‘We painted, sang songs': the Russian woman found living in Indian cave with daughters
Buried deep in the forests of Gokarna, a coastal town in southern India, they had woken 'up with the sun, swam in rivers and lived in nature'.
'I cooked on a fire or gas cylinder, depending on the season, and got groceries from a nearby village. We painted, sang songs, read books and lived peacefully,' Kutina said, according to Indian media reports.
Then the police arrived.
The story of how the 40-year-old Russian woman and her daughters, aged six and four, came to be living in a damp cave in the state of Karnataka has gripped the country.
The family was discovered by police on 9 July during a patrol of the hilly forest area, which is popular with tourists, when officers spied a curtain of red saris hanging in the trees. Moving closer, they realised it was covering the entrance of a cave.
A statue of a Hindu god was visible, as were scattered items of clothing. Then a blond child emerged. Behind her, the police were astonished to find Kutina, asleep with another child by her side.
Kutina told officers she had moved to the cave for meditation and prayer, and to get herself and her children away from modern urban life and into nature.
She had cooked vegetable curries and roti on a small gas stove and they had bathed in waterfalls and slept on plastic mats.
Police believe she had been there for at least a week when they found her and had spent several stints living in the cave over the past nine months.
Kutina dismissed the officers' warnings that it was a highly dangerous place to live, especially during the monsoon, telling police that 'animals and snakes are our friends' and that it was only humans who were dangerous.
Despite her objections, police insisted on removing the family from the cave and taking them back to the town, where they were placed in a shelter after Kutina had a hospital checkup. M Narayana, a local superintendent of police, said Kutina appeared 'deeply disillusioned with human society, yet still compassionate and spiritually grounded'.
Kutina messaged a friend after being taken from her 'big and beautiful cave', saying her family had been 'placed in a prison without sky, without grass, without a waterfall, with an icy hard floor on which we now sleep for 'protection from rain and snakes'…. Once again, evil has won.'
According to immigration records cited by Indian officials, Kutina first travelled to India in 2016, ending up in Arambol Beach, in Goa, a destination popular with Russian travellers. A year later, she had begun a relationship with an Israeli man, Dror Goldstein. After overstaying her visa in 2018, Kutina was deported to Russia and travelled to Ukraine, where she had their first daughter. She already had two older sons from a previous relationship.
In 2020, Kutina returned to India with her children. She reunited with Goldstein in Goa and became pregnant again, making money as an art and language teacher.
According to Goldstein, who spoke to Indian media, Kutina began withdrawing from him and would disappear for long periods with their two daughters. Then, in October last year, her eldest son, 21, was killed in a motorcycle crash in India. After Goldstein travelled to Nepal to renew his visa, he returned to Goa to find Kutina and their daughters had disappeared.
He filed a police report in December but had heard nothing until reports of their discovery emerged this week.
Asked by journalists why she had remained in India without any valid documents, Kutina said there were 'many complicated reasons'.
'First, there were multiple personal losses – not just the death of my son, but also a few other close people. We were constantly dealing with grief, paperwork and other problems,' she said.
Kutina claimed her son's ashes were among the belongings removed from the cave.
With no valid documents to remain, the family were moved to a detention centre and police are arranging for Kutina's deportation to Russia.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Expert shares Trump's two-word nickname as he reveals Russia's honest opinion on president
US security services began investigating Donald Trump in 2015 as he was preparing to announce his candidacy for the 2016 presidential election as a new documentary has revealed what they really think In June 2015, shortly after Donald Trump declared his intention to run for the White House the following year, certain figures within America's intelligence apparatus started scrutinising the controversial business mogul's past. In the subsequent years, numerous allegations surfaced suggesting Trump had received financial backing, or at least substantial assistance, from the Russian state. Writers Craig Unger and Luke Harding have both published books claiming that Trump was groomed as a Kremlin operative following his marriage to Czech model Ivana Zelnickova. However, the reality of the situation is far more straightforward, and considerably harsher, according to former White House national security adviser John Bolton. Speaking in a new British documentary examining Trump, Bolton revealed: "Many alumni of the U.S. intelligence community have said to me that they think that Trump has been recruited by the Kremlin. I don't think so. I think he is a useful idiot." The phrase "useful idiot" became popular during the Cold War era, describing someone who naively advanced Soviet objectives without recognising they were being manipulated. Bolton, with a career spanning four US presidents, made a startling claim in the documentary Trump: Moscow's Man In The White House, suggesting that Vladimir Putin, a seasoned former intelligence operative, has Trump wrapped around his finger: "I think Putin can get him in the place he wants to," he said. "He's manipulable and, does the work that the Russians want without ever knowing it." He elaborated on why intelligence experts, who have successfully turned numerous Russian officials into informants, believe Trump is acting precisely as a Russian asset would. However, Bolton posits that Putin is exploiting Trump's ego for strategic gain rather than financial reward. Trump, for his part, has been less than complimentary about Bolton, his former 25th United States ambassador to the United Nations, branding him "a real dope" and "a nut job." Yuri Shvets, a former KGB agent reportedly consulted by Craig Unger for his book "American Kompromat," drew parallels between Trump and the infamous Cambridge Five – a quintet of idealistic upper-class British spies who passed secrets to the KGB over many years. Addressing claims that he has shown excessive favour towards Russian interests, including allegedly dismissing CIA intelligence on Russian espionage, Trump has consistently maintained that the Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, widely referred to as The Mueller Report, "completely exonerated" him. However, the report explicitly states that Russian meddling in the 2016 US presidential election was unlawful and took place "in sweeping and systematic fashion." The document also documented numerous connections between Trump's associates and Russian agents. The investigation detailed how a Russian "troll farm" established bogus social media profiles to saturate online platforms with pro-Trump and anti-Clinton material. Among those identified in the report was Yevgeny Prigozhin, the Wagner Group leader who later mounted a brief mutiny against Putin in 2023 before his death in suspicious circumstances. Mueller's findings led to criminal proceedings against 34 people and three organisations, resulting in eight guilty pleas and one trial conviction. The report stopped short of determining whether Trump had obstructed justice, in part because of Justice Department policy preventing federal prosecution of a serving president.
Times
36 minutes ago
- Times
‘Total failure of justice': all convicted of Mumbai train blasts acquitted
When bomb blasts ripped through the carriages of packed commuter trains and two stations during Mumbai's evening rush hour on July 11, 2006, India's prime minister vowed to defeat the terrorists and secure justice for the victims. But 19 years on from the carnage of the attacks, which left 189 dead and more than 800 injured, justice remains elusive. On Monday, 12 Muslim men who were convicted of planting the bombs were acquitted after the prosecution case against them was found to be based on forced confessions and unreliable evidence. The suspects, who were accused of being Pakistani separatists, were convicted in 2015 for one of India's worst terror attacks. Five of the men were sentenced to death, while the other seven were given life imprisonment, pending an appeal. A decade on from the conviction, judges at the Bombay High Court found the prosecution had 'utterly failed to prove their case against the accused'. 'It is hard to believe that the accused committed the crime. Hence their conviction is quashed and set aside,' Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak said. The men were ordered to be released from jail 'if they are not required to be detained in any other case'. During the 2006 attacks, seven bombs placed inside pressure cookers to maximise the intensity of the blasts went off within minutes of each other, causing horrific casualties. One surgeon described his hospital in the aftermath of the attacks as 'bloodier than an abattoir' in a report published on the front page of The Times the next day. Prosecutors said the devices were assembled in Mumbai and deliberately placed in first-class coaches to target the city's wealthy Gujarati community. They said the bombings were intended as revenge for the riots in the western state of Gujarat in 2002, which left some 2,000 people dead, most of them Muslims. Prosecutors accused the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba of being behind the attacks, although a little-known outfit called Lashkar-e-Qahhar later claimed responsibility. • Times report, 2006: 7 bombs, 10 minutes, 160 dead On Monday the judges spoke witheringly of police failures to prove what kind of bombs were used. The explosives and arms presented as evidence appeared 'unrelated to the blasts,' they said. Eye witnesses presented by the prosecution were also deemed unreliable, as many of them made statements to the police months or even years after the bombing. The judges observed that it was unlikely they would remember the accused after such a long period. 'The defence had raised serious questions about the test identification parade. Many witnesses remained silent for unusually long periods, some over four years, and then suddenly identified the accused. This is abnormal,' the judges noted. Apparent confessions by the accused, they concluded, were likely to have been obtained through coercion. One of those convicted, Kamal Ansari, died in 2021 from coronavirus while in jail. The remaining 11 have spent 19 years behind bars. Monday's acquittal does not mean the saga is over, as the prosecution can appeal against the order to the Supreme Court in Delhi. Given that cases move very slowly through India's judicial system, and that it took a decade for the convictions to be overturned, the men are likely to remain behind bars for months if not years. Rebecca Mammen John, a lawyer at the Supreme Court, said the investigation and prosecution did 'a disservice both to the people framed who spent years behind bars and to the families of the victims who are left without justice'. 'When you don't have a robust investigation and you have fabricated evidence, you are letting down an entire community of people who deserve better than this,' she added. 'This is a total failure of the justice delivery system.'
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Omagh bomb families call for special advocate for closed hearings at inquiry
Omagh Bombing Inquiry chairman Lord Turnbull is hearing arguments around applications during dedicated hearings this week. Counsel to the inquiry Paul Greaney KC said the inquiry, which is probing whether the 1998 dissident republican bomb attack could have been prevented, will hear some sensitive security evidence in closed hearings. The atrocity in the Co Tyrone town on August 15 1998 killed 29 people, including a woman pregnant with twins. Speaking during hearings in Belfast on Monday, Mr Greaney said the inquiry's legal team recognises that survivors and the bereaved have spent 25 years seeking the truth, and may be 'suspicious or even cynical of the UK state's willingness to engage in a way that is straightforward and wholehearted with this inquiry'. 'We acknowledge too, that the idea of evidence being heard in circumstances in which the families and survivors will be excluded is one that they will find difficult to accept, to say the least, and accordingly, we regard it as entirely understandable that some, although not all, have suggested special advocates should be appointed to represent their interests in any closed hearings, and have made applications for that to occur,' he said. Outlining the arguments that will be made, Mr Greaney said some contend special advocates cannot legally be appointed in a statutory public inquiry, while others have said if such a power does exist it should not be exercised. He said others have said special advocates can legally be appointed in an inquiry, and should be in this case to ensure the interests of the bereaved and survivors are protected, meanwhile others are neutral, and one group has said they are content to leave the matters to the inquiry's legal team. Mr Greaney also revealed that both the Advocate General of Northern Ireland Lord Hermer KC and Secretary of State Hilary Benn's position is that there is no power to appoint a special advocate in a statutory public inquiry. It was also noted that special advocates were not appointed in the inquiry into the death of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko or in the Manchester Arena Inquiry. Hugh Southey KC, acting for some of the bereaved families and survivors, emphasised the importance of a process from which everyone walks away feeling confident in the outcome. He said those which he represents have been calling for the appointment of a special advocate since the early days of the inquiry. 'They obviously have a degree of scepticism about the state's position in relation to this inquiry,' he said. 'There has been considerable delay in getting to this stage and also there is a history, they would argue, of the state not necessarily of being fully open, essentially about what's happened in the past, and because of that they are of the opinion that it is particularly important that any closed procedure involves the state being fully tested, and it's important also that they have confidence in the outcome of any closed procedure.' He added that special advocates played a key rule in a judicial review which was taken by Michael Gallagher, whose son Aiden was killed in the bomb, previously of the government's decision not to call a public inquiry. 'That is part of the reason why, from their point of view, it is important that special advocates continue to be involved in the process,' he said. The hearing continues.
