Talk:Dnepropetrovsk maniacs/Archive 2

Suprunyuck and rape allegation

This news story from Segodnya is interesting. It says that in 2002 there was an incident involving Igor Suprunyuck at his school, which was described officially as bullying, but people at the school said that it was a rape. The incident led to Suprunyuck being moved to another school. Local residents said that if this incident had been handed over to the police, the 2007 killings would have been prevented. No charges were brought, and Suprunyuck's father was accused of using his influence to get the matter dropped.

There are some WP:BLP issues here, and Igor Suprunyuck would have been around fourteen at the time, which seems young for a rape allegation. Nevertheless, the incident shows that Suprunyuck's behaviour was causing concern long before the 2007 wave of killings. Here is a new picture showing Igor Suprunyuck in court, with his father Vladimir and Igor Sayenko on the right.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Another strange case

Just found this recent news item [1], it contains images of a girl posing with dead animals (The images in question are gruesome), the article also mentions the murders in Dneproeptrovsk, I'm somewhat confused as to if these cases are related or not.

--TardisShell (talk) 11:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Saw this on Google News earlier this week, but decided not to mention it. The images are disturbing, and are not directly related to this case. They apparently show a female medical student posing with a dog that had been dissected as part of an experiment on a veterinary course at college. The photos were posted on a social networking site, and caused a row which has picked up a lot of coverage in the Russian language media. Incidentally, it is hard to imagine British or American news websites showing photos like this.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up, the way the article mentions the Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs put me under the impression that she had killed the animals herself.

Yes, I find it ironic how the article shows the same images that were posted on her social networking page, considering the controversy that it caused which the article is mainly about. Indeed I don't think any western media outlet would get away with showing images of that nature, just like the courtroom video which shows images taken by the suspects that were shown on Ukrainian TV, I can't picture BBC News showing images of the culprits flipping off the corpse of one of their victims (Assuming that was one of the victims that Suprunyuk was flipping off). --TardisShell (talk) 11:28, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The dog was apparently a road accident victim and was dead by the time it was dissected. However, the rat was killed for the photos, leading to a row. If my translation of this article (content caution) is OK, the female in the photo is 19 year old Anna Dyachuk. The case prompted comparison with the Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs due to the cavalier attitude of the participants in the photographs. It seems that Dyachuk was asked to leave the veterinary course after these photos were published. Ms Dyachuk was a student at this university in Kiev (no graphic content, just a description of the university, in English).--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Article update and appeal court hearing

The part about the appeal was removed, because the wording had become misleading. What the source said was (in Ukrainian): "23 червня Верховний Суд розглядатиме касаційне оскарження." (A cassation appeal will be heard in the Supreme Court on 23 June). That was back in June and nothing has been heard since. It is unclear if the hearing took place, or was delayed, or what the outcome was, so it has been removed for the time being.

One news article that did mention the case was here on 29 August. On 27 August a seven months pregnant woman was stabbed to death in Kotovka, leading to rumours that the Maniacs were on the loose again.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

It's Dnipropetrovsk maniacs

Cause this city is called Dnipropetrovsk. Ogomemnon (talk) 20:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

This has been discussed before. The article uses the most common spelling found in the English language coverage per WP:COMMONNAME.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:09, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Illogic use of bureaucracy, if we should use WP:COMMONNAME the city name in this article should be Dnipropetrovsk (the most common spelling found in the English language coverage of the city) and the name of the criminals Dnepropetrovsk maniacs (the most common spelling found in the English language coverage of the crime). — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 18:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

It's not ideal to have the article about the city spelled Dni and the article about the crime spelled Dne. However, this is the way things worked out, as a Google search shows that the Dne spelling is the standard one for the crime. Incidentally, Google Translate uses the Dne spelling.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:05, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

one of my edits keeps getting deleted

I wrote 'RIP Sergei Yatzenko 1959 - 2007' in the article and it keeps gettign removed, why? I think it is disrespectful not to. --90.207.182.19 (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Because this is an encyclopedia, and articles should be factual and from a neutral point of view. Writing a statement of personal feelings, i.e. expressing your greif and respect for a person, is not what an encyclopedia is for. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 16:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Latest news on the appeal

At last, some news on the appeal, pending since June, in this article from 30 September. The Supreme Court of Ukraine has referred the case back to the Dnepropetrovsk regional court of appeal. The article also mentions that one of the videos was leaked to the Internet (Один из видеороликов попал в интернет) and that the court described the motive as "unhealthy self-assertion" ( «болезненное самоутверждение», still wondering how best to translate this into English).--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

It will be interesting to see what happens when the appeal is heard on 5 October. The parents of Suprunyuck and Sayenko were unhappy with some aspects of the police investigation, particularly the way that the interrogations and forensic evidence were handled. What they have not said in any of the current newspaper articles is that all of the photos and videos were faked. This was arguably the key aspect of the case, and unless Judge Ivan Senchenko's ruling that the videos and photos were genuine was overturned, it is hard to see an acquittal.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

There is a YouTube video from the Novi Most press conference (only 10 seconds long) in which Igor Sayenko protests his son's innocence, while sitting next to Vladimir Suprunyuck. It can be watched here. Not really enough new information to put this in the article.

In this Novi Most article, Igor Sayenko says at the October press conference that there was a cover up because the nephew of Nadezhda Deeva was involved. Nadezhda Deeva is the former governor of the Dnepropetrovsk region, and there is a profile of her here [2]. This runs into some WP:BLP issues, and it may be best to see what the court rules at the appeal.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I noticed in the related articles on the Novi Most site that the killers are referred to as the "Dnepropetrovsk Hammers". Is this the epithet they are known by in Ukraine, or is it just a cock-up in the Google translation? PCLM (talk) 08:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Caitlin Moran's Times article

On 12 January 2009, Caitlin Moran wrote an article in The Times about her reaction to the Yatzenko video. It was here, but is now producing a 404 error and has probably been removed/expired from the site. This is a nuisance, as it is one of the few substantial appearances of the case in the English language media. However, an archive copy can be found here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

The article appears to be back online now. PCLM (talk) 08:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

It is definitely giving a 404 error for me, and has for some time. The only other possibility is that it is available in some countries only.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Would some sort of ban on the page in other countries produce a 404 error, though? I would have thought there'd be some other error, or that the page just wouldn't load. I checked it again just now and it worked, and then I tried it through a proxy server which cloaks my IP address with an American one and it worked again. Not sure if that proves anything haha. Have you tried accessing it from a different browser/PC/location? Maybe a library or an internet café, or a friend's computer? It's a strange problem, I don't think I've encountered it before (not 404s, but two people accessing the same page and one getting through while the other gets a 404, using the exact same URL at more or less the same time). PCLM (talk) 11:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

The page is still definitely a 404 at my location, even after using a proxy. It would be wrong to remove the link as a citation if other people can still access it, but it is hard to speculate on why it shows up for some people and not others. However, there are ways round this type of problem, so I submitted the page to WebCite and it is now available here as well. I'll also test the page on some other computers when available.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you by any chance use Opera? I also get frequent 404s from Timesonline using Opera but it seems to work OK in Firefox. Peculiar one. Blorg (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The problem is possibly related to the Opera browser. A bigger worry is that The Times has talked about going to subscription only for its online content [3], which is one reason why the Caitlin Moran article was uploaded to WebCite.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Igor Sayenko image

I don't see why the picture of Igor Sayenko is blurred when this page has links to news articles and video reports where his face can clearly be seen. Also any more images that relate to the case would also be an impovement to this article. Thanks.

--TardisShell (talk) 16:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

This was added a long time back and it is a bit odd. However, I am loathe to add any new images to the article as there are enough images requiring fair use rationales already, and it is best not to set off arguments about the image tagging. It would have to be a non-free image.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Small Question About Guns and Blonde "Co-Conspirators"

In the archive of this talk page there is mention of the alleged co-conspirator, Danila or Dmitriy Kozlov, and how he allegedly sold Suprunyuck a gun. Then there are photos of Suprunyuck and Sayenko posing for photographs with guns (presumably taking turns with the same one). Could these things be related? I know that the gun in the photographs is thought to be a BB gun, but there isn't much information about the one sold to Suprunyuck by Kozlov - could that one be a BB gun? I can't imagine it getting a mention if it was just a BB gun, and if it was a genuine gun is it possible that this is the one seen in the photographs? The identification of it as being a BB gun doesn't seem concrete from what I've read. PCLM (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

The Kozlov angle is another of the puzzles in the case. It is mentioned in this article but does not figure heavily elsewhere. The gun photos shown at the trial [4][5] are interesting because Suprunyuck and Sayenko appear to be considerably younger in them. It is unclear whether they ever owned a "real" gun as opposed to a BB gun, and none of the media reports describe the victims as being shot. The Kozlov angle was used by the defence to support the conspiracy version of events, but there is not much more to say than what is already known.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

It's certainly interesting. Just to be clear, I wasn't implying that a gun was ever used in the attacks, but I thought that if the story about the alleged co-conspirator selling a gun to one of the accused in some way gives the conspiracy slant more weight then these photographs perhaps corroborate that claim. But as you say, there's not much more that can be learned from the scant information at hand. PCLM (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

This is what the article at [6] says about the guns: "О том, что парни "созрели" для самых бесчеловечных преступлений, свидетельствовали и кадры видеосъемки, показанные в одном из последних судебных заседаний. Пытки, которым подвергся в гараже крошечный белый котенок, друзья снимали в мельчайших подробностях: как сколачивали из двух брусков крест, прибивали жалобно мяукающее существо за лапки гвоздями, расстреливали его из двух пистолетов, а чтобы не орал, залили рот монтажной пеной и клеем. Смотреть на это было просто невыносимо. Многие присутствующие вышли из зала, а отец Игоря, бывший летчик, сидел с глазами, полными слез. Но парни на экране хохотали и весело матерились, комментируя мучения своей жертвы."

It is not clear from this what type the guns were. Also, it appears to say that the kitten was silenced with foam and glue in its mouth rather than duct tape as the article currently says. Any comments on the translation appreciated here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Where was the duct tape mentioned first? It seems like there are some major differences between various news articles about what is contained in the videos, and this issue about what was used to silence the cat is a good example of that. The article from which you got the glue and foam information also describes a video in which the pair of killers attack a man on a bicycle with metal pipes, a hammer, a screwdriver and a knife, and that there was someone else's torso visible or reflected on the car, indicating that there was perhaps a third killer/accomplice. It also mentions a mobile phone video showing a woman being kicked (which seems to fit in with the quote I mentioned in the above section, "Great kick!"). There are a lot of loose ends here, namely how many videos are there and is the one we've seen truncated/edited? It doesn't look like we'll find out any time soon. PCLM (talk) 20:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

The only detailed citation that I could find for the kitten torture video was the one given above, [7] and this is why there were concerns over whether the duct tape reference was accurate. Some discrepancies between the news reports are inevitable (eg the Daewoo Lanos has been described as dark blue or green) but I was tempted to change the duct tape phrase because it does not seem to be sourced elsewhere. Likewise, the Russian passage above does not specify BB guns, only pistols. It does seem likely that there were air pistols rather than real guns, but the translation could be better here. The other points are puzzles, and as you point out, it would help if the information could be cross referenced to other articles.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Appeal and life sentences

Not being an expert on Ukrainian law, it is unclear how life sentences work in that country. None of the reports have the court specifying a minimum time in prison, which would happen in some countries. It is also unclear if the courts specified life without the possibility of parole, which would be unusual for defendants who were nineteen years old at the time of the crimes. It would be useful for the article to have some more detail here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I dont like this article

I think it gives Ukraine a bad reputation, I am not from ukraine but I think it's a bad name for ukrainians, it makes their country look violent and unprotected. --90.207.85.113 (talk) 14:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, can't agree here. Following this logic, the Manson murders would make the USA look bad, or the Moors murders would make the UK look bad. The article has gone to great lengths to stick to the facts as they were reported in mainstream media sources, and is not intended to make Ukraine look bad.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, this is not a holiday brochure. This article covers grim events that happen to have occured in Ukraine and in no way do these murderers or any other murderers in Ukraine represent the entire nation as a whole. As stated above, the USA & UK are known for having a much higher death rate mainly related to gun crime or knife crime etc. Unfortunately there are some rather ignorant people who will come across this article and assume that Ukraine is a horrible place, I visted Lviv and other parts of western Ukraine in August last year and I can very well say that from what I saw it was much more pleasant than certain parts of the UK.

--TardisShell (talk) 19:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Questions About Sergei Yatzenko's Murder Video

I've been reading some of the translated articles relating to Yatzenko's murder, and there are details about the murder which I haven't read in the main Wikipedia article or elsewhere, and which don't appear to correspond with the events captured in the video. For instance, the following article discusses a knife being used to cut off one of his ears and to cut his throat (and even his belly):

http://www.facts.kiev.ua/archive/2009-02-27/94631/index.html

It also mentions that the camera clearly captures "Saenko", but the video in fact shows Suprunyuck, with Sayenko/Saenko always behind the camera.

Is this description of the same man/murder? Are the details just muddled somewhat (such as confusing a knife with a screwdriver), or have we misidentified Yatzenko as the victim in this clip? I think the cutting off of an ear is the main question here; the others can probably be dismissed as confusion about the details of a grainy, low-quality video, but stating that an ear is cut off is a pretty specific thing and don't recall anyone else interpreting the facial torture in that way. Is it possible that the video on the internet has had its original length truncated? That would explain a lot. The misidentification of Sayenko remains puzzling, though, unless there is indeed a longer version which shows him. At the end of the clip the killers return to the body for a "photo-shoot", so it's possible that these events took place at that stage. PCLM (talk) 12:57, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

It is possible that there has been some confusion over the videos. Segodnya says that on 29 October 2008, the court was shown the photo and video material.[8] It says that 300 photographs and videos were shown to the court: "На заседании в среду судьям представили около 300 кошмарных фотографий и видеозаписи измывательств над жертвами, которые изъяли у парней." It does not say how many videos, and this is where the confusion may have arisen. The kitten torture video is one, and the Blik article at [9] describes the Yatzenko video, which is also in the Wikipedia article. In the Yatzenko video, Sayenko is never seen, and his ear is not cut off. Also, the only weapons seen in the video are a hammer and screwdriver. This means that the Wikipedia article is correct about the contents of the Yatzenko video, although it is possible that a) the court was shown other videos not mentioned, b) the Yatzenko video has been edited (unlikely, as the two attackers run back to the car at the end, showing that this was the end of the attack) or c) the newspapers themselves have become confused. The Fakti i Kommentari article [10] is in broad agreement, and says that three videos were shown to the court. If this is the case, we do not know what the third one contained, as only the contents of the kitten and Yatzenko videos are known in detail.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

The end of the clip isn't necessarily the end of the attack, given that we know the killers returned to the body immediately after the clip ends. The last words spoken by Suprunyuck in the video are something to the effect of "let's get a picture", and the following photograph proves that they did just that:

WARNING: This image contains graphic violence; it shows the corpse of Yatzenko with the killer crouching next to him, posing for the photograph.

I uploaded the pic to two places in case the image is removed:

Source 1: http://i37.tinypic.com/29waa7a.jpg

Source 2: http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/6823/suprunyuckposingwithvic.jpg

Knowing that the killers went back to the body of Yatzenko it's not unlikely that they could have inflicted further damage to him, namely removing an ear and slashing his throat/stomach with a knife (if that even happened at all - I'm just illustrating the fact that they had an opportunity to do so outside of the time-frame of the video clip). The use of a knife is actually mentioned by the killers during the attack, so they had one with them and were at least willing to use it (consult the transcript for more info). It's also not entirely clear that the victim is indeed dead by the time they leave him during the video, so perhaps on returning for a picture they decided to finish the job with a knife. Again, this is just speculation by way of showing that the ear removal and other damage mentioned in the Kiev article could well have occurred post-video.

In case there is any doubt about when the photograph was taken, you can clearly see that Yatzenko's face and stomach have been damaged severely, and given that we see his face "unharmed" from the beginning of the clip and that there are no pauses for photographs during the attack, the photo must have been taken after, which is supported by Suprunyuck's comment at the end of the video.

I had read about the fact that there were at least 2 videos, one of which shows the torture of the cat with BB guns, which is why I was confused about the Yatzenko clip and the description of it in the Kiev article - I assumed that there was either another clip with more or less the same "killer M.O." which wouldn't be unusual for serial killers, or that the clip we know about here was edited. On a side note, I think the lack of footage of the rest of the murders goes some way towards debunking the claim that the killers were motivated by a desire to reap rewards for snuff movies! PCLM (talk) 18:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

An additional thought: the killers are known to have removed the foetus from a pregnant woman's womb [presumably] with a knife, so there is evidence to support that knives were used in conjunction with objects designed to inflict blunt force trauma. They were "tooled up" in this way for at least two of the murders, namely Yatzenko's (as evidenced by the conversation between the killers and its transcript) and the pregnant woman's. PCLM (talk) 20:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, there are several points that need to be cleared up here:

• Where does this image come from? Does it come from a web page with text describing it, because it does not appear to be from any of the current citations in the article.
• There seems little doubt that it is genuine, as it closely matches the contents of the Yatzenko video, which is very grainy and blurred due to being shot on a mobile phone. This image is of much better quality, and may (WP:OR) be a still image taken by the same mobile phone camera that took the video.
• In the bottom right hand corner of the picture there is some red text which is very small. It says "20 blurred-07 19:16". According to the other sources, the murder of Sergei Yatzenko was on 12 July 2007. Was this stamp added by the camera, or was it added afterwards?

Without more detail, it is hard to know what to make of this photo.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 21:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I got the image from a gore forum (one of those pinnacles of research!). Here is the post in question, although you need to be logged in to access it:

http://www.ogrishforum.com/showpost.php?p=3740511&postcount=1133 [Shows images of graphic violence when logged in]

I don't know where they got it from, or if the timestamp was added after the fact, and subsequent posts in the thread don't ask for more information. As I understand it 4 days passed before Yatzenko's body was found, so the possible time-frame in which the photograph could have been taken must be a maximum of 3 or 4 days, which still leaves a discrepancy between the timestamp on the image and the date of the event. I see no reason to doubt the authenticity of the image (no more than I can doubt the authenticity of the video) and as such I think it shows conclusively that the end of the video clip is not the end of the killers' time with Sergei. PCLM (talk) 22:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there any usable text with the photo? Unfortunately I can't log in to the page at the moment. The photo seems to have been taken at the same time as the attack, because a) Suprunyuck is wearing the same clothes as he is in the video and b) Yatzenko appears as he does in the video, with no signs of decomposition due to the heat when his body was found four days later. Apart from the gore content, this falls short of being a reliable source, although there is little doubt that the photo is genuine.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 23:39, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Good news, I found the original source of the image. Well, I didn't, but I went a few posts up from where I found it in the gore thread and someone had posted a link. Not sure how I didn't see it before now. Anyway, here it is:

WARNING: Contains an image of Suprunyuck posing with the mutilated corpse of Yatzenko, and also images of animal torture.

http://www.blik.ua/content/view/12906/39/

Google Translated Version: [11]

There's an interesting image of Sayenko's father/lawyer closing his eyes in horror as the footage is played in court.

The other images in this article shot by the killers don't have timestamps, which indicates one of three things (as far as I can tell). First, the timestamp option could be switched on or off and they had it on for the photo with Sergei, and they could very well have punched in the wrong date or were using the untweaked factory-set date that came with the phone/camera, which is wrong a lot of the time depending on the model/brand. Second, they were using more than one phone/camera. Third, the images are cropped and as such the timestamp section isn't visible. I'm sure the defence team would opt for a fourth alternative - that the discrepancy between the timestamps and dates of the murders are further proof of a cover-up or frame-up, and the defendants are actually quoted saying as much in the photo caption.

The article - in its translated state - is a little confusing, as one would imagine. There is a paragraph discussing a video which was playing in court, and it showed "The next movie recreated the murder scene of men. He is beaten with a hammer on the head, cutting the throat and cut open his stomach. Video is accompanied by the cheerful cries of: 'to strive for it,' Great kick." This indicates to me that there is at least one other murder video, or that the video we have seen is edited/truncated. I don't think it's a case of editing, because the photo of Suprunyuck posing with Sergei doesn't show that his stomach or throat is slashed, so if it is indeed discussing the Yatzenko murder then they must have started filming again after the photograph was taken, at which point a knife was used. Do we know the details about any of the other murders of older men? Specifically related to a knife being used in the ways described by the article? If there is another victim whose demise fits in with the description there is clearly another video, and if not Yatzenko's murder video is longer or in two halves. PCLM (talk) 12:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help on this. It is no surprise that the material came from the Ukrainian tabloid Blik, because this was the only Ukrainian media source that discussed the photo and video material openly, eg in this article which also contains disturbing content. This also helps to explain why Judge Ivan Senchenko said at the trial "Столь явная ложь вывела из равновесия даже невозмутимого судью Ивана Сенченко. "Вы думаете, вас слепые судят? - не выдержал он. - Так мы на вас уже насмотрелись и анфас, и в профиль... " [12] "This blatant lie disturbed even the imperturbable Judge Ivan Senchenko. 'Do you think that you are blind? This is unsustainable. We have already seen enough of you in full face and in profile...'"

Only the contents of the Yatzenko and kitten videos are known, although other material may have been shown to the court. Yatzenko's throat is not cut in the infamous Internet video, although other video material depicting events of this kind may exist. Some puzzles remain here, but the description of the Yatzenko video in the article remains accurate.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realise that Blik was considered a tabloid, and as such I think it's reasonable to consider the possibility that they simply screwed up the information, or accidentally ended up melding information from different murders together. For instance, it wouldn't be surprising to me if someone who saw the video in court, in shock and subjected to grainy video footage, misidentified the screwdriver as a knife and the throat cutting as the facial torture (and the stomach stabbing as "slashing the stomach"). Perhaps the killers did indeed use a knife on other victims (we know they must have done so with the pregnant victim) and the accounts of these murders worked in some way to "muddy" the account of the Yatzenko video. This is pure speculation again, but it's difficult to reconcile the Blik account with the video we've seen without doing so, at least at this stage.

The Wikipedia article's description of the murder video is spot-on, and this has never been contested, but I think we are left with a huge question mark regarding what happened after it. The photo of Suprunyuck posing with Yatzenko's body opens the door to any number of possibilities, for the simple reason that we know they returned to the body after the video ended. I really wish the Western media would cover this story; I'm sure if they did we might have an easier time piecing together this information, although your work and the work of others on this article has been stellar! PCLM (talk) 14:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

At around the six minute mark in the Yatzenko video, a train horn is heard, and an approaching train drowns out all the other sounds for a few moments. This seems to disturb the attackers in the woods, and they run back to their car parked by the roadside (a Daewoo Lanos as described in the media reports). It is possible that a few moments later, Suprunyuck and Sayenko went back into the woods next to the road to take this photo (disturbing content). This would fit in with Suprunyuck's known pattern of wanting "trophy pictures" of things that he had done. Without a more detailed account of how the evidence was presented in court on 29 October 2008, some of this is going to remain as original research. It is a pity that the English language media has not covered the case, although there was a mention here when Ukraine and England played a World Cup qualifier in Dnepropetrovsk a few weeks back.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know about that Daily Mail article, thanks for that. I think it's a little unfortunate that the murders are only mentioned in passing in an article about football hooliganism! My mother reads a lot of those murder detective magazines, which cover real murder trials and stories, and I've been keeping my eye out for a mention of the Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs. Sensationalist rags like these will surely jump at the chance to cover a story like this, but no luck so far. That said, I'm not sure how much more information I'm expecting them to provide. PCLM (talk) 15:34, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Through a rough translation the camera man questions if Yatzenko is actually dead or not while walking back to the car, one of them could have slit his throat as a safe measure to make sure that he was dead after the camera stopped rolling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.178.41.127 (talk) 17:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

At 5:48, the video says something like взять нож (take a knife), but a knife is not used in the video. At this point, the camera shows Yatzenko on the ground, and the attackers have just been disturbed by the passing train. Much of the dialogue is distorted and hard to understand. On the way back to the car, the attackers express surprise that the victim is still alive, and Suprunyuck says at the end "Viktor, we need a photograph with him... turn off the video camera, let's get a photo." This may be the photograph here (disturbing content).--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Is this legal?

I was searching for this wikiarticle but I accidently clicked on Encyclopedia Dramatica article titled "3guys1hammer". I'm surprised that the site displays portions of the video in form of GIF animations without any warning. They also put a stopmotion pics edited in a way that sick people find humouristic. If anyone is a registered user please edit it out of the article. It's not OK to put such content without any warning.78.131.137.50 (talk) 02:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no control over Encyclopedia Dramatica, which treats this case with its customary lack of taste. As for the legality, I am not a lawyer, but websites hosting shock content are often based in the United States in order to receive First Amendment protection that they might not get elsewhere. 3guys1Hammer has become one of the main ways for people to hear about this case, and people should be advised that the article on ED contains clips from the Yatzenko video.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

It is highly unlikely for Encyclopedia Dramatica to include warnings for any of their articles, given that most users of the site tend to consist of sick basement dwellers or immature pre-teens, as Ianmacm has stated above; whatever goes on at ED is by no means associated with Wikipedia. --TardisShell (talk) 19:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank You guys for replies. There is a wikiarticle on Encyclopedia Dramatica which describes the site merely as "satirical" :|so I started a thread on discussion panel where I'd like You to express Your opinions. I've already got 4(-1 vandalism) responses critical of my propostion to include information about gore content.78.131.137.50 (talk) 20:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank You for joining in. If it wasn't for You I would discuss only with "ED" -registered editors patrolling the article, who prefer to decribe the site as family fun place, for some reason :)78.131.137.50 (talk) 13:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

On a further note Encyclopedia Dramatica does not only contain images of the attack but also a few links to websites that host the video.124.178.41.127 (talk) 17:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Hitler photographs

The person posing as Hitler in the dead dog photo appears to be Suprunyuck, but the image may have been photoshopped in some way. The black and white image is in a newspaper article here, and contains disturbing content. There is another photo of Suprunyuck posing as Hitler (in colour) in this article. Suprunyuck added captions to some of the photos, notably the one that read "в гробу, я всех вижу... " (I hate all of you...).--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

"в гробу, я всех вижу " actual translation is "in the grave, I see everyone" > just thought to clarify. L.

This was discussed at Talk:Dnepropetrovsk_maniacs/Archive_1#In_a_coffin.2C_I_see_all.... This is a Russian figure of speech, meaning "I show contempt for all of you".

lol don't mind me..I left Russia when I was 6 so I never ended up being exposed to expressions like this. I just took it as literally. I should have read the previous discussion on this subject. sorry about that.

Americanisms

Fifth grades and Eighth grades I believe to be Americanisms. Most people from other countries will not know what these phrases equate to in terms of child age. Can we not just state their ages so it's something we will all understand?

Alexander Hanzha dead?

I recently came across a video where Alexander Hanzha (the guy who did not kill anybody) is beat up really badly. I assumed it was just Ukrainian Police beating him up.. but for some reason there are several places saying that he died in jail?? Mind you, I haven't found anything Legit saying this but I'm just wondering where this idea came from? Has anybody heard anything about it? Wouldn't there be some sort of Russian/Ukrainian news coverage saying that he died? I can read Russian but I don't really know where to look. My computer is English language based so I can only type with English script in search engines. Does that make sense? I'm thinking the whole "dying in jail" thing might be to make people be interested in the website posting the video... but I just really want to know if it has any truth to it? If Hanzha died in jail, I think that would be pretty significant to the article. But like I said, I have no idea if he died.. and personally, I really hope he's still alive. So yeah, sorry I'm new to this thing so please be patient :) Okay, thanks.

If Hanzha had died in prison it would probably have received some Russian language media coverage. A recent Google news search on Александр Ганжа is bringing up nothing [13], and there has been no substantial media coverage of the case since the appeal court ruling in November 2009. So it seems unlikely that he has died. Do you have a link to the video where he is beaten up?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

After some looking around, I managed to find this video. It is on a shock site, so the link will not be given here. A non-graphic still from the video can be found here. The person in the video does not speak, and the dialogue in the background in indistinct unless anyone can make sense of it. It is hard to say with 100% certainty that the person in the video is Hanzha, although his face is showing clear signs of bruising. There is also another link with a forum thread claiming that Hanzha is dead, but a registration is required to view it. Shock sites and forums are not a reliable source, but it cannot be ruled out that this is a genuine video taken during the questioning of Hanzha.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for checking up on it. I think you're right - something more legit would have mentioned it. Take care :) I was reading this and Vladimir Supruyuck talks about how there is a video clip taken of Hanzha all beaten up . Apparently there were two parts and they were sold for 20гривен. (http://www.segodnya.ua/interview/10041462.html). Lenachka25 (talk) 11:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The quote is "Игоря держали в ИВС 21 день, а должны были от 3 до 10 суток. Не для того ли, чтобы скрыть побои? В СИЗО с ними не принимают! Вот снятая кем-то из милиционеров на мобилку видеозапись, где зафиксированы издевательства над Ганжой (показывает). Каждая из двух частей была продана за 20 гривен" It may be that this is the video that shows Hanzha with the bruised face, but it is hard to be sure from the report. Thanks for finding this.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Friendship Ties Correction

I was going through all the links/sources at the bottom of the article and something stuck out to me. Twice it is mentioned that Alexander Hanzha was friends with Igor Supruyuck in school, but not Viktor Sayenko. Right now the article says that Hanzha and Sayenko were lifelong friends etc. There are two sources contradicting this :

An interview with Sayenko's father. It's in Russian,the interviewer asks if the kids were all friends and he replies: " My son was never friends with Hanzha- only with Suprunyuck. But Suprunyuck was friends with Hanzha. Although they did all go to school together." (http://gorod.dp.ua/news/news.php?id=10600)

Then there is the boys' school teacher Natalya Leonidovna who says : "In school Sasha (Hanzha) was friends with Igor, but with Viktor he didn't even communicate. However, what happened to the boys after they finished school I don't know, and can't answer that." (http://www.segodnya.ua/news/324349.html)

The sources are number 36. and 29. at the bottom of the article. So could somebody find a way to change that? I don't really feel comfortable enough editing/deleting parts of the article because I haven't learned yet how to do it properly. To be honest, I think the correction is important because after reading it, my perception of the three of them changed. It's a whole different dynamic. Lenachka25 (talk) 08:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The relationship between the boys is one of a number of areas where the sources are confusing. The court found that all three participated together in some of the robberies and animal cruelty, but the hammer attacks were the work of Suprunyuck and Saenko only; Hanzha was not involved here. On the question of their relationship at School 63, the evidence is largely from the recollection of other people. The wording in the article is not substantially incorrect, but has been changed to avoid making misleading statements not supported by the sources.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

This article from Segodnya has a couple of developments worth mentioning. Most of it is about how the parents say their children were framed, and are planning an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. It also mentions that a Chilean documentary team has made a film about the case. Viktor Pertsev, a local resident, claims to have been the victim of a hammer attack by Suprunyuck and Sayenko on the evening of 25 June 2007, but did not go to the police until after the killers were arrested. He says that two women from a nearby barber's shop called for help and scared away the attackers. Pertsev says that he was struck on the head, and still has memory problems.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Found out some more about the television documentary in this Ukrainian language article. It was made for Red Televisiva Megavisión of Chile, is 70 minutes long, and due to be shown in August or September this year. Not sure if this is notable enough for the article, but it would be interesting to watch this if it could be found on the Internet after transmission.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey :) Thanks for the update..I read the article and it mentioned something I have been curious about for a loooong time so yeah. Lenachka25 (talk) 09:03, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Ian, from what I can gather from reading the translated articles the Chilean documentary team have looked into the claims that 40 videos were made/to be made for the purposes of resale. Is this possibility still being treated as plausible by some? As I understand it the court dismissed it. It's difficult to ascertain anything concrete from Google-translated pages, unfortunately. PCLM (talk) 13:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

The snuff film angle was denied by Ivan Stupak, the regional security chief who headed the investigation. In this citation from the article (Locals believe Maniacs' motive could have been sale of films) he is quoted as saying "Ступак подтвердил, что убийцы снимали видео, убивая своих жертв, однако версию о том, что они делали это для продажи, опроверг: «Подтверждения фактов связи подозреваемых с заказчиками подобного видео через Интернет пока нет." (Stupak confirmed that the killers had made videos showing the murder of their victims, but denied reports that the videos were made to be sold. "The claim that the suspects had customers on the Internet for the videos is unconfirmed at the moment.")

The existence of commercially produced snuff films is usually dismissed as an urban legend, with this Snopes article looking at the claim and finding it to be false. Since Suprunyuck's grinning face is seen clearly in the Yatzenko video, it is hard to imagine him staying free for long with the video available for sale. All the signs point to the video being leaked like the photographs in the Nikki Catsouras photographs controversy. Nevertheless, it is possible that Suprunyuck boasted about making this type of video to his friends, leading to the stories about snuff films.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

The question I asked was whether or not people (namely the Chilean documentary crew) are still giving the idea that the killers were aiming to get rich from their murder videos any credence, not if snuff films are said to exist. I wrote in my question that the claim was dismissed by those involved with the case, which I accept. That said, using Snopes' own definition of "snuff" it's clear that the videos produced by the Maniacs qualify as such; they recorded them in order to provide themselves with entertainment at a later date. That is, if we accept the broader definition of the term to include private entrainment as opposed to commercial distribution the videos are indeed "snuff films". But that's neither here nor there; does the documentary team believe it to be the case? It's hard to tell from the translated article, but the snuff angle was definitely mentioned in it at one point. PCLM (talk) 02:51, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

It is hard to be specific about the Chilean TV documentary because it has not been transmitted yet. The story about the Chilean documentary is also here in Russian, but appears to be the same as the Ukrainian version. The final part says "Первое время после поимки обвиняемых в СМИ со ссылкой на правоохранителей прошла информация о том, что некий гражданин США пообещал крупную сумму за совершенные и записанные на видео убийства. Всего их должно было быть 40." (At the time of the arrests, it was reported that law enforcement officers had been told that a citizen of the United States had promised a large sum of money for murders committed and recorded on video, which had to be 40 in all.) This appears to be based on the report cited in the article at Lowlifes planned 40 murders. According to this citation, Igor Suprunyuck told a girl "We are going to be rich when we kill 40 people!" ("Мы разбогатеем, когда убьём сорок человек!") This is something that has been reported in connection with the case, but the police and court rejected this version of events. Maybe it was just idle boasting, but it does give another angle to the case. It would be interesting to see the finished Chilean documentary, but this will be difficult unless someone uploads it to YouTube or a similar site.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Well if you guys end up watching it online, could you send me the link to it? I'm kinda wary of it, alot of documentaries turn these kinds of things into like "dun dun dun" events and unknowingly glamorize it but oh well...Chile...that's pretty random *_* Lenachka25 (talk) 17:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

The Chilean documentary was transmitted on August 2, 2010. Mapcho (talk) 18:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I have been trying to watch the Chilean documentary at http://beta.mega.cl/programas/aev/capitulos/Último-capitulo-de-aqui-en-vivo-los-maniacos-del-martillo.html but it keeps freezing and buffering. The documentary is called "Aquí en Vivo: 'Los maníacos del martillo'" ("Here Live: The Hammer Maniacs") The description is "Sea testigo de cómo dos asesinos en serie matan y graban sus homicidios en cámara. (Witness how two serial killers record their murders on camera)"--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:14, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Here is a screenshot from the documentary showing a very young Igor Suprunyuck with his parents: [14] Still trying to watch the whole documentary, which has rare photos and videos of the killers. Any help welcome here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:49, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Here's a direct link which can be downloaded and watched without buffering, although the download rate is abysmal:

http://190.96.79.62/video/2010/08/03/aqui_en_vivo_03_07_2070_maniacos_martillo_web_640x480_HQ.mp4

Can you confirm whether or not the documentary contains the murder video(s)? I'm hoping to avoid seeing that material again, but I'm eager to watch the documentary.

Cheers for this Ian! PCLM (talk) 00:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

With the version on the Megavisión website, I was able to watch only the first ten minutes because it kept freezing (it is around 1 hour 25 minutes long). It has clips from the Yatzenko video, but they have been blurred. Here is another screenshot, showing Suprunyuck in front of a computer: [15] I am trying to download the video at the moment, but it is 872MB and the connection is snail slow. Better late than never, though, as from what I have seen so far, the documentary has numerous photos and video clips from the case that have never been seen before.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm so desperate to see this, especially now that it is known to contain never before seen material, but the download rate and the fact that it contains Yatzenko's video (albeit blurred but presumably with the audio playing?) might just put me off haha. I look forward to any upcoming edits in light of this new material. PCLM (talk) 14:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I fell asleep last night after watching like 3 second bits of it...it was pretty annoying :( Ah well - I'll try again when I get home...my computer stalled on the closeup of Suprunyuck - all I could see was that NOSE of his - I'm going to have nightmares now *_* Lenachka25 (talk) 17:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Chilean documentary

On Monday 2 August 2010, the Chilean television channel Red Televisiva Megavisión broadcast a documentary about the case. It was 1 hour and 25 minutes long, and was notable for including photo and video material from the case that had never been shown publicly before.

It would take too long to describe everything in detail, so I have put together a zip file of screenshots and commentary from the documentary which can be downloaded here (18MB). There is no graphic material in this file, it is mostly previously unseen images of Suprunyuck and Sayenko. The most important aspect of the documentary is that the makers obtained a longer version of the Yatzenko murder video. It shows a period of around half an hour preceding the murder, during which Suprunyuck and Sayenko stand by the roadside next to their taxi, waiting for a victim to arrive, and discussing what they are going to do. Eventually Sergei Yatzenko arrives on a pedal bicycle (not a motorcycle, the article may need a rewrite here) and is knocked off the bicycle before the attack takes place. During this period, the faces of Suprunyuck and Sayenko can be seen clearly.

The article will probably need a full section about the Chilean documentary, and it would be helpful if someone fluent in Spanish could produce a transcript. However, the images and video that were used in the documentary are a key new source of material.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on this. The confirmation that the Yatzenko murder video exists in a longer form helps clear up some of the lingering questions concerning the news coverage which described a video showing a man on a bicycle being attacked; I assumed there had to be a second video given that we previously believed Yatzenko was on a motorbike when he was murdered. PCLM (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The part about Yatzenko being on a motorcycle comes from this article, which may have got confused somewhere along the way. Yatzenko was definitely on a pedal bicycle when he was attacked, although he may have been doing something with the motorcycle earlier in the day.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Found this Facebook page with a 30 second video trailer for the documentary. Unlike the show itself, this video played without freezing. Also some comment about the documentary on the Aquí en Vivo Facebook page here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

New section on the Chilean documentary

Managed to get round to adding this at last. Also, there is a 320 x 240px WMV version of the documentary (282MB) available for download here. This will allow the material added to the article to be checked, and it would also help if someone fluent in Spanish could produce a transcript. The part about Yatzenko's Dnepr motorcycle was tweaked after a look at the source, although there is still a confusing gap as to why he turned up on a pedal bicycle before the attack. The documentary also confirms that it was Alexander Hanzha with a bruised face in the image here, so this has been added to the article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:40, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the alternative download link Ian! I just read the latest edits to the main article; very good work, as usual. I still can't figure out what the deal is with Yatzenko's bicycle/motorcycle. He's obviously on a bicycle when he's attacked, so how did his abandoned motorcycle help the family find his body as described in the news reports? And how did the killers get their hands on it in order to dump it in the river? Very strange. PCLM (talk) 19:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm still scratching my head about how the Dnepr motorcycle became involved, but have had to accept the sourcing of the story that mentions it. The source says "12 июля Сергей после обеда решил заправить старенький мотоцикл "Днепр". " (On the afternoon of 12 July, Sergei decided to fill the tank of an old Dnepr motorcycle). Police searched for the motorcycle when Yatzenko was reported missing, and a witness reported seeing an abandoned motorcycle on July 13. When Yatzenko's family heard this, they went to the scene, but the motorcycle was gone except for fragments of headlights in the road (Когда этот случайный свидетель привез родных Сергея к посадке, мотоцикла уже не было - только осколки фар на дороге.) This is what the source says, and it leads to a clear problem in squaring it with Yatzenko being knocked off a pedal bicycle before the murder attack. I have to admit defeat here, since the Fakti story is the only one to describe Yatzenko's death in detail. Any other thoughts welcome here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that's weird. mototsikal...viloseped...two different words for two different things. Oh yes, and I also want to say thank you for the link - I was finally able to watch it from beginning to end. I was a bit disappointed with the overall documentary but oh well - it was cool to see more pics of them other than the ones that were already available. I wonder if somebody could translate the Spanish speaking into English and write it out just for us to read? That would be really awesome although I don't know anybody who would be willing to do that in their free time. Once again, thanks for the link Ian :))) Lenachka25 (talk) 13:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I just had a look at the report which mentions Yatzenko's motorcycle; it's from August 2007, which was very close to the time of the actual killings. It's plausible that at that early stage information about different murders may have been merged together accidentally, or that the information was simply wrong. With no corroborating reports about Yatzenko's motorcycle, and with several of the reports describing the video which shows a man on a bicycle being attacked (and indeed with the video of this itself), I think we can safely dismiss it. I'm not sure what the policy on this sort of thing is, because we can't really go around second-guessing legitimate media reports, but in this case the information has to be wrong, because video evidence proves it to be.

Ian, when I was watching the documentary I saw a clip of one of the killers searching through the pockets of the victim. Did this happen in the Yatzenko video which was released to the internet in 2008? I also thought I saw evidence of a knife being used, and a gaping stomach wound from apparent cutting (as opposed to the stab wounds caused by the screwdriver). The wound I'm referring to was shown during one of the documentary's video edits (you know, where the screen goes all fuzzy) but you can make it out quite clearly. I've uploaded three screenshots:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EAI2LEL9 [WARNING: CONTAINS IMAGES OF GRAPHIC VIOLENCE]

The first screenshot could just be the screwdriver, but it resembles the pocket knife we see Suprunyuck posing with in another photograph during the documentary. The second and third screenshots show Yatzenko's torso with what appears to be a massive, gaping stomach wound. It looks like it has straight edges, suggesting a blade was used. If I'm seeing what I think I'm seeing, and if this video footage was shot after the end of the clip which was leaked to the net, then it corroborates the reports I had mentioned a few months back which discuss video footage showing stomach slashing, throat cutting and ear removal. The killers, upon returning to the body to take photographs of themselves giving a Nazi salute over Yatzenko's corpse, would have to have started recording again. I think this could be cleared up when we get an English transcript of the documentary, but the photos I've uploaded seem to suggest that this is the case. PCLM (talk) 14:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Something similar to this was asked before at Talk:Dnepropetrovsk_maniacs/Archive_2#Questions_About_Sergei_Yatzenko.27s_Murder_Video. To the best of my knowledge when looking at the video (a while since), the only weapons used in the attack on Yatzenko are a hammer and a screwdriver. Nothing like a knife appears to be used, although given the poor quality of the video it is hard to be sure. Part of the dialogue (5:48) appears to be Suprunyuck saying "take the knife" (взять нож) but it is muffled. Yatzenko is definitely poked in the eyes and stomach with a screwdriver during the video, but it is hard to confirm whether a knife is used. There does not appear to be any attempt at emptying Yatzenko's pockets during the video. The infamous 8 minute leaked video does not show any obvious slashing with a knife, only a hammer and screwdriver.

I'm still puzzling about the Dnepr motorcycle, about which the Fakti story is very clear. Either something is inaccurate here, or there is more to the sequence of events that needs to be understood.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Ahh yes, those previous questions were from me. Did you see the screenshots I uploaded? If so, what do you think? The documentary shows that cigarettes are taken from Yatzenko's trouser pocket, with several clear shots of the package and a gloved hand removing them from the pocket. If you skip to 00:28:26 in the documentary (the version you uploaded) and watch it frame by frame you can see everything I've mentioned here (the pockets, the knife, the slashed gut). This sequence immediately follows from when the presenter holds up the disc which contains the full video - so apparently this is footage shot after the end of the clip which was released online, as well as footage shot before. During this section of the video we see in the subtitles the words "un diente" which means "a tooth" which is a little worrying, and we also see a pair of hands at work on the victim's face; one is holding his head in place whilst the other approaches with an object, possibly the screwdriver, possibly the knife (this could be the ear cutting scene). Yatzenko is dead at this stage, with no groaning or visible breathing coming from him. We desperately need a transcript! PCLM (talk) 15:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

At the 4:00 mark, the subtitles describe the attack as follows "Lo llevaron a un costado de la carretera... ahi decidieron matarlo con un martillo... pero luego continuaron experimentando con un destornillador, dándole puñaladas en el estómago, apuñálandole los ojos." (He was taken to the side of the road, there they decided to kill him with a hammer, but then they continued experimenting with a screwdriver, stabbing him in the stomach, stabbing him in the eyes.) You are right that at 28:45 or thereabouts, the black gloved hand of Suprunyuck appears to retrieve a packet of cigarettes, with the commentary saying "Luego xxx? sus bolsillos (then xxx? his pockets). The "diente" part is as follows (28:10): "Tiene dientes de oro... ¿dientes de oro?... un diente... córtala... tiene la cara de un degenerado." (He has gold teeth... gold teeth?... a tooth... cut it from him... he has the face of a degenerate.) The knife is mentioned at 1:01:11, with the on screen translation of "trae el cuchillo" (literally: brings the knife, their translation of the apparent Russian взять(?) нож).--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:33, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Audio

Here is the audio where Igor Suprunyuck apparently refers to the knife. What do others think about the translation?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

It sounds very much like "соси нож" (suck the knife), except it doesn't make much sense. Do you have a bigger excerpt? It might be easier to understand in a context.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 11, 2010; 17:00 (UTC)

Ah, I see the link to the video is in the section above. I'll take a look when I come back home tonight.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 11, 2010; 17:03 (UTC)

There is an extract of the surrounding audio here. However, it is very muffled. The second word is almost certainly нож, but it is hard to understand the rest.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. The context didn't help much, unfortunately. However, after listening to the passage fifty or so times, I think that he probably says "тащи нож". "Тащи" is the imperative form of the verb "тащить"—literally it means "to haul", but in the imperative form it is colloquially often used to mean "bring me", "get me". Still, while he "нож" part I have no doubts about, the verb itself does sound a lot like "соси" (suck) or "точи" (sharpen). Since neither makes sense in the context, I'd go with "тащи".—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 13, 2010; 11:53 (UTC)

Thanks, this concurs with the Chilean documentary translation of "trae el cuchillo" (bring the knife). However, the first word is always going to be a matter of some guesswork as it is unclear.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I think the translation of "bring the knife" or "get the knife" is accurate, because I've read the same translation in two independently-produced transcripts (amateur ones, but they both seem to agree on this point) as well as the subtitles provided by the Chilean documentary. I think the amateur-created subtitled version of the infamous video clip might qualify as a third independent transcription, because as far as I can recall it was made by a different person and isn't identical to the aforementioned transcripts, and this too seems to agree on what is being said with regards to the knife.

Did anyone look at the screenshots I uploaded? I think the wounds visible in them are evidence of a knife being used, and this along with the footage of the killers rifling through the man's pockets seems to be evidence of a second half to the video's runtime. The photographs of Suprunyuck and Sayenko posing with Yatzenko don't show this particular wounding on the corpse, which suggests it was inflicted outside of the time-frame of the original 8-minute clip. If all of this is true, the main article's account of Yatzenko's death needs to be heavily revised. PCLM (talk) 18:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, looked at them. The problem remains that there is no obvious use of a knife in the leaked video. The consensus from the descriptions is that a hammer and screwdriver are the weapons used. Of course, there could have been injuries inflicted with a knife outside this time frame, but this would be WP:OR unless some reliable sourcing could be found, eg from a text based news story.

By the way, the audio of the "knife" may actually be Sayenko's voice rather than Suprunyuck's, it is hard to make out a lot of the dialogue.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

The article mentioned in the Talk:Dnepropetrovsk_maniacs/Archive_2#Questions_About_Sergei_Yatzenko.27s_Murder_Video section talks about a knife being used in this video, and discusses the stomach being slashed as well as a few other things not included in the 8-minute clip. The screenshots appear to corroborate this. To me this isn't WP:OR. The article in question has the following passage:

"They filmed the assassination of Sergei Yatsenko - how to slit the throats of lying men, picking out the right eye with a knife, cut off his right ear and lay on his stomach. The man in blue jeans and gloves, cut through his stomach, turned and the camera clearly captured the face Saenko"

The title of the article is "Man, Cut victim abdomen, turned, and video unambiguously captures the face of one of the defendants". The removal of the victim's right ear is mentioned twice in the article, as is the cutting open of the stomach. I'm also wondering if the article's claim that a knife was used to gouge out the eyeball is accurate, or if they simply misidentified the tool used. In the first screenshot I uploaded it's not clear what tool is being used, but the "shaft" looks a little too wide to be the screwdriver used earlier in the video. PCLM (talk) 18:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

The quote in question is "Они снимали убийство Сергея Яценко - как перерезают горло лежащего мужчины, ножом выковыривают правый глаз, отрезают правое ухо и кладут на живот. Человек в джинсах и перчатках, разрезающий живот, обернулся, и видеокамера отчетливо запечатлела лицо Саенко"...[16] As with the Dnepr motorcycle angle, there are some serious inconsistencies here. ножом выковыривают правый глаз (they picked out his right eye with a knife) contradicts the consensus view that a screwdriver was used, while отрезают правое ухо и кладут на живот (they cut off his right ear and put it on his stomach) also cannot be seen in the leaked video. At the end of the leaked video, the dialogue is something like "Is the video camera turned off, let's get a photo." This is when the pictures of Suprunyuck and Sayenko (giving the Hitler salute) seem to have been taken. In this image (disturbing content) there does not appear to be an ear on Yatzenko's stomach. As with the Dnepr motorcycle, there are two possibilities here: the time frame of the events is not fully understood, or there are inaccuracies somewhere. Without a transcript of the full court proceedings, it is hard to say which it is.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:29, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

But we have already established that the video clip preceding the photographs isn't the only footage of the attack. For instance, in the documentary we see the killers take cigarettes from Yatzenko's pockets, something the 8-minute clip doesn't show. The screenshots I uploaded show damage to Yatzenko's stomach which isn't shown in the 8-minute clip nor in the photograph of Suprunyuck posing with the dead body, so this damaged and the footage capturing it had to have been taken after the photographs were shot. All of this corroborates the account in the news article which describes additional damage being done to Yatzenko. I honestly can't figure out why there's any question about this. PCLM (talk) 19:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

The leaked video is 7:48 long, and begins with Yatzenko being struck on the head with the hammer. At around 2:00, the dialogue says "cut his abdomen" and at 2:03 a cut can be seen on his bare stomach, which was possibly inflicted with a knife. The cut can be seen again at 2:26, and may have been inflicted before the leaked video started, rather than after. At around this point in the video, Suprunyuck is stabbing Yatzenko in the stomach with the screwdriver, but the cut on the lower right hand side of his stomach appears to be already there. At 3:16, Suprunyuck uses the screwdriver to brush away what appears to be a green cigarette lighter from Yatzenko's left shoulder. The attack on the face with the screwdriver begins at around 3:30. at 3:52, Yatzenko groans and puts his right hand up to his face as if to protect it, causing the killers to remark that he is still alive. At 5:18, the screwdriver is shown to be fairly small (about 6 inches/15cm long) and to have a red or pink handle. The sound of an approaching train distracts the killers at around 5:35, and the dialogue says "Finish him now, execute him". At 5:48, the unclear нож (knife) phrase is used. However, at 6:11 Suprunyuck goes back to hitting Yatzenko in the face with a hammer, with Sayenko urging him on, saying "More, more!" The attack ends at 6:35, and they make their way back to the Daewoo Lanos car at the roadside. At 7:09, Suprunyuck says "Viktor, we need to be photographed with him. Quick, let's get a photo on my camera, turn off the video camera, OK?"

Of the three screenshots uploaded at [17], images 2 and 3 are definitely not from the leaked video, although 1 may be. Images 2 and 3 seem to have been deliberately blurred, making it hard to tell how they might fit in with the Yatzenko video. The large open cuts shown in images 2 and 3 would seem to fit in after the leaked attack. The cigarettes are taken from the pocket of Yatzenko at 28:30 in the Chilean documentary, and this moment is not in the leaked video. There may be video footage from both before and after the 7:48 of the leaked Internet video, but it is hard to give a sequence of events without seeing the full video that Michele Canale obtained. However, the article could be rewritten to include the removal of the cigaretttes from the pocket, since this is clearly shown in the Chilean documentary. The ear on the stomach part remains a mystery, as nothing in the Chilean documentary mentioned this even though they had access to a wide range of videos and photographs.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

On closer inspection I now believe that the screenshots I provided aren't from the Yatzenko murder, but are from a different one. Yatzenko is definitely not wearing that shirt, and doesn't appear to be wearing those trousers. We also catch glimpses of the second victim's relatively undamaged face (relative to the damage done to Yatzenko). The way the documentary is edited (and not being able to understand Spanish) made it appear that these clips were from the same video. I think until we get a proper translation of the documentary we're still in the dark about much of this.

I've taken more screenshots of the knife being used, and these seem to show rather conclusively that it is indeed a knife, although the fact that the images aren't of the Yatzenko murder probably means they're not of much interest, but here they are anyway:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3TW2IVXK

The third shot is especially important, because you can clearly make out the curved shape of the tip and the breadth of the silvery blade.

We also see this currently unidentified victim having his throat cut (click here for screenshots: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=9HWBIAVY - these shots also show the largely undamaged face of the victim). I'm wondering if these two videos were described in succession in the Kiev article and that the author of it wasn't talking only about Yatzenko. If so, it clears up the ambiguity about these "extra" mutilations. PCLM (talk) 00:20, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Since this was raised, I have been thinking about the best way to marry up all the sources about Yatzenko's murder. It is annoying that the choppy editing style in the Chilean documentary makes it hard to say what is and is not from the photos and videos relating to it. It is clear that the video extracts where the gold teeth are mentioned and the cigarettes are removed from the pocket are previously unseen parts of the Yatzenko video, but beyond that it starts to get confusing. The use of a knife in some of the attacks is not in doubt, but it would be hard to say if and when a knife was used during the Yatzenko attack. The wound on the lower right hand side of Yatzenko's stomach in the leaked video is consistent with a stab from a knife, but this is only a conjecture. There is a lot that is open to debate unless further sourcing becomes available, but it would make sense to add the part about the gold teeth and the cigarettes to the article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Here we go again, more screenshots! These ones show conclusively that there are two different victims in these sequences. Compared the belt-line, the upper body clothing and the trousers. The belt-line images are the most obvious ones; Yatzenko has a brown leather belt and his light-blue & white underwear are protruding beyond it. The second victim has no belt, and simply has a button-closed trouser with navy underwear visible just above the waistline. The second victim is wearing a sleeveless shirt which is light-blue and white, whereas Yatzenko is wearing a blazer with what appears to be a simple string-vest underneath it. Here are the screenshots:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=DBEKLFEM

With regards to the sleeveless shirt: it could be possible that the shirt is simply obscured from view during the 8-minute clip, but upon returning to Yatzenko's body the killers removed his blazer revealing the shirt. I don't think this is likely, and I don't believe it's plausible that the shirt could be so hidden from view. With regard to the belt, it's possible they removed it for some reason, but that doesn't explain the distinctly different underwear visible at the waistline. The pockets/trousers look different to me, with Yatzenko's being dark blue/navy and the second victim's being light-grey, but this is debatable given the low quality of the video. The differences in the belt, underwear and shirt seem pretty cut and dry to me, however. PCLM (talk) 16:05, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

There was a missed opportunity in the Chilean documentary. Having obtained a worldwide scoop with the extended Yatzenko video, they should have been much clearer about how it differed from the eight minute leaked version. All we learned clearly is that there is some extra footage of Suprunyuck and Sayenko standing at the roadside before the murder. It would be interesting to know the length of the extended version in minutes, and to have a detailed account of how it differs from the leaked version. As it is, we are left with rather too much WP:OR to extract this information.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Are you saying it's "original research" to say there is more than one murder video shown in the documentary? PCLM (talk) 17:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

To a certain extent yes, unless the commentary confirms this. One of the most interesting parts of the commentary is at 14:49, where the voiceover says that the Yatzenko video was shown to a range of people for comment, "a pesar de que existen por lo menos cinco video más de estos homicidios" ("although there exist at least five more videos of these murders.") The commentary is clear on this point, which is why it was added to the article. Without a transcript of the whole documentary, this is an area that needs some caution.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:42, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I can understand the desire to avoid falling into errors in thinking with regards to what is contained in these clips, but unless we assume Yatzenko had his underwear changed mid-attack there's no other explanation for the discrepancy beyond accepting that we're seeing a second murder video. It doesn't really involve any personal interpretation or WP:OR, the videos are unambiguous in at least one regard; that we're seeing another victim, separate from Yatzenko, being mutilated and having his pockets emptied.

Do you think it's worth writing to the documentary's producers to ask for at least a transcript or at most an English-subbed version? If we were to write to them in our capacity as Wikipedia editors/researchers, explaining the complete lack of English-language coverage to work with, it might help. I don't have a Facebook account, but perhaps they could be reached that way by someone who does. PCLM (talk) 02:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I sent an e-mail to the makers (aquienvivo at mega.cl) asking if a transcript was available, but have not received a reply. My rusty Spanish understanding of the commentary is that it does not specifically say that it is showing parts of murder videos other than the Yatzenko video. The only time that the commentary specifically mentions this area is at 14:49. In the end, I became annoyed by the pop video editing style found in parts of the documentary, because this makes them unsuitable for use as a reliable source. It is possible that even a full English transcript of the documentary would not clear up this question. From the article's point of view, it is important to note that more than one murder video is known to exist, even though it is the Yatzenko video that has received all the media attention because of the Internet leak.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:39, 14 August 2010 (UTC)