Were There Any Survivors? Two Bodies are Missing!

[CorisCapnSkip]

Check out "The Love of the Marvellous and the Disbelief of the True" from the book "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds."  http://www.litrix.com/madraven/madne010.htm  Strange to say, it was omitted from every printed copy I could find of the book, so I printed it from the online copy because I find it so relevant every time I discuss historical controversies.

[AGRBear]

There were no survivors!

Despite all but unanimous agreement to this statement amongst the serious Russian Historians of the past 85 years, a small group of amateur historians or hobbyists find giving up the incorrect belief that there were one or more survivors, to be as difficult as giving up the use of addictive narcotics.

It is much better to be stubborn in the belief of a truth than stubborn in the belief of a lie.

David

David,  the fact that two bodies are missing is not a lie.

Can we agree on this?

AGRBear

 

[Robert_Hall]

What about-
They are NOT missing, they just have not been found yet ? [or at least what is left of them]

[David_Pritchard]

David,  the fact that two bodies are missing is not a lie.

Can we agree on this?

AGRBear

Bear,

This topic is about survivors. That you responded to my statements by using the word 'bodies' shows that even you are not so removed from the obvious reality that all the children were killed in 1918. This of course would mean that there were no survivors!  

If the present day unavailabilty of identified corpses were the indication that someone did not die when executed by the Bolsheviks, then how would we know that the four grand dukes executed in Peter and Paul Fortress in 1919, did not really escape to the isolated Himalayan Kingdom of Bhutan and become Buddhist monks?*

David


*I just created this new 'myth' for this post but it would seem just as plausable as all those created about the missing corpses of the two children.

[Robert_Hall]

Of course, the end of speculation would put some posters, with their endless posts, out of business...if only....

[AGRBear]

David,  the fact that two bodies are missing is not a lie.

Can we agree on this?

AGRBear

Bear,

This topic is about survivors. That you responded to my statements by using the word 'bodies' shows that even you are not so removed from the obvious reality that all the children were killed in 1918. This of course would mean that there were no survivors!  

If the present day unavailabilty of identified corpses were the indication that someone did not die when executed by the Bolsheviks, then how would we know that the four grand dukes executed in Peter and Paul Fortress in 1919, did not really escape to the isolated Himalayan Kingdom of Bhutan and become Buddhist monks?*

David


*I just created this new 'myth' for this post but it would seem just as plausable as all those created about the missing corpses of the two children.

My body is alive and well as I type this.

A body is a physical struture living or dead.

Let me see,  if someone opens a grave and pulls out a coffin and there is no body inside,  it means there is no body, living or dead, inside the coffin.  So,  the next step would be to find evidence as to why there is no body, living or dead, inside the coffin, or, in this case, a grave near the mass grave of nine others in Pig's Meadow.

I do not kown what happen to the bodies, living or dead, of the four Grand Dukes.   The Bolsheivks told us they executed them and placed them in a common grave.  Do we know for certain?  I don't know enough about this execution to make any farter comments.  

Creation of a "myth" is not my intent.  Asking questions and finding the truth is.

AGRBear

[AGRBear]

Of course, the end of speculation would put some posters, with their endless posts, out of business...if only....

I will continue to ask questions which incorporates a certain amount of "speculations" until we know what happen to Alexie and one of the grand duchesses.

So,  do we agree that two bodies are missing from the mass grave?

AGRBear

[David_Pritchard]

I think we can agree that two corpses that were said to be in the mass grave were either buried elsewhere or burnt along the way from the Ipatiev House to the mass grave. That written, I still be believe that there were no survivors!, as do most other sensible people. That you continue to ask the same questions in various forms day in and day out only makes you appear as an obcessive rather that a sleuth. Maybe you should purchase the most sensitive ground penetrating equipment and spend the next few years examining Pig's Meadow and the surrounding paths with your scientific team. This would at least be better that rephrasing all of the questions in a dozen different forms just to get back to the basic conclusion that the corpses have yet to be located.

David

[AGRBear]

I think we can agree that two corpses that were said to be in the mass grave were either buried elsewhere or burnt along the way from the Ipatiev House to the mass grave. That written, I still be believe that there were no survivors!, as do most other sensible people. That you continue to ask the same questions in various forms day in and day out only makes you appear as an obcessive rather that a sleuth. Maybe you should purchase the most sensitive ground penetrating equipment and spend the next few years examining Pig's Meadow and the surrounding paths with your scientific team. This would at least be better that rephrasing all of the questions in a dozen different forms just to get back to the basic conclusion that the corpses have yet to be located.

David

I will admit that I am "obsessive" about sleuthing for the truth and it doesn't depend upon the subject matter.

As for going to Russia to search for the remains,  I think there has been and still are enough people looking for the missing bodies with the "most sensitive ground penetrating equpment".  They don't need me.  Besides,  I am not convince there are remains of the missing two to find.

AGRBear

 

[LisaDavidson]

The issue seems to be that Bear is saying that because two bodies have not been found that there is a possibility of survivors. However, as a matter of law, the absence of a body does not necessarily preclude a murder conviction. Thus, the absence of remains in this case may still mean that everyone died that night or very soon thereafter.

And, David's point is well taken - no one has ever come forward and said they were one of the 4 grand dukes who were shot at the Fortress of Peter and Paul even though no remains of these gentlemen has ever been found. And, two of these grand dukes have living descendants today - and no one is saying that they are the offspring of one of the four who was heretofore unknown to us.

[Bev]

In other words, absence of evidence, isn't evidence of absence.  In a court of law, you present the "best evidence".  It would seem that in this case, you have eye-witness testimony, an established motive, means and opportunity.  You also have physical evidence that supports the claim that all members of the family were shot.  I believe the case could be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury.

[Annie]

Yes, people have been convicted of murder when no body was ever found.

Also no one ever claimed to be GD Michael the Tsar's brother, his body was never found, and he was next in line for the throne!

[J_Kendrick]

In other words, absence of evidence, isn't evidence of absence.  In a court of law, you present the "best evidence".  It would seem that in this case, you have eye-witness testimony, an established motive, means and opportunity.  You also have physical evidence that supports the claim that all members of the family were shot.  I believe the case could be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury.

You do have physical evidence that five of the seven Romanovs were shot at Ipatiev.  You do have physical evidence that four of the family's retainers were also shot at Ipatiev... but ...

You do not have any physical evidence at all that Alexei and his missing sister were killed at Ipatiev.

Washington has just required that the physical remains must be obtained and the DNA identification tests must be completed in order to prove that the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawri has been killed in Iraq.  The same will be necessary if that day ever comes for the positive identification of Osama Bin Laden.  

The case of the missing Romanovs is no different. The very same thing must also be required in order to confirm the suspected murders of those two missing members of the Russian Imperial family at Ipatiev.

The fact of the matter is, without that discovery of those two missing sets of mortal remains and without a postive DNA identification of those same missing mortal remains, you do *not* have any physical evidence at all to support your conjecture that Alexei and his sister had also been killed at Ipatiev.

This one fact alone is the only reason at all why Peter Sarandinaki's S.E.A.R.CH Foundation (Scientific Expedition to Account for the Romanov Children) now exists.  If there had been any actual physical proof at all of the two missing Romanov's deaths at Ipatiev then the formation of S.E.A.R.CH and the ongoing effort to find and rcover those very same missing remains would never have been necessary.

Here is the one piece of evidence which cannot be refuted:

"If the remains are those of the Romanovs then the STR and sex test data indicate that one of the princesses and the Tsarevitch Alexei were missing from the grave. This would support some historical accounts which would indicate that two bodies were either burned or buried separately. Alternatively, two individuals may have survived the massacre."

From the "Identification of the remains of the Romanov family by DNA analysis" by Peter Gill, Pavel L. Ivanov, et al.  NATURE GENETICS, page 131, Volume 6, February 1994.

JK

[JonC]

In other words, absence of evidence, isn't evidence of absence.  In a court of law, you present the "best evidence".  It would seem that in this case, you have eye-witness testimony, an established motive, means and opportunity.  You also have physical evidence that supports the claim that all members of the family were shot.  I believe the case could be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury.

You do have physical evidence that five of the seven Romanovs were shot at Ipatiev.  You do have physical evidence that four of the family's retainers were also shot at Ipatiev... but ...

You do not have any physical evidence at all that Alexei and his missing sister were killed at Ipatiev.

Washington has just required that the physical remains must be obtained and the DNA identification tests must be completed in order to prove that the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawri has been killed in Iraq.  The same will be necessary if that day ever comes for the positive identification of Osama Bin Laden.  

The case of the missing Romanovs is no different. The very same thing must also be required in order to confirm the suspected murders of those two missing members of the Russian Imperial family at Ipatiev.

The fact of the matter is, without that discovery of those two missing sets of mortal remains and without a postive DNA identification of those same missing mortal remains, you do *not* have any physical evidence at all to support your conjecture that Alexei and his sister had also been killed at Ipatiev.

This one fact alone is the only reason at all why Peter Sarandinaki's S.E.A.R.CH Foundation (Scientific Expedition to Account for the Romanov Children) now exists.  If there had been any actual physical proof at all of the two missing Romanov's deaths at Ipatiev then the formation of S.E.A.R.CH and the ongoing effort to find and rcover those very same missing remains would never have been necessary.

Here is the one piece of evidence which cannot be refuted:

"If the remains are those of the Romanovs then the STR and sex test data indicate that one of the princesses and the Tsarevitch Alexei were missing from the grave. This would support some historical accounts which would indicate that two bodies were either burned or buried separately. Alternatively, two individuals may have survived the massacre."

From the "Identification of the remains of the Romanov family by DNA analysis" by Peter Gill, Pavel L. Ivanov, et al.  NATURE GENETICS, page 131, Volume 6, February 1994.

JK

Hi Mr. Kendrick, thanks for your post, it was refreshing to read such sound logic from someone else. Besides Bear there are on this forum members who do seem to have clarity of vision and reasoning to come up with such a simple conclusion, i.e. no bodies therefor no conclusive evidence of death! Now, how hard is that?

For all those others there is still hope that one day you too will admit the same conclusion. I believe that will happen when, finally, the two missing will be found.

Now, Mr. Kendrick, tell Mr. Sarandinaki I have some clues for him and his SEARCH team to pursue. JonC.

[Bev]

The best evidence in this case is circumstantial and eyewitness.  In the first case, they found intimate objects known to have been on the persons' bodies:  the contents of the son's pocket, items customarily carried by him, the belt buckle worn by the father, rings and other jewelry, and most importantly, siix missing women with six different corset busks.  (And this is only a minute listing of physical evidence.)  As to eyewitness testimony, there are the statements of the person who arranged the murder, the statements of those who participated in the murder, and the statements of those who helped arrange the disposal of the bodies.  The primary in this case, Yorovsky, states that in disposal, a fire was first attempted, at which time two bodies were placed on it.  When that method was not satisfactory, they buried the two partially consumed bodies, put out the fire, put a layer of clay over it and then covered it with soil.  Evidence of fires were found by all investigators, including the most recent excavations at the site.  The other grave was found just as described in the statement - including broken vials of sulfuric acid and pieces of rope that had been used to drag them from the mine - exactly as Yorovsky said.

Now, were two people missing from the mass grave?  Of course, but that means only that two people were not in that grave, and it means nothing else.  It also is the best evidence that supports Yurovsky's statement and the statements of others.  

It would seem to me that combined with the physical and circumstantial evidence and the eyewitness testimony, that the reasonable conclusion is that all prisoners in that house perished that night.