The 2014 disappearance of 17 year old Guram Dadianidze in Georgia, and the strange events that started happening 12 years later
I want to share a missing person case from Georgia that has been unsolved for 12 years.
The case is about Guram Dadianidze, usually called Gurika.
He was 17 years old when he disappeared in June 2014 during the Lomisoba religious festival near Mleta, Georgia.
His mother has been looking for him ever since.
There have been many theories over the years, but no one has found Guram and nobody has been publicly proven responsible for his disappearance.
Recently the case became active again.
Police searched the area again, old witness statements started being discussed, an old video appeared, witnesses gave new interviews, and then Guram’s Facebook account suddenly became active after many years.
There are also several strange details in the original story that still do not have clear answers.
I want to put everything I have found in one place.
I am not accusing anyone mentioned here of a crime.
Some of the people in this post were with Guram that night or are connected to the case as witnesses. There is no public evidence proving that any of them harmed him.
I am also attaching screenshots and photos. Where something comes only from a screenshot or from information that has not been publicly confirmed by police, I will say so clearly.
1. The trip to Lomisoba
According to the Georgian Ministry of Internal Affairs, 16 people from the same neighborhood in Tbilisi travelled to the Lomisoba festival on June 10, 2014.
They travelled in a minibus.
Because the road toward the shrine was difficult, they left the minibus in Mleta and continued on foot.
The official police statement says they stayed at the shrine for a short time and started walking back at around 2 AM.
There is also information discussed around the case that the group reached Lower Mleta at around 10 PM and spent only a short time near the shrine.
One version describes that time as about 20 minutes.
However, the public police statement does not give an exact number of minutes, so I am not treating the 20 minute figure as an officially confirmed fact.
There are also slightly different numbers in older reports about how many people were together.
Police now say 16 people travelled from the neighborhood.
Some older reporting talks about a smaller group of around 14 young people and an adult.
A very early report talks about six people being together near the time Guram disappeared.
This may simply mean different reports were talking about different parts of the same larger group.
2. What police say happened to Guram
The current official police version is very specific.
Police say Guram was walking down with a relative.
Two other people, described as a father and his child, were also nearby.
At some point Guram stopped to rest and sat on a rock.
According to police, the relative and the father and child saw this happen.
There were only about 300 to 500 meters left before reaching the minibus.
Police say Guram told the others to keep walking and said he would catch up.
The three people continued.
After walking a short distance, Guram still had not appeared.
Because it was dark, one of the neighbors went back with a flashlight.
When he returned to the place where Guram had been sitting, Guram was gone.
Police say Guram did not have his mobile phone with him.
Because of that, his friends could not call him and investigators could not later use his phone to track where he went.
Police also say witnesses reported that Guram had no fight or conflict with anyone during the trip or at the shrine.
They say many pilgrims were moving through the area and no signs of violence were found where witnesses say Guram was last seen.
3. Early reports from 2014 were not this clear
This is one of the parts of the case that I find most confusing.
On June 13, 2014, only a few days after Guram disappeared, a local official told Georgian media that relatives said six people had come down together as far as the main road.
According to that report, Guram disappeared after they reached the road.
Then another report appeared on June 14.
The same official said police had questioned people who had been with Guram and their stories were different.
Some reportedly said they stopped seeing Guram near the school in Lower Mleta.
Others reportedly mentioned the area near a church.
At that time the official said it was unclear exactly where Guram disappeared.
This was not years later.
These reports came only a few days after Guram went missing.
Today the official version describes a very specific rock, three people who saw Guram there, and a distance of only 300 to 500 meters from the vehicle.
There may be a normal explanation.
Different people could have been talking about the last place where they personally saw Guram.
Early information may also have been passed badly between police, local officials and journalists.
But I think the difference is still important.
4. What Ani Gelashvili says happened
Ani Gelashvili was part of the group.
She gave a long interview in 2026.
Ani says that shortly before Guram disappeared, he was walking with a friend known by the nickname Tini.
According to Ani, Guram told Tini to go ahead and said he would catch up.
Tini returned to the others.
Ani says the group thought Guram may have wanted privacy because he needed to use the toilet.
She says about five minutes later her father, Kakha Gelashvili, decided to go back and look for Guram.
According to Ani, her father came back about five minutes later.
He asked whether Guram had reached the group.
He had not.
Ani says they became worried and began searching.
She says police and rescue workers were told very quickly.
According to her, rescue and police vehicles were already only a few meters from their minibus because a large number of officers and rescuers were in the area for Lomisoba.
She says this is why they went directly to them instead of calling emergency services.
If this timeline is correct, Guram disappeared in a very small period of time.
5. Did the group stay in Mleta or return to Tbilisi?
Ani strongly denies the claim that the group simply left Guram and returned to Tbilisi.
She says they immediately started looking for him.
According to her, police, rescuers and local people joined the search.
She says Guram’s aunt and uncle later arrived in Mleta.
Ani says the younger people only left after Guram’s uncle told them to go home.
She says her father Kakha, her mother, police, rescuers and local people stayed there.
She has also said that the group was covered in mud because they had been searching.
Guram’s mother, Sopho Bibilashvili, tells a different story.
She has publicly said that according to what she was told, the group returned to Tbilisi without Guram and asked Guram’s aunt whether Guram had somehow arrived home.
She also questions whether the story about Guram sitting on the rock is true at all.
So there is a direct difference here.
Ani says they stayed in Mleta and searched until Guram’s relatives arrived.
Guram’s mother says she was told the group returned to Tbilisi without him.
The public does not have every original 2014 police interview, so we cannot compare every person’s first statement word for word.
6. The family says one person later changed their story
In 2026, Guram’s family said that one person who had been with the group later admitted that their first statement had not been true.
This claim was reported by Georgian television.
However, the full interview record has not been published publicly.
We do not know from public records exactly who the person was, what the original statement said, or exactly what was later changed.
Because of that, I think this needs to be described as an important claim from Guram’s family, not a proven public fact.
The family has also raised the possibility that some kind of accident happened while Guram was with the group and that the full story was never told.
Again, this is a theory raised by the family.
Nobody has been publicly proven guilty.
7. The strange phone question
Police say Guram did not have his phone with him when he disappeared.
Ani Gelashvili says the same.
But there are other strange details about the phone.
Ani says Guram had told his mother that his SIM card was damaged or was not working.
According to Ani, it later turned out that the SIM card was actually fine.
Ani also says the group decided to go to Lomisoba on the same day.
But she says she later heard that Guram had already told his mother about the trip one day earlier.
Ani said this confused her because, according to her, the group itself had not planned the trip the previous day.
There is also a photo connected to the trip that has caused questions because Guram appears to be holding a phone.
If his own phone was not with him, the obvious question is whose phone it was.
I have not seen a public answer to that question.
8. How many photos exist from the trip?
Another strange point concerns photographs.
Only a very small number of photographs from the trip have surfaced.
I currently have two photos that are said to be from the trip, and I will attach them.
There is also a claim around the case that witnesses have denied having more photographs.
I want to be careful with this point.
I have not found a public police statement confirming that only two photos exist in total.
So I am not saying that as a proven fact.
But considering this was a group trip to a large religious festival, the small number of known photographs is still something I think is worth asking about.
9. Questions about the original investigation
There is also disagreement about what kind of investigation existed in the first years after Guram disappeared.
A report from June 2014 said rescue workers were already searching.
A rescue official reportedly believed a criminal investigation had been opened.
The Ministry of Internal Affairs told the same news outlet that a criminal case had not yet been opened at that point.
In 2026, lawyer Tariel Kakabadze joined Guram’s family.
He says the case material he received contained an investigation registration document dated 2017.
He has also said that interview records he saw in the criminal case material began in 2017.
He has questioned why important phones were apparently not collected and checked shortly after Guram disappeared.
Police reject the claim that nothing happened between 2014 and 2017.
The Ministry says a missing person search case was opened in 2014 and search work was carried out.
So this may partly be a difference between a missing person search file and a formal criminal investigation.
Still, it is an important part of the case.
10. Another question about the early investigation
There is another serious point that has been raised in material around the case.
The claim is that a person said to have been involved in the earlier investigation later denied being involved in Guram’s case, and that former colleagues reportedly could not clearly confirm that person’s role there.
I do not want to name this person because I have not found enough reliable public documentation to independently confirm this claim.
I am also not presenting it as a proven fact.
But if this information is correct, official staff records, case assignment records and signatures on the original documents should be able to answer the question.
11. The landslide theory
For years one major theory was that Guram may have fallen somewhere and later been covered by a landslide.
His mother repeatedly asked authorities to properly search a specific area.
In August 2026, police returned to Mleta.
Around 50 officers and specialists were involved.
They used special equipment, scanners and heavy machinery.
A well was also checked.
Nothing connected to Guram was found.
After the work was completed, Guram’s mother and the family lawyer said the landslide theory had been ruled out for the specific area they had wanted searched.
This does not mean there was definitely no landslide anywhere in the area in 2014.
It also does not prove that Guram could not have had an accident somewhere else.
It means the specific location that the family wanted searched did not produce Guram’s remains.
12. The occupied territory theory
The Lomisa area is close to territory occupied by Russia.
Because of that, one theory over the years has been that Guram may somehow have crossed the occupation line.
There has been no public confirmation from eyewitnesses or occupation forces that Guram crossed the line.
So this remains a theory, not established fact.
13. The monastery theory
Ani Gelashvili has said she personally believes Guram may still be alive.
She has also talked about the possibility that he went to a monastery.
According to Ani, there had previously been talk that Guram wanted to go to a monastery.
She says her father and Guram’s father contacted the Georgian Orthodox Church after Guram disappeared and asked for help.
Nothing was found.
In 2026 Ani again publicly asked monasteries to contact the family or police if Guram had ever stayed with them.
There is no public proof that Guram entered a monastery.
There have also been public comments from other people connected to the case who believe he may still be alive.
This is unusual, but belief that he is alive is not proof that he is alive.
14. Guram’s aunt
Guram’s aunt, Nino Dadianidze, has also spoken publicly about the case and has expressed the belief that Guram may still be alive.
Lawyer Tariel Kakabadze publicly said he wanted to speak with her because he had questions.
At one point he said she had refused to meet him.
He also said some things she had said did not fit other evidence as he understood it.
Later reporting said she decided to speak publicly.
This shows that even among people close to Guram there are different views about what may have happened.
It does not prove that anyone is hiding anything.
15. The Turkey rumor
Another rumor online tried to connect Guram’s disappearance to a young man who died in Turkey.
Guram’s mother publicly rejected this.
She said that death had nothing to do with Guram’s disappearance.
She has also explained that Guram had spent time in Turkey with her before he disappeared.
That seems to be one reason the Turkey theory became popular online.
But his mother says the two cases are not connected.
16. The old video
In 2026 an old video filmed during Lomisoba in 2014 began spreading online.
Lawyer Tariel Kakabadze said that near the end of the video he hears a distressed male voice that sounds like:
“Kakha, do not leave me, please.”
Guram’s mother says she believes the voice is her son.
Ani Gelashvili strongly disagrees.
She says she is sure it is not Guram.
The video has been sent for professional examination.
Police found and interviewed the person who recorded the video.
According to the lawyer, the person who filmed it did not know Guram and was not part of Guram’s group.
Police say the video was recorded on June 11, 2014 at around 3 PM.
The people who were with Guram say he disappeared at around 4 AM.
That is around an eleven hour difference.
This is important.
If the voice is not Guram, the video may have nothing to do with his disappearance.
If experts prove the voice really is Guram, then the timeline would need serious explanation.
As of the time I am writing this, I have not found a publicly released final result of the voice examination.
17. Police questioned people again in 2026
The Ministry of Internal Affairs says the case is still active.
In August 2026, police said more than 20 people had been questioned again during the previous month.
Police say they have not found evidence of a revenge motive.
They also say they found no confirmed signs of violence where witnesses say Guram was last seen.
Police have asked people not to spread false or unconfirmed information.
18. Fake messages started appearing online
The digital part of the case became very strange in August 2026.
Before Guram’s real old Facebook account made its strange post, fake accounts were already spreading messages connected to Guram.
On August 18, lawyer Tariel Kakabadze said fake accounts were posting things such as:
“Mom, I am alive.”
He said he believed the purpose was to mislead the family and move attention toward false directions.
This timing is important because it means some fake account activity was already happening before the biggest Facebook event later that evening.
19. Guram’s real Facebook account became active
On August 18, 2026 at 21:54, Guram’s old Facebook account suddenly published a post.
The text was:
“Арцыд рæстæг”
Georgian media described this as Ossetian and translated it approximately as:
“The time has come.”
Media reports say the previous visible post on Guram’s account was from 2013.
Guram disappeared in 2014.
At this point there is no public proof that Guram himself made the new post.
Someone else may have gained access to his account.
20. A message sent to the account was read
After the post appeared, Guram’s cousin sent a private message to the account.
Later the cousin posted a screenshot showing that the message had been marked as read.
The cousin asked who was using the account and what was happening.
This suggests someone had access to the account.
It does not prove that person was Guram.
21. Guram’s mother’s reaction
Guram’s mother publicly reacted to the post.
She asked what “the time has come” meant.
She later said several strange messages had appeared around the case.
These included messages similar to “Mom, I am alive”, Russian language messages and then the Ossetian post.
She said she believed somebody was playing with the case.
Her point was simple.
If Guram was really alive and wanted to contact her, he knew how to reach his own mother directly.
She said the Facebook situation had been reported to investigators.
22. The suspicious account using the name “Kaxa Gelashvili”
Around the same time, another Facebook account appeared using the name “Kaxa Gelashvili”.
This is very important:
There is no public proof that the real Kakha Gelashvili created or controlled this account.
Someone may have used his name.
According to Georgian media, the suspicious account reportedly had only one Facebook friend.
That friend was Gurika Dadianidze.
The account also used information connected to Guram.
The name “guriko96” appeared in its contact information.
A public post on the account was written in Russian:
“Если я приду”
which means:
“If I come.”
The account also appeared under posts connected to Guram.
Under one video posted by Guram’s mother, the account reportedly wrote:
“Mom, I am alive.”
The account later stopped appearing in Facebook search.
Again, none of this proves that the real Kakha Gelashvili controlled it.
It could even mean somebody was deliberately using his name to point attention toward him.
23. The heart reaction
One screenshot I am attaching appears to show the suspicious “Kaxa Gelashvili” account giving a heart reaction to the new post on Guram’s real Facebook account.
The post is the one containing:
“Арцыд рæстæг”
I have the screenshot.
I do not have a public police statement confirming who controlled the account.
So I am showing the screenshot as part of the timeline, not as proof against the real Kakha Gelashvili.
24. Another strange Ossetian message
Another screenshot appears to show the same suspicious account posting:
“ма йæ кæн”
I do not want to guess what this means.
I would really like someone who speaks Ossetian to explain the exact translation and how a native speaker would understand it.
Again, this screenshot should not be treated as officially authenticated evidence unless investigators confirm it.
25. The Viber account
Another screenshot shown in a circulating video appears to show a Viber profile with wording similar to:
“Арцыд растаг”
The screen also appears to say:
“Last seen yesterday at 21:54.”
That time is interesting because Guram’s real Facebook post appeared at 21:54.
However, a screenshot by itself does not prove that the Viber account was controlled by the same person who used the suspicious Facebook account or Guram’s real account.
That connection would need technical confirmation.
26. The accounts later disappeared
The suspicious Kakha named Facebook account later stopped appearing in Facebook search.
People following the case have also reported that other pages later became unavailable.
It is important not to jump to conclusions here.
A missing profile can mean several different things.
The owner may have deleted it.
It may have been deactivated.
Facebook may have removed or locked it.
The username may have changed.
Without information from Meta, we cannot know which happened.
27. The lawyer says he knows the IP information behind one message
On August 19, Tariel Kakabadze said he had information about the IP address and the country connected to the person behind the message:
“Mom, I am alive.”
He did not publicly name the country.
He said revealing it could interfere with the investigation.
There is a very important difference here.
This does not automatically mean that investigators have identified the person who entered Guram’s real old Facebook account at 21:54.
The lawyer was speaking about the “Mom, I am alive” message.
Whether that account and Guram’s real Facebook account were controlled by the same person has not been publicly proven.
28. Why the digital evidence matters
There are several separate questions now.
Who accessed Guram’s real Facebook account?
Who created the suspicious account using Kakha Gelashvili’s name?
Who wrote “Mom, I am alive”?
Who controlled the Viber account shown in the screenshot?
Were any of those accounts connected through the same phone, computer, IP address, email address, phone number or recovery information?
If investigators find a technical link between them, that could be very important.
If they do not, some of this activity may simply be trolling or an attempt to confuse the family and the public.
29. The biggest questions I still have
Why did the first reports in 2014 describe different places where Guram was last seen?
Why did one early report say six people reached the main road together?
Who exactly were the three people who police now say saw Guram sitting on the rock?
Is Tini the relative mentioned in the official police version?
Exactly how much time passed between Tini leaving Guram and Kakha going back to search?
How long was Kakha away from the group?
Why does Ani say the group stayed in Mleta while Guram’s mother says she was told they returned to Tbilisi?
Did somebody really admit that their first statement was false?
If so, what exactly changed?
Why did Guram not have his phone?
Whose phone appears in the photograph where Guram seems to be holding one?
Why did he reportedly say his SIM card was damaged?
How did Guram apparently know about the trip one day earlier if the rest of the group supposedly planned it on the same day?
Why are so few photographs from the trip known?
Are there more photographs or videos that have never been made public?
What exactly happened in the investigation between 2014 and 2017?
Who was officially assigned to the case during those years?
Whose voice is heard in the old video?
If it is Guram’s voice, how can the 3 PM recording fit a disappearance that witnesses place at 4 AM?
Who entered Guram’s real Facebook account in 2026?
Who created the suspicious Kakha named account?
Why did that account use “guriko96”?
Why did it react to Guram’s post?
What exactly does “ма йæ кæн” mean?
Is the Viber screenshot authentic?
If it is authentic, why does its 21:54 time match the time of Guram’s Facebook post?
What country was connected to the IP mentioned by the lawyer?
Were the fake account and Guram’s real account operated by the same person?
And most importantly:
Are these new online events actually connected to what happened to Guram in 2014, or is somebody using a 12 year old missing person case to confuse and hurt the family?
30. What I am asking Reddit
I am not asking anyone to find private phone numbers, home addresses, IP addresses or personal information.
Please do not contact, threaten or harass Guram’s family, witnesses, Kakha Gelashvili, Ani Gelashvili or anyone else mentioned here.
I am not asking Reddit to decide who is guilty.
I am interested in the timeline and in public information that may help people understand the case.
I would especially like to hear from people who understand missing person cases, digital forensics, Facebook security, OSINT and the Ossetian language.
Can an Ossetian speaker explain the exact meaning and normal use of:
“Арцыд рæстæг”
and
“ма йæ кæн”
What information could Meta still have about a Facebook login made in August 2026?
Can investigators determine whether two accounts were used from the same device even if one account has been deleted or deactivated?
Can Meta still preserve useful login information after an account disappears?
Does anyone see a contradiction in the public timeline that I have missed?
This is still an active missing person case.
Nobody mentioned in this post should be treated as guilty unless there is real evidence.
Sources
Georgian Ministry of Internal Affairs statement reported by Publika
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty report on the police timeline and search
InterPressNews report from June 13, 2014
InterPressNews report from June 14, 2014
Netgazeti report on the Facebook post
TV Pirveli interview with Ani Gelashvili
TV Pirveli report about the family’s claim that a statement changed
Netgazeti report from the early search in 2014
Tabula report on the suspicious Facebook account
Tabula report on the renewed search
Primetime report on the read Facebook message
Primetime report on the lawyer’s IP statement
Palitra Video report about fake “Mom, I am alive” messages
Palitra Video report on the old video and voice examination
TV Pirveli report about the person who recorded the old video