Learn Turkish: Polis hiçbir iz bulmamış; o canavar ormandan geçmiş olamaz. - The police found no trace; that monster cannot have passed through the forest.

This structure is used for strong deductions about the past. It combines geçmiş (having passed) with olamaz (cannot be). The -a before -maz in olamaz is the ability/possibility suffix in its negative form, meaning "cannot". Together, -miş olamaz is the standard B2 structure to express "cannot have done something".

Why is the first verb bulmamış instead of the definite past tense bulmadı?

Since the speaker is making a deduction about the monster's movements, they likely didn't see the police investigation firsthand either. Using the evidential past -mış shows that this is reported information ("I heard they found no trace") or a newly realized fact. It sets the logical stage perfectly for the strong deduction that follows in the second clause.

Does hiçbir always require a negative verb like bulmamış?

Yes! In Turkish, words like hiçbir (any/no), hiç (ever/never), and kimse (anyone/no one) require a grammatically negative verb. While English says "found no trace" with a positive verb and negative noun, Turkish effectively says "did not find any trace" using hiçbir iz bulmamış.

Why do we use the ablative case -dan in ormandan geçmiş instead of a postposition for "through"?