GUILTY Austria - Thomas Plamberger leaves gf, Kerstin Gurtner to freeze to death on Austria's tallest mountain - charged with manslaughter - Jan.19/2025

[Charlot123]

5 months imprsionment seems extremely brief, given the gravity of the outcome and the many, many opportunities in which Thomas could have signalled for rescue sooner. But I am not familiar with Austrian law or sentencing norms.

Perhaps the media publicity will offer pause to future women who consider a domestic, romantic, or climbing partnership with him.

5 months does seem brief to me, but it is the first case in Austria that I am following.

On "big forums" not a single person exonerates him, it seems.

I hope that men, too, don't include him into their climbing teams. He is plain dangerous. Let him climb alone.

Also, such risk-takers may put teams of savers at risk.

Did they call him Salzberger and not Plamberger because he was just the accused?

The woman who was the witness did a good job. I hope she doesn't feel guilty for not reporting him to the police. It was abuse, but of the type that's hard to recognize as such. "Extreme coercive control in dangerous conditions" comes to mind. This time, it culminated in a person dying. That one was lucky to survive.

I wonder if his family has certain clout and was able to hush up his clearly abnormal behavior for a while.

 

[planet]

It wont. Nobody will remember what exactly happened in few weeks not to mention months. He already has people buying that he had to save himself. If prosecutor and a judge in his case mostly bought his &%#@×÷€ there will be women seeing nothing but poor, heartbroken guy who got treated so unfairly.

I'm not sure I agree with you, but only time will tell.

 

[tillytatler]

It looks more and more clear to me Plamberger punished Kerstin because she dared to have some difficulties during the climb.

MOO

MOO this is more or less what I think too - he got exasperated and went ahead, even the fact he summited and came down so quickly implies to me a sort of "look how easy it is yet she cannot manage" - and as the helicopter had been over recently probably thought it would be simple to send it back up and rescue her (i do not go so far as to think he wanted her dead - though certainly he was at fault - i just think he was petulant and egotistical, with fatal results)

 

[Charlot123]

It wont. Nobody will remember what exactly happened in few weeks not to mention months. He already has people buying that he had to save himself. If prosecutor and a judge in his case mostly bought his &%#@×÷€ there will be women seeing nothing but poor, heartbroken guy who got treated so unfairly.

It is an example of abuse in the form of coercive control, but i understand why the previous girlfriend had problems with reporting him. It is hard to formulate what exactly one is reporting.

For all men who are making YouTubes supporting him, I'd offer to start going with him to Glossglockner as a team of two.

 

[beubeubeu]

5 months does seem brief to me, but it is the first case in Austria that I am following.

On "big forums" not a single person exonerates him, it seems.

I hope that men, too, don't include him into their climbing teams. He is plain dangerous. Let him climb alone.

Also, such risk-takers may put teams of savers at risk.

Did they call him Salzberger and not Plamberger because he was just the accused?

The woman who was the witness did a good job. I hope she doesn't feel guilty for not reporting him to the police. It was abuse, but of the type that's hard to recognize as such. "Extreme coercive control in dangerous conditions" comes to mind. This time, it culminated in a person dying. That one was lucky to survive.

I wonder if his family has certain clout and was able to hush up his clearly abnormal behavior for a while.

Somebody paid for one of the best lawyers available over there.
They call him Salzburger cause its law in Austria, nobody says full name unless court decides otherwise. Will be even easier for him to find next victim.

 

[beubeubeu]

MOO this is more or less what I think too - he got exasperated and went ahead, even the fact he summited and came down so quickly implies to me a sort of "look how easy it is yet she cannot manage" - and as the helicopter had been over recently probably thought it would be simple to send it back up and rescue her (i do not go so far as to think he wanted her dead - though certainly he was at fault - i just think he was petulant and egotistical, with fatal results)

Would you still think that he could have that logic on a level of a 5 year old or adult with no knowledge about climbing and rescue considering:
- private associations with alpine rescue heli pilot,
- having multiple close family members with life long proffesional firefighting and mountain rescue experience,
- rich history of adding comments under posts about mountain emergencies, bragging about his skill, experience, high level of precautious
?

 

[RedHaus]

TP FOUND GUILTY OF KILLING KG!!!

Thrilled there is a bit of JUSTICE for KG!

But the sentence is just ridiculous! That is sad. Do it really is. Partial victory.

He dies now have a criminal record and no one with any sense will climb with him, at least as a guide or boyfriend.

I have yet to catch up on the trial blow by blow. I look forward to it!! Thank you.

Austrian Man Found Guilty in Girlfriend’s Death on Mountain Hike

Thomas Plamberger was given a suspended prison sentence and fined in a case that tested the limits of personal responsibility in mountaineering.

www.nytimes.com

ETA: sentencing information...

 

[tillytatler]

Would you still think that he could have that logic on a level of a 5 year old or adult with no knowledge about climbing and rescue considering:
- private associations with alpine rescue heli pilot,
- having multiple close family members with life long proffesional firefighting and mountain rescue experience,
- rich history of adding comments under posts about mountain emergencies, bragging about his skill, experience, high level of precautious
?

Well, I would say I find his logic or level of intellectual ability difficult to gauge from a distance. We know e.g. they didn't have any food on them other than gummy bears, so I am not seeing this guy as a particularly prize thinker tbh.

I absolutely *could* believe he was purposefully and premeditatedly trying to kill her, I don't think it's unimaginable, if that is your question; but I do not believe this has been shown within reasonable doubt. And it seems like it would be a pretty convoluted and precarious murder method.

I think he likely purposefully left her behind and beyond that I do not know and probably cannot and will not know.

 

[moonglow123]

I’m glad he didn’t get nothing, but 5 months really does seem extremely paltry for what he did. He knew she was going to die and it really was an utterly awful, cruel, malicious, negligent way to approach the situation. I pray he doesn’t do this to another woman.

 

[pol100gk]

It's a five month suspended sentence, he won't go to jail.

 

[moonglow123]

It's a five month suspended sentence, he won't go to jail.

Wow…

Well, I pray any woman that tries to date him in the future looks him up and learns about this situation.

Not even covering her in the emergency blanket is bonkers. Turning the phone on silent in a life or death emergency. Everything. Horrible.

 

[geronimo_is_alive]

Five months means hes gonna walk free before Easter? Or bit after?

I'm not from Austria, but suspended sentence is probably like the rest of EU. It means he walks free, he'll only go to jail if he does it again in certain time frame.

 

[beubeubeu]

Well, I would say I find his logic or level of intellectual ability difficult to gauge from a distance. We know e.g. they didn't have any food on them other than gummy bears, so I am not seeing this guy as a particularly prize thinker tbh.

I absolutely *could* believe he was purposefully and premeditatedly trying to kill her, I don't think it's unimaginable, if that is your question; but I do not believe this has been shown within reasonable doubt. And it seems like it would be a pretty convoluted and precarious murder method.

I think he likely purposefully left her behind and beyond that I do not know and probably cannot and will not know.

We dont know what he did have or havent in his backpack. It was only stated that she had nothing but gummy bears in her backpack as he left her. And that came from him. Wasnt challenged so likely accurate.

My question was if youre still having so much trust into his outstanding naivety and ignorance in regard of whats likely possible or impossible in the matter of alpine rescue.
That usually (the naivety) comes from people who didnt have much real exposition on the issue.

 

[tillytatler]

We dont know what he did have or havent in his backpack. It was only stated that she had nothing but gummy bears in her backpack as he left her. And that came from him. Wasnt challenged so likely accurate.

My question was if youre still having so much trust into his outstanding naivety and ignorance in regard of whats likely possible or impossible in the matter of alpine rescue.
That usually (the naivety) comes from people who didnt have much real exposition on the issue.

I would not say I had "so much trust" in the first place, it was a very offhand comment that he might have thought to himself, well, the heli just went over, so surely it can again. Equally he might not have thought that. I cannot know, as I am just a person on a message board.

 

[beubeubeu]

I'm not from Austria, but suspended sentence is probably like the rest of EU. It means he walks free, he'll only go to jail if he does it again in certain time frame.

Oh right. Suspended. Jesus Christ, i got so disappointed by "five months" i totally missed thats even worse.
Well, surely missing on so many incriminating details worked well for him.

So... that will be one of the lightest from (in general) pretty light sentences for negligence. Full on blessing for others to do the same.

 

[georgiajean]

Final reporter comments on the trial. Glockner-Drama: Nach über 13 Stunden Schuldspruch

"Judge Norbert Hofer now explains the sticking points in this case. "The victim was galaxies away from you (note: the accused) as far as her high alpine abilities are concerned," he says, "what she explicitly lacked is experience in winter.""

""For me, the impression has arisen that the victim has been deceived in some points," says Hofer, "it actually escalated at the Frühstücksplatzl". Among other things, it was proven by the clocks that difficulties had arisen from this point on. "They definitely should have turned around here. You should have recognized that with your alpine experience," the judge speaks clearly."

"Further detailed and, above all, conclusive explanations follow from the judge. "If you had acted differently, I strongly assume that your partner would have survived." And further: "For the alpine policeman, the emergency call did not arrive until 3.30 a.m. - there is no other way to explain his behavior.""

"Judge Norbert Hofer also explains in great detail which charges he has dropped - and above all why."

""You have clearly taken the lead," the judge notes, "you also planned the tour in advance." He also discusses crampons. "That was not the right tool for your partner – you need to know that because you provided her with the material," Hofer said."

"
Among other things, the judge explains to the Salzburg resident how quickly a rope blockade can actually be released. "And you know that with all your experience." It would also not have been unusual if Kerstin had made an emergency call herself. "The fact that she dialed 149 certainly indicates that the number 9 is not far from 0," says Hofer, "and that at a time when she was already feeling bad."

And the judge continued: "I still see gross negligence fulfilled, it is not excessive, but it is fulfilled." He justifies this on the basis of several points."

""It is difficult for me to understand that total exhaustion occurred within an hour," says Hofer, "it occurred insidiously - and not overnight. You should have recognized that." The judge emphasizes: "I don't see you the way you see many others on social media.""

"The judge is still explaining his verdict to the Salzburger. And then follows: "You have the opportunity to file a complaint," informs Norbert Hofer, "how do you want to proceed?" Defense attorney Kurt Jelinek takes the floor: "I would like to have a brief discussion with my client outside." The two are allowed to do so."

"The defense attorney asks for time to think it over. According to the law, he receives three days. Therefore, the verdict is not final."

"After more than 14 hours, the hearing is declared over. The "Krone" says goodbye – GOOD NIGHT!"

Glockner-Drama: Nach über 13 Stunden Schuldspruch

Die Tragödie schockte Österreich und weit darüber hinaus: Kerstin G. (33) fand im Jänner 2025 am Großglockner den tragischen Erfrierungstod. Ihr ...

www.krone.at

 

[Charlot123]

Somebody paid for one of the best lawyers available over there.
They call him Salzburger cause its law in Austria, nobody says full name unless court decides otherwise. Will be even easier for him to find next victim.

Now that he is guilty, it stays in history. And it is not the situation that can be expunged. Although it does make sense to copy articles discussing the case.

Historically, "what happens in the mountains is hard to prosecute", but at the same time, "what happens in the mountains doesn't stay only in the mountains". And the reputation exists.

Of course one wonders what happens in the mind of this dude; I don't feel appropriate to guess out loud. But I think it is safe to say that this case reeks of at least severe psychological quirks on his side. The fact that it happens specifically with women is telling.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Austrian Man Found Guilty in Girlfriend’s Death on Mountain Hike

Thomas Plamberger was given a suspended prison sentence and fined in a case that tested the limits of personal responsibility in mountaineering.

www.nytimes.com

In the end, the judge found that Mr. Plamberger was largely responsible for Ms. Gurtner, saying his mountaineering skills were “galaxies” away from hers, and faulting him for not recognizing and understanding her abilities.

“You are an excellent alpinist, but someone who finds it very difficult to make the switch between your own limits and those of others,” he said.

Mr. Plamberger’s lawyer, Kurt Jelinek, said after the ruling that the trial was “fair” and that his client “accepted the verdict with composure.” He added that Mr. Plamberger would take time before considering an appeal.

At its core, the case examined how much responsibility can be put on a private individual when they are engaging in risky or dangerous behavior with others. The question has become increasingly relevant in Austria, where more and more less-experienced visitors have visited the mountains in recent years, leading to an uptick in accidents.

Severin Glaser, a professor of criminal law at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, said the guilty verdict could alter mountaineering in Austria, as people consider their liability on personal tours.

“This could shift the responsibility for yourself if you’re doing something dangerous,” he said. “The costs of mountaineering, the costs of expressing your freedom might rise, and maybe some people are not willing anymore to pay this higher price.”

 

[Charlot123]

Well, I would say I find his logic or level of intellectual ability difficult to gauge from a distance. We know e.g. they didn't have any food on them other than gummy bears, so I am not seeing this guy as a particularly prize thinker tbh.

I absolutely *could* believe he was purposefully and premeditatedly trying to kill her, I don't think it's unimaginable, if that is your question; but I do not believe this has been shown within reasonable doubt. And it seems like it would be a pretty convoluted and precarious murder method.

I think he likely purposefully left her behind and beyond that I do not know and probably cannot and will not know.

This is the guy that behaves normally on the ground. Has a job, a community, has no trouble having girlfriends, so not that he is totally devoid of normal skills. Mind you, no prior criminal history whatsoever, so the anger that his ex spoke about manifested only when there was no one else to see it but the woman.

So whatever problems he had, there was enough common sense to conceal them.

And, he did ascend many times, so he must have had enough common sense to pack all necessary things.

Did he take care only of himself? Perhaps it did not matter if his partner was as seasoned as he was.

But with less seasoned women, who trusted him and depended on him, the behavior changed: he didn’t care about them, was focused on reaching the peak himself and if they (predictably) were not as fast as he was or did not meet his expectations, he’d leave them. Only one was in a better shape and managed, and the other one, died.

So I see something sadistic in it. It is either training a puppy in a harsh way or intentionally setting up a person for failure (meaning, death) or being very angry that life hadn’t sent him a better partner (a high-class female climber) and taking it on these young, less experienced, women?

Which brings up a point: his rating was high among the climbers, but deep inside, how did they view him? There is a Hamburg score anywhere. Could it be so that really “cool”, popular, strong climbers, be it men or women, shunned him? Could he be too self-conceited or too shallow of a person? Did he try to train these girlfriends of his into high-class climbers and when it didn’t work fast, he’d get angry?

Could he always feel that he deserved more?

Now, this is a purely theoretical point. The local mountain climbing community is probably not going to discuss him (for many reasons we don’t want to “drown” our own), so I don’t expect anyone to come out and say, “totally unsurprised, this egotist”. It doesn’t happen.

But to myself, I ask this question. Was he an established member of the community but somewhat of an outlier?

When men harbor hatred of women but never show it except for when they are totally alone, it’s never about women.

 

[Lammergeier]

Outraged at the sentence. They valued this woman’s life at £8000. Not even jail time. So basically free rein to murder women as long as you do it by putting them in a unsurvivable situation and walking away with a shrug.