An experienced Austrian climber has been charged with manslaughter after his girlfriend froze to death close to the summit of the country’s highest mountain, in a case that has focused attention on responsibility and decision-making in extreme alpine conditions.
Prosecutors allege that 36-year-old mountaineer Thomas Plamberger left 33-year-old Kerstin Gurtner alone, exhausted and severely hypothermic, just below the 3,798 metre (12,460 ft) peak of the Grossglockner in the early hours of 19 January this year, before descending the mountain to seek help. Gurtner died several hours later from exposure in temperatures reported to have dropped to around minus 20C.
The pair had set out to climb Grossglockner, a popular but demanding alpine route in the High Tauern range. According to investigators, they were caught on cameras and webcams on the mountain as they progressed towards the summit through the evening. Local reports say they became stranded from about 8 pm as conditions deteriorated, with strong winds and severe cold making further progress difficult.
Gurtner is said to have collapsed roughly 50 metres below the summit cross at around 9.50 pm, unable to go on. At that point, both climbers were still on exposed terrain, high above safer ground and far from any mountain hut. Prosecutors allege that although the couple were in difficulty for several hours, no emergency call was made until 1.35 am.
In a statement outlining the indictment, the Innsbruck public prosecutor’s office said that, at approximately 2 am, Plamberger left his partner on the mountain while he descended alone. “At approximately 2:00 a.m., the defendant left his girlfriend unprotected, exhausted, hypothermic, and disoriented about 50 meters below the summit cross of the Grossglockner,” the statement said. “The woman froze to death. Since the defendant, unlike his girlfriend, was already very experienced with alpine high-altitude tours and had planned the tour, he was to be considered the responsible guide of the tour.”
Investigators allege that Plamberger did not move Gurtner to a more sheltered position before leaving and did not use an emergency blanket reportedly available to the pair. They also say he failed to signal to rescue helicopters that flew near the area at about 10.50 pm, and instead called specialist mountain police only several hours later. After that call, according to the prosecution, he put his phone on silent mode.
The first helicopter mission to reach Gurtner in the night was eventually called off because of the intensity of the wind at altitude. By the time rescuers returned to the area at around 10 am the next morning, she was already dead. Her body was airlifted from the mountain as authorities began piecing together the final hours of the couple’s ascent.
A forensic examination found that Gurtner died of extreme cold and exposure. She was reportedly still equipped with crampons and harness when she was found, in terrain difficult to access in winter conditions. Hypothermia can cause confusion and reduced ability to move, which can rapidly worsen in high winds and sub-zero temperatures, particularly at night and at high altitude.
Gurtner, from Salzburg, had described herself online as a “winter child” and “mountain person”, sharing images of snowy landscapes and outdoor adventures. At the same time, prosecutors say she had “little experience with alpine high-altitude tours”, in contrast with Plamberger’s long background in mountaineering. That imbalance in experience is central to the case, with investigators arguing that he effectively took on the role of guide when he planned the route.
According to one account cited by local media, Gurtner had referred to herself in her final hours as “defenceless, exhausted, hypothermic and disorientated”. The precise context of that description has not been publicly detailed, but it has been taken by prosecutors as an indication of how precarious her condition had become on the mountain that night.
In the weeks after her death, Plamberger wrote a highly emotional tribute on social media which has since been deleted but has been reproduced in court documents and media reports. “I miss you so much. It hurts so incredibly much,” he wrote. “Forever in my heart. Without you, time is meaningless.” The message, now at the centre of renewed attention, is seen as the “tragic message” referenced in recent coverage of the case.
Friends and relatives of Gurtner shared their own tributes, posting photographs of her smiling in the mountains and expressing shock at the sudden loss. One online memorial page described her as someone who loved nature and sought peace in the Alps. Others spoke of her enthusiasm for outdoor sports despite only recently taking up more serious alpine tours, highlighting the enduring attraction of challenging peaks like Grossglockner for recreational climbers.
Grossglockner, located in the central Eastern Alps, is a prominent and heavily visited peak that attracts experienced mountaineers and guided parties each year. While its normal routes are considered technically manageable for well prepared climbers, winter ascents involve serious objective dangers, including extreme cold, strong winds and rapidly changing conditions. Austrian mountain rescue services repeatedly warn that even apparently straightforward routes can turn deadly if weather deteriorates or if climbers underestimate the difficulty.
The case has revived a wider debate in alpine communities over how responsibility is apportioned when a more experienced climber takes a less experienced partner into high-risk terrain. Prosecutors argue that Plamberger’s knowledge of the mountain and his planning of the tour mean he held a duty of care that went beyond that of an equal partner. Defence lawyers have not yet set out their full arguments in public, but the court is expected to examine in detail whether his decisions met or fell short of the standard expected of a competent leader in such circumstances.
Key questions are likely to include why no emergency call was made earlier in the evening, whether it was reasonable to hope to bring Gurtner down without external assistance, and whether leaving her alone on the mountain was, at any stage, the safest available option. The timing and effectiveness of the rescue response, once contact with authorities was made, may also be scrutinised, including the aborted helicopter mission and the challenges crews faced in high winds and darkness.
Under Austrian law, manslaughter by gross negligence in such circumstances can carry a prison sentence of up to three years. The charge does not suggest intentional killing, but alleges that a person’s conduct showed such disregard for foreseeable danger that it became criminal. In this case, prosecutors maintain that Plamberger’s alleged failure to act sooner and his decision to leave Gurtner where she lay represent a serious breach of his obligations as the more experienced climber.
The indictment comes after a lengthy investigation that drew on helicopter footage, webcam images, weather records, mobile phone data and interviews with mountain experts. Technical assessments are understood to have considered what options might realistically have been open to the couple at different points during the night, including whether shelter could have been reached together or whether an earlier distress call might have enabled rescuers to intervene in time.
Legal proceedings are due to take place at a regional court in Innsbruck, with a trial date set for February. Plamberger, who remains free pending the hearing, has not made detailed public comments about the allegations. It is not yet clear whether he intends to contest the charge in full or accept a degree of responsibility while arguing that the extreme conditions limited what could realistically be done.
For Gurtner’s family, the trial is likely to be a difficult revisiting of events that have already been widely reported and discussed. Her relatives have largely stayed out of the public debate, releasing only brief statements of grief and remembrance. They are expected to follow proceedings closely as the court hears expert testimony about the mountain, the weather and the decisions taken during the ascent.
The case has resonated beyond Austria among climbers and outdoor enthusiasts who have followed the details of the route and the sequence of decisions with particular attention. Many have pointed out that alpine culture traditionally emphasises self-reliance and acceptance of risk, while also stressing the duty of partners to look after each other. Some commentators have suggested that a criminal conviction for choices made under pressure in hostile conditions could have a chilling effect on how climbers approach emergencies, while others argue that the allegations in this case describe failures far outside normal practice. These views, expressed mainly on specialist forums and social media, remain opinions and will not determine the outcome in court, where the focus will be on evidence and legal standards.
For now, the picture set out by investigators is stark. A relatively inexperienced climber, drawn to the mountains she loved, found herself on one of the country’s most exposed summits as darkness fell and temperatures plummeted. Her partner, regarded by authorities as a seasoned mountaineer, is accused of waiting too long to call for help, failing to use basic protective measures and then walking away while she lay in a critical condition on the ice. Hours later, she was dead.
Plamberger’s earlier declaration that “without you, time is meaningless” now sits beside the prosecutors’ description of his actions on Grossglockner as a criminally negligent breach of duty. Whether a court ultimately agrees will depend on how judges and, potentially, a jury weigh his experience, the conditions that night and the options that were realistically open to him.
Until that verdict is delivered, the death of Kerstin Gurtner remains both a personal tragedy for those who knew her and a sobering reminder of how quickly a winter climb in the high Alps can turn fatal when conditions, decisions and experience collide.