how does that make sense? couldn't they cut it in a fashion show or on the street or sth? i don't understand why they had to kill her for that..

The article made it out as though they were suggesting the killer killed her for her hair - to sell it or something - not like a killer keeping her hair as a souvenir of the act. So I believe melfreya was questioning if someone had want her hair, why not get it some other, less deadly, way?so her hair couldn't certainly be cut at a fashion show or at a hair saloon.
The article made it out as though they were suggesting the killer killed her for her hair - to sell it or something - not like a killer keeping her hair as a souvenir of the act. So I believe melfreya was questioning if someone had want her hair, why not get it some other, less deadly, way?
Anyway, for all we know Ruslana may have cut it herself?