course, interesting to see the place where the murder of Rasputin has been carried out, and therefor worth a visit.

Rudy
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Alan on June 12, 2011, 04:28:28 AM
Ena,
That part of the Moika Palace is only open when there is a Russian speaking guide. Your alternative could be to go with someone who speaks Russian and will translate for you afterwards.
As rudy3 says its a sort of Madame Tussauds. I went to a similar thing in the Peter and Paul Fortress. It was nobility, politians and the Imperial Family. I thought it looked tacky and regretted going in.
Alan
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Ena on June 17, 2011, 05:16:47 AM
Ena,
That part of the Moika Palace is only open when there is a Russian speaking guide. Your alternative could be to go with someone who speaks Russian and will translate for you afterwards.
As rudy3 says its a sort of Madame Tussauds. I went to a similar thing in the Peter and Paul Fortress. It was nobility, politians and the Imperial Family. I thought it looked tacky and regretted going in.
Alan
I know. I tried once to buy a ticket to get into the Russian tour, speaking the poorest, most non-existent Russian possible. Trust me, they weren't fooled. ;-P

I agree about it being a sort of Madame Tussauds.  I was never a fan of wax exhibits, but it would've been nice to be in the room for history's sake. :-) 
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Alixz on June 20, 2011, 04:19:18 PM
Why should they care if one speaks Russian or not?  The idea is to see the palace and the rooms and if one can't speak Russian one could still enjoy the tour.  At least I think so.
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Alan on June 20, 2011, 04:28:11 PM
Hi Alixz,
Thats what I thought but those are the rules and regs they adhere to, unfortunately,
Alan
Title: Re: Rasputin's Murder
Post by: Nictionary on September 19, 2015, 10:19:55 PM
I am a little confused about which song was played by the conspirators to simulate "Irina's party." Was it the traditional tune "Yankee Doodle" from the American Revolution, or was it George Cohan's 1904 hit "The Yankee Doodle Boy"?