Austrian Climber Found Guilty for Leaving Girlfriend to Die During Winter Ascent

A 37-year-old Austrian alpinist was just convicted of grossly negligent homicide, after leaving his girlfriend to die on the country’s highest peak, Grossglocker (12,461ft), during a botched winter ascent last year. A single, 14-hour trial resulted in a verdict delivered after 11:00 p.m. yesterday, following a staggeringly damning testimony from a surprise witness.

Thomas Plamberger, of Innsbruck, pleaded not guilty to the charge in court on February 19. He faced up to three years in prison, but according to Austrian paper Die Presse, only received a fine of €9,600 (roughly $11,300) and a five-month suspended prison sentence (effectively probation). The verdict, however, isn’t yet legally binding; Plamberger has three days to file an appeal.

The incident in question occurred on January 18, 2025, when Plamberger and his partner, 33-year-old Kerstin Gurtner, attempted an overnight ascent of the Grossglocker, via a technical ridgeline called the Stüdlgrat (UIAA III-IV [5.4]). The prosecution detailed nine separate errors made by Plamberger during the climb—from failing to bring bivy gear to failing to abide by a reasonable turnaround time—which collectively suggest a charge of gross negligence.

Accounts of what happened on the mountain differ, but one clear truth is that Plamberger and Gurtner were making a remarkably slow ascent—allegedly hampered by a stuck rope. Although they started their climb at 6:45 a.m., the pair had still not reached the summit long after nightfall, nor had they turned back.

At 10:30 p.m., as a ferocious storm descended on the mountain, alpine rescuers dispatched a helicopter to check on the couple. Other climbers on the mountain, who bailed under the foul conditions, had seen Plamberger and Gurtner still on-route, attempting to ascend.

According to an account of the February 19 trial in German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, although the helicopter circled them six times and attempted to signal them with a spotlight, Plamberger gave no distress signals. Furthermore, authorities allege he then turned his phone on “silent,” ignoring subsequent attempts by authorities (who had his phone number on file from his climbing permit) to contact him.

According to Die Presse, Plamberger claimed that when the helicopter flew over, Gurtner was fine, and she only became exhausted later, around midnight. He said that at 12:35 p.m. after realizing the severity of the situation, he called the police to request rescue. The prosecution, while acknowledging that this call occurred, claimed the content of the call was “unclear” and that Plamberger failed to communicate that there was an emergency.

“That was definitely not an emergency call,” said the rescue officer who received the call, identified in court as “Mattias A.” The officer said he subsequently tried to contact Plamberger several times, both by phone call and WhatsApp text message (one of which read, “Do you need help now or not?”) but received no response. “There was no indication that an emergency situation existed,” he said.

Plamberger then left his exhausted partner near the summit in sub-zero temperatures and 45mph winds, beginning to descend alone. Authorities allege his only explicit call for aid came several hours later, at 3:30 a.m. By that point, the winds were too violent for a rescue flight to reach Gurtner.

Rescuers found her body near the peak’s summit shortly after 10:00 a.m. the following morning. A coroner’s analysis determined she died of hypothermia.

The “Duty of Care” debate

The prosecution’s case hinged on the argument that Plamberger was the more experienced of the two climbers, and was therefore responsible for Gurtner’s well-being on the mountain. The defense, meanwhile, argued that the pair, who had been dating for around a year, constituted equal partners.

German national paper Die Zeit reported that in court, Plamberger did his utmost to paint himself as inexperienced. He claimed he had “no alpine training whatsoever.” He identified as a self-taught climber who had learned mostly from “online videos.” Thus, although he said he was “infinitely sorry” for what happened, he argued that he was not responsible for his girlfriend’s death.

Roughly 15 witnesses and experts were testified during the trial, including rescuers, and police officers. Notably, Gurtner’s mother, Gertraud, also took the stand, and actually defended Plamberger, claiming he was not at fault.

Other witnesses, like the alpine police officer who questioned Plamberger on the morning of January 19, when he got off the mountain, allege that at the time, Plamberger made it clear that he was acting as a de-facto guide. “He essentially confirmed that he was the one who planned the tour,” said this officer, identified as “Christian J.,” according to Die Presse.

But it was a surprise witness who became the nail in the coffin: Plamberger’s ex-girlfriend, Andrea Bergener. (Editor’s note: We are uncertain about the correct spelling of Andrea’s last name: Bergener or Bergner. Die Presse only refers to her as “Andrea B.”)

Bergener testified that in 2023, Plamberger had also left her alone on an overnight summer ascent of the very same peak, Die Presse reported. The pair had been arguing during the climb, and Bergener had hoped to take a shortcut to end their trip. That’s when Plamberger went on alone.

“Then he was suddenly gone,” she recalled. “It was the middle of the night, I was alone, I was at the end of my strength, I was yelling and screaming. He had already gone ahead. That was our last mountain tour.”

The trial’s presiding judge, Norbert Hofer, is also a part-time mountain rescuer. He clearly communicated where he believed the blame lay.

“You are an excellent mountaineer,” Hofer told Plamberger, per Die Presse. “But you are also someone who struggles to switch from your own abilities to the abilities of others and react accordingly. The impression that was created is one of ‘going at any cost.’”

All other facets of the situation aside, Hofer said that even if Plamberger truly intended his 12:35 p.m. call as an explicit request for aid, Plamberger should have expressed to the authorities long before that Gurtner had reached her limit. “’My partner can’t continue’ was not communicated. That is the most fundamental information,” Hofer said.

Analyzing video footage taken by the helicopter at 10:30 p.m., Hofer said it was obvious even from this point that Gurtner was in trouble. “She’s having an incredibly hard time finding a handhold to continue climbing from, and finding a foothold. In five minutes, she only manages to move 20 centimeters upwards in what is quite manageable terrain.”

“I don’t see you as a murderer, not as someone trying to save his own skin,” Hofer added. He said he believed Plamberger was, in effect, what the charges state: grossly negligent. Someone who had “misjudged the situation, who tried to get help, to support his girlfriend … It’s incredibly tragic what happened.”

A shift in alpine law?

Because the region around Innsbruck is so mountainous, Innsbruck’s Regional Court has a specialized “alpine prosecutor.” This prosecuter litigates court cases resulting from accidents that occur in the mountains. Robert Waller served in this role for 11 years, and is a member of the Austrian Board of Trustees for Alpine Safety. In the days before the trial, he told Die Presse that cases like Plamberger’s are incredibly uncommon.

“On average, we have about 285 fatalities per year in the mountains,” Waller explained. “Nevertheless, charges of negligent homicide in connection with accidents in alpine terrain are very rare, and convictions even rarer. You can count the charges on one hand each year. It’s more common in skiing, but in alpine mountaineering, it’s the exception.”

Waller explained that when negligent homicide convictions do occur, they almost always involve guided trips, not informal climbing partnerships, like Plamberger and Gurtner. He added that even if Plamberger and Gurtner acted as “equal partners,” they would each harbor a legal obligation to support and help each other.

According to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, in an interview televised by the German Press Agency, Waller said that the verdict could have a chilling effect on how climbers approach trips into the mountains in Austria.

“Many are now uncertain, and believe that they are always responsible for the entire group and may even be liable simply because they are more qualified,” Waller said.

Severin Glaser, a professor of criminal law at the University of Innsbruck, offered a similar analysis. “This could shift the responsibility for yourself if you’re doing something dangerous,” he told The New York Times. “The costs of mountaineering … might rise, and maybe some people are not willing anymore to pay this higher price.”

It’s too soon to say what the long-term impact of the Grossglockner verdict will be, and as noted above, Plamberger can still appeal.

But it seems safe to say that at least in Austria, the dynamics of casual alpine mentorship may be facing a reckoning. Climbers who once freely shared their expertise with less experienced partners might now have to weigh the legal risks before tying in together.

This is a developing story that we will update as new information becomes available. 

The post Austrian Climber Found Guilty for Leaving Girlfriend to Die During Winter Ascent appeared first on Climbing.