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

[Twick]

It seems there is a certain type of active outdoors person who enjoys dragging those less capable (inexperienced, unfit, too young) into dangerous situations. Why? Perhaps to prove their superiority or control. Perhaps as a “punishment” for perceived misbehaviour. Perhaps to play out a “saviour complex “ I heard someone refer to it as “assault by nature.”

He may not have intended to kill her, but I’m sure he knew she’d essentially be at his mercy at some point during the climb.

 

[beubeubeu]

RSBM
Curious what you mean here... you've used the term 'infection' a couple times.

To me, an infection means a bacterial or viral disease in the body - a UTI?, a URI?

And if KG had an infection, where did you here that? I must have missed that...

No idea...
I was sure that it was mentioned in at least two news articles from last week, but I cant find it now, but I went through so many Im unable to check all of it at the moment.
So I apologize and warn that it may not be accurate, maybe bad translation of "sickness", I dont know.

But even apart from that Im just utterly confused.
Several article say that they actually had a CAMP below the summit and were waiting there for the bad weather to pass. But if so, then wth?
How visible their headlamps could be in a tent? How people in helicopter could see that theyre "turning their heads away" and not signalizing anything if they were covered?
And... then what? He spend some time in that camp, then packed it up and left her without anything, totally exposed to "get help"?
But other articles say that they had nothing.

One claims that they were climbing all the time till almost midnight but if they were climbing then how people could get so concerned seeing them "stuck" on the peak to have helicopter go there and people investigating the identity of climbers. How it can be so much all around the place?

 

[Trebor5591]

What a horrid story.

Sounds like intentional negligence, unless he was also hypothermic and delusional.

I wonder what his defense will be?

That poor woman, entrusting her life...

"unless he was also hypothermic and delusional."

That would be my guess. I am shocked that charges are being filed against him, what a colossal waste of resources. Mountain climbing is incredibly dangerous, IMO.

 

[beubeubeu]

It seems there is a certain type of active outdoors person who enjoys dragging those less capable (inexperienced, unfit, too young) into dangerous situations. Why? Perhaps to prove their superiority or control. Perhaps as a “punishment” for perceived misbehaviour. Perhaps to play out a “saviour complex “ I heard someone refer to it as “assault by nature.”

He may not have intended to kill her, but I’m sure he knew she’d essentially be at his mercy at some point during the climb.

Doesnt apply here either. These people hate to look bad.
If it was intended as show off or power play, he would win that game and came out as a hero and savior if he got her down safely, started taking care of her at some point and if he called help. This doesnt look consistent with the provided info either.

I have to comb through all of that once again and check Austrian/German/British news sources cause Im starting to get Lars Mittank deja vu. That case blew up all around the world cause of the "mysterious" aspect and mental health speculations - and that seemed like pretty reasonable conclusion, till I started checking sources in German, not in English and noticed that soo many details were just translated so poorly that it basically made into a different story.

God, I wish I could just put on some filter and block everything that was translated, written or made with any sort of AI help. Few years ago it felt like searching for info, now it feels like swimming in rubbish.
(and now I have to jump back right in, cause after all what I said here about his actions it'd be awful if it was AI-induced-poor-news-reporting what made him look like murderous monster).

 

[beubeubeu]

"unless he was also hypothermic and delusional."

That would be my guess. I am shocked that charges are being filed against him, what a colossal waste of resources. Mountain climbing is incredibly dangerous, IMO.

Working as a paramedic or firefighter is incredibly dangerous, IMO.

Each fatality in Austria is investigated and closed rather quick.
Trials are rare, and so far it was like shooting someone or taking bunch of kids on advanced trail and leading them to death or injuries.
Hundreds of people are dying in Alps every year.
Most people don't climb alone.
They arent colosally wasting their resources filing charges often.

 

[ChatteringBirds]

"unless he was also hypothermic and delusional."

That would be my guess. I am shocked that charges are being filed against him, what a colossal waste of resources. Mountain climbing is incredibly dangerous, IMO.

Doesn't it then follow that if they are pursuing charges in this particular case, they must have reasons for doing so?

Is Austria like Germany-- will the case go before just a judge?

 

[beubeubeu]

Is Austria like Germany-- will the case go before just a judge?

Yes, judge.

Some of these articles made it sound like (NONE says that, but for me the way its said) on one side there were people freaking out about the climbers stuck below the peak for hours, notifying that there seem like there are people in need of rescue + full surveillance that showed them actually stuck there for hours + rescue services working to identify climbers and making rescue attempts vs. him claiming that they were still slowly climbing up till about midnight.

And kinda... common sense makes ME assume that there is nobody who knows better what climbers may be struggling with on that mountain than people who work there and are assisting people on regular basis there.

Its very clearly stated that both sides ARE holding some things close to their chests and wont reveal it till the actual court case. So there must be more than they have against him and more than he has to explain his actions... so no matter what we dont have the full picture yet.
There has to be something serious that makes people highly experience with this mountain specifically to go "whoa, that doesnt make sense".

 

[georgiajean]

Glad to see this case here. I've been reading about it ever since it started hitting MSM a couple weeks ago.
There is a book, Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why by journalist Laurence Gonzales. Highly recommend for anyone who does outdoor adventures as well as anyone who sleuths outdoor adventures gone wrong. I learned a lot from this book about how there are some mental constructs that we need to be aware of and actively combat in order to stay alive. For example, the "We've already put in X hours, we can't give up now" and the "Just one more (mile, hour, turn)" are two thoughts that are very common and get people into a lot of trouble. Also, the "Just going out on a quick hike,, no need to take snacks/water/a jacket" until the storm rolls in, there is an unexpected detour on the chosen route, and someone twists an ankle. He presents a list of rules, including "If you planned to leave at X and get delayed, do not continue with the hike." and "Every person needs to have their own map and communication device/gps beacon."

At any rate, I highly recommend the book.

My guess (not an expert in any high-risk adventure sports, so just my opinion!) is that this has a lot to do with ego and them getting in over their heads and him not being willing/able to make proper choices once things started going south. He was the experienced hiker, and when (if) she started questioning him or wanting to turn back, he wouldn't, and managed to convince her to keep going. Or perhaps she was too caught up in also showing she was strong and capable (his equal) that she mustered on long before she should have stopped.

This is a case I hope is recorded, or there is a good reporter texting from within.

 

[mickey2942]

The folks on Mount Everest who left their teammate to die, didn't get charged. I wonder if this will be a new trend, to charge people who leave teammates.

This Man Was Left to Die on Everest, But These Hikers Sacrificed Reaching the Top To Save His Life

Near Everest's peak, the climbers faced a choice: head for the summit, like others had done, or stop to save the injured man.

www.rd.com

 

[Cedars]

My guess (not an expert in any high-risk adventure sports, so just my opinion!) is that this has a lot to do with ego and them getting in over their heads and him not being willing/able to make proper choices once things started going south. He was the experienced hiker, and when (if) she started questioning him or wanting to turn back, he wouldn't, and managed to convince her to keep going. Or perhaps she was too caught up in also showing she was strong and capable (his equal) that she mustered on long before she should have stopped.

I agree.

I have experience with people really into extreme sports - and the kinds of books and films they love - which I found mystifying.

I eventually concluded enthuiasts see a sort of glory in it. It feels heroic, like warriors proudly marching off to battle, full of confidence in their own success and survival. They also feel a unifying, transfixing sense of purpose and focus on conquering the mountain, and an intense bond with other people who aren't afraid of challenges, compare with the mass of humans who won't step out of their comfort zone.

IMO, pivoting from that mindset is not always easy. Although experienced, this guy had no training as a guide, and was probably unfit to be playing that role.

JMO

 

[Charlot123]

Possible theories:

- Thomas is so self-absorbed that he didn’t even pay much attention to Kerstin’s preparedness, just didn’t think of her at all. He had already ascended Grossglockner before and was fixated on what “he” needed. It culminated in leaving Kerstin alone when she became a “burden” in the mountains as his goal was to summit.

- a different, scary possibility. As an uncertified guide, Thomas had to guide other people. Did he, perhaps, slowly increase the risk level with each new person? Was it a very special kind of thrill that he pushed? Culminating in: the “maximum risk with minimally prepared person”? If Kerstin summited successfully, would his new climb with her, or someone else, be even more risky?

- or did he simply took Kerstin along because he needed to lead a certain amount of groups in the mountains to get credited as the official “group guide”?

Let us think about it. Plamberger was an “experienced” climber, and a guide, but not a certified one. The highest official certifications are IFMGA or AMGA. I looked through them. Was Thomas trying to get “credits” to eventually become a certified guide, to make money on his hobby? And did one of the requirements include “experience with leading groups”?

I looked up the requirements of becoming an alpine mountain guide in Austria.

It is a little bit vague but trainings are spread over years. I wonder if “leading groups” is what he was pursuing? Two people make a group.

Becoming A Mountain Guide | Susi Süßmeier | Part 1

‘The most beautiful job in the world? To be out in the mountains. To do what others pay money for, and earn money in the process. Sounds like a dream, doesn't it? But what do you have to do for it? And does the fun really come without a down side?‘ In part 1 of this 4-part series, certified...

us.mountain-equipment.com

Lastly, I looked into “mountain climbing Oscars”, and please correct me if I wrong but here is how I understood it. In the time when oxygen is allowed to climb, climbing gets physically less stressful. So the emphasis shifts towards “innovative”, “style, spirit, creativity and technical difficulty”.

Piolets d'Or - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So maybe Thomas was emulating “increased technical difficulty” (starting later, summiting at night, in winter, - 20C for a purpose,to make it “technically difficult”?). Was snowboarding down meant to be “innovative”? And the “girlfriend” was also a “group” because “technically difficult climbing in a group” was needed for him to get another credit for guide accreditation?

 

[Charlot123]

The folks on Mount Everest who left their teammate to die, didn't get charged. I wonder if this will be a new trend, to charge people who leave teammates.

This Man Was Left to Die on Everest, But These Hikers Sacrificed Reaching the Top To Save His Life

Near Everest's peak, the climbers faced a choice: head for the summit, like others had done, or stop to save the injured man.

www.rd.com

It is something that Plamberger probably knew, the situation on the Everest. I suspect he planned to rely on it as the precedent.

But Everest is highly commercialized. And, it is Nepal. I don’t know what websites say, I heard from tourists that a “normal” cost for the climb to Everest is 80K plus 20K mandatory insurance. Groups may be formed from the people knowing each other, or from totally random people, or mixed. But mainly, Nepal lives by tourism and is not interested in scaring off climbers.

Plamberger and Gurtner are Austrians, Grossglockner is in Austria, Thomas is judged by the Austrian laws.

Everest to Plamberger: cruise ship sinks, best swimmers swim out not trying to help anyone else. Whose fault? The cruise line, officially. Plamberger: a parent wants a baby to learn swimming, throws him into the ocean without a life buoy, the baby starts drowning, the parent decides that the waves are too strong and saves himself. Whose fault? The parent’s.

(We may, and should, talk about how commerce drowns morality and the fact that in many elite climbing companies the tours are poorly prepared. But we should hold them to higher standards, not allow all climbers to sink down to their level).

 

[beubeubeu]

"We've already put in X hours, we can't give up now" and the "Just one more (mile, hour, turn)" are two thoughts that are very common and get people into a lot of trouble.

Yeah. The problem is that exact same thing gets people to achieve their challenging goals like 99% of the time and it's very hard to tell a difference between pushing through moment of weakness and pushing through warning signs that it's getting bad. Its hard to have that level of self awareness in circumstances that are almost always different (in some way/s) than previous experiences.

Also, the "Just going out on a quick hike,, no need to take snacks/water/a jacket" until the storm rolls in, there is an unexpected detour on the chosen route, and someone twists an ankle.

Same thing. As you go through all the tragic outcomes or what ended up with search for a person or required some form of rescue you can see/learn that it applies to almost all these events. But as you go through the totality of these quick hikes, majority of them ends up mostly okay.
Which is great - that they end up okay. And would be pretty good if tese people had the mindset of I took a risk, I came out of it okay so Im very happy about it, but I wont be doing that in the future or to the very least shut up about it and keep my own irresponsible preferences to myself. But no. Those people tend to immediately start to act like they proved all these chickens who brag about appropriate gear/clothing/supplies WRONG and they start preaching themselves to the holy heavens. To who? Not to the people who insist on the importance of having proper gear and supplies - cause they wont agree or wont listen. They tend to "educate" those who dont know, who never climbed or took a serious hike yet or dont know the area.
And the moment somebody gets hurt, theyre first to jump straight into "oh, they should've known better".

The folks on Mount Everest who left their teammate to die, didn't get charged. I wonder if this will be a new trend, to charge people who leave teammates.

This Man Was Left to Die on Everest, But These Hikers Sacrificed Reaching the Top To Save His Life

Near Everest's peak, the climbers faced a choice: head for the summit, like others had done, or stop to save the injured man.

www.rd.com

What would you charge a folk who left their teammate to die on Mount Everest with? There is 0% of chance that staying with an injured/sick companion on the slope of Mount Everest can save their life. Any successful rescue missions on such high mountains were successful only cause the teammates left their companions - securing them as well from wind, cold and snow as possible (if it was possible) and notifying other people that were able to climb up and help.

Thomas P. is not charged cause he left her behind.
Hes charged cause he's on the video surveillance, not moving in any direction since 8:50 PM, not trying to call for help despite of having phone reception, not weaving for help to helicopter and not using the gear that he had to protect her from cold.

It absolutely should be a new trend and I hope people will be getting charged as now we have technology and at least in some cases it becomes possible to verify that something doesnt add up in some stories and its not all "what happens in the mountains, stays in the mountains".
Its scary in the aspect of possibly charging people who did nothing wrong, but that kinda applies to everything.
And at least some people tend to control themselves better and make much better judgement while aware that there may be consequences. With sheer numbers. More people survive traffic accidents and heart attacks on the streets if witnesses can be punished for minding their own business and not trying to call an ambulance or do CPR than if it relies solely on their will to do it.

 

[beubeubeu]

Possible theories:

- Thomas is so self-absorbed that he didn’t even pay much attention to Kerstin’s preparedness, just didn’t think of her at all. He had already ascended Grossglockner before and was fixated on what “he” needed. It culminated in leaving Kerstin alone when she became a “burden” in the mountains as his goal was to summit.

But its not what happened. He didn't leave her to summit.
We cant be sure, but looking at the timeline... if he actually DID leave her to summit the moment she wasnt able to walk farther and wend down the other way to the exact same spot where he called emergency the second time... it likely would be still possible for helicopter to go for her.

- a different, scary possibility. As an uncertified guide, Thomas had to guide other people. Did he, perhaps, slowly increase the risk level with each new person? Was it a very special kind of thrill that he pushed? Culminating in: the “maximum risk with minimally prepared person”? If Kerstin summited successfully, would his new climb with her, or someone else, be even more risky?

There is no implication that he wanted to be a guide and no implication that he was guiding anyone. I think they mean it more in a way that he ended up as a guide in a way that anyone who knows the area/circumstances/topic/whatever best ends up as a guide for their companions.

- or did he simply took Kerstin along because he needed to lead a certain amount of groups in the mountains to get credited as the official “group guide”?

Thats no way to become a guide. Allowing her to go in snowboarding boots, starting after dawn would more likely ban him from becoming a certified guide ever than work in his favor.

I looked up the requirements of becoming an alpine mountain guide in Austria.

It is a little bit vague but trainings are spread over years. I wonder if “leading groups” is what he was pursuing? Two people make a group.

Years experience in climbing high mountains + courses + climbing training + skiing training + several theoretical and practical courses (gear, climbing techniques, geology of Alps and so on) + internship with other certified guides + several exams.
Pretty sure (but not absolutely sure) that any guiding related legal offences are closing that path completely. So a person cant become an alpine guide or stay alpine guide if they will commit climbing-related negligence.

Becoming A Mountain Guide | Susi Süßmeier | Part 1

‘The most beautiful job in the world? To be out in the mountains. To do what others pay money for, and earn money in the process. Sounds like a dream, doesn't it? But what do you have to do for it? And does the fun really come without a down side?‘ In part 1 of this 4-part series, certified...

us.mountain-equipment.com

Lastly, I looked into “mountain climbing Oscars”, and please correct me if I wrong but here is how I understood it. In the time when oxygen is allowed to climb, climbing gets physically less stressful. So the emphasis shifts towards “innovative”, “style, spirit, creativity and technical difficulty”.

Piolets d'Or - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So maybe Thomas was emulating “increased technical difficulty” (starting later, summiting at night, in winter, - 20C for a purpose,to make it “technically difficult”?). Was snowboarding down meant to be “innovative”? And the “girlfriend” was also a “group” because “technically difficult climbing in a group” was needed for him to get another credit for guide accreditation?

It was -8*C not -20*C.
-20*C was the approx. temp experienced near the peak with the frost and wind combined.

No way.

And I mean "no way" in a way that any of that would help him to became a guide in reality. He very well might have these theoretical visions and goals in his mind, but snowboarding down the mountain may count as "innovative" for someone who knows the mountain, summited few times, learned the terrain and weather from the exact area, and who does that by themselves not for a companion of such person, and definitely not for a companion of a person who doesnt know the mountain.

Btw. Im still combing through these articles and there is nothing clear about that snowboarding down plan. Its not clear from where it came from. Was it Kerstin who shared that with someone? On her social media possibly? To a friend? Ot is it his claim? Or somebodys "best guess"?
Cause what she had was splitboard, so snowboard that can also be split into a pair of skis. But as Im now thinking - it doesnt clearly imply that she had an intention of some wild ride down the slope straight from the peak, could be and likely was intended just for some part of their trail down...

 

[303gmf]

The folks on Mount Everest who left their teammate to die, didn't get charged. I wonder if this will be a new trend, to charge people who leave teammates.

This Man Was Left to Die on Everest, But These Hikers Sacrificed Reaching the Top To Save His Life

Near Everest's peak, the climbers faced a choice: head for the summit, like others had done, or stop to save the injured man.

www.rd.com

The 1996 Everest expedition is explained so well by author Jon Krakauer in his book

 

[beubeubeu]

Plamberger and Gurtner are Austrians, Grossglockner is in Austria, Thomas is judged by the Austrian laws.

There are no laws in mountains.
Unless you actually ARE a certified guide and taking responsibility for other people's safety - then some outcomes may lead you to consequences.
Otherwise no consequences, cause its always implied and always will be implied that people made the best decisions that they could do having their own and others safety/survival in mind. People die trying to save others in circumstances where there is no reasonable chance that they may succeed so its kinda... you cant encourage or push people to take more risk than theyre feeling theyre able to take and expect higher survival rate.

On the other hand there are examples as from the link above, where climber got saved by other climbers who were able and willing to try to save him but left by others unable or/and unwilling to decrease their chances of survival.

Unless there are witnesses, laws dont apply in mountains, on the sea and not only there.
Yet you can be pretty damn sure that not all of those people "left to die" ended up left to die cause their companions had no choice, as occasionally those "left to die" survive and can tell what happened.

 

[justtrish]

The folks on Mount Everest who left their teammate to die, didn't get charged. I wonder if this will be a new trend, to charge people who leave teammates.

This Man Was Left to Die on Everest, But These Hikers Sacrificed Reaching the Top To Save His Life

Near Everest's peak, the climbers faced a choice: head for the summit, like others had done, or stop to save the injured man.

www.rd.com

I think in this case on Everest everyone climbing likely signed an agreement about risks and what rescue efforts would and wouldn't be used to help if something like this happens. It can be dangerous for other climbers if one in the party loses it and everyone is more in a survial mode to get themselves up and back down.

The difference I see with the couple is, he brought her up there, he had the supplies to save her and himself, he didn't call for help even with a helicopter flying around. It was possible for him to save her and get help, but he didn't. On Everest nobody is coming to help. I believe it's more of a self-rescue and the climbers you are with being able to physically help you to a point where rescues can get to you, if they can't do that, then it puts everyone in the group at risk trying. I will say again ANYONE climbing Everest knowingly takes on the risks associated with it. you don't accidently get almost all the way up Everest.

 

[beubeubeu]

Okay, I give up.
This is crazy.
Some sources say that they were first seen stuck below the peak sometime around 20:50 (8:50 PM)
But then another shows time stamped ss from surveillance, showing them at the spot at 19:30 (7:30 PM)
And some claim they stopped climbing after 22:00 (10:00 PM)

EVERYTHING related to the actual hours of events is so around the place that I cant understand how it could get so mixed up.
So a guy whos 36 or 39
Who has moderate or excellent Alpine climbing experience
Had his girlfriend start feeling unwell sometime between noon and 10 PM
Had his gf stuck below the peak and unable to move sometime between 7:30 PM and 10 PM
Called rescue services and beg for help sometime between "30ish mins later", 0:30 AM and 2:00 AM
Was or wasnt repeatedly called by rescue services before that
His call for help either wasnt verbally expressed during the call, wasnt understood or got ignored.
They either had some sort of camp below the summit or they didnt
In which or without which he stayed for sometime between 30 mins and 6 hours before going up without her
Then either he wasnt able to get an rescue services on call or they werent able to conntact him cause he kept ignoring these calls
Helicopter either flew to their rescue sometime before midnight or it just happened to pass the mountain
During that flight people in helicopter either saw the couple turn their heads away or they didnt
Then Thomas P. called for help again sometime around 2:30 or 3:30 AM
Heli either flew there again before that happened, or tried to do so after that call or havent tried to do so cause weather was too bad
And then rescue team climbed to Kerstin but as they got to her around 8,9,10 OR 11 AM, she already froze
The only consistent info could be that she wasnt sheltered or covered from the elements in any way... but its not cause there is also a mention of some sort of camp here and there

Excellent coverage I must say.
Something happened.
Kristen died.
Her boyfriend either acted like a cold blooded, sociopathic murderer or like a boyfriend who tried to get help for her.
And it either seems crazy and unjust that theyre charging him with anything, or crazy and unjust that they arent charging him with first degree murder.

I get how some details may vary, but what on Earth were those people's sources that the timeline looks like they all made it relying on random hour generator?
Ive tried to group links, like which source says what, but its just so all around the place its ridiculous.

Edit: btw, cherry on top - two articles claim it happened in 2024, not 2025.

 

[georgiajean]

Okay, I give up.
This is crazy.
Some sources say that they were first seen stuck below the peak sometime around 20:50 (8:50 PM)
But then another shows time stamped ss from surveillance, showing them at the spot at 19:30 (7:30 PM)
And some claim they stopped climbing after 22:00 (10:00 PM)
View attachment 630205

EVERYTHING related to the actual hours of events is so around the place that I cant understand how it could get so mixed up.
So a guy whos 36 or 39
Who has moderate or excellent Alpine climbing experience
Had his girlfriend start feeling unwell sometime between noon and 10 PM
Had his gf stuck below the peak and unable to move sometime between 7:30 PM and 10 PM
Called rescue services and beg for help sometime between "30ish mins later", 0:30 AM and 2:00 AM
Was or wasnt repeatedly called by rescue services before that
His call for help either wasnt verbally expressed during the call, wasnt understood or got ignored.
They either had some sort of camp below the summit or they didnt
In which or without which he stayed for sometime between 30 mins and 6 hours before going up without her
Then either he wasnt able to get an rescue services on call or they werent able to conntact him cause he kept ignoring these calls
Helicopter either flew to their rescue sometime before midnight or it just happened to pass the mountain
During that flight people in helicopter either saw the couple turn their heads away or they didnt
Then Thomas P. called for help again sometime around 2:30 or 3:30 AM
Heli either flew there again before that happened, or tried to do so after that call or havent tried to do so cause weather was too bad
And then rescue team climbed to Kerstin but as they got to her around 8,9,10 OR 11 AM, she already froze
The only consistent info could be that she wasnt sheltered or covered from the elements in any way... but its not cause there is also a mention of some sort of camp here and there

Excellent coverage I must say.
Something happened.
Kristen died.
Her boyfriend either acted like a cold blooded, sociopathic murderer or like a boyfriend who tried to get help for her.
And it either seems crazy and unjust that theyre charging him with anything, or crazy and unjust that they arent charging him with first degree murder.

I get how some details may vary, but what on Earth were those people's sources that the timeline looks like they all made it relying on random hour generator?
Ive tried to group links, like which source says what, but its just so all around the place its ridiculous.

Edit: btw, cherry on top - two articles claim it happened in 2024, not 2025.

Impressive summary of the "facts." Thank you!
I had gotten frustrated by the lack of consistency across reports, and I wondered if it was related to multiple language translations.

The piece that bothers me the most is why the thermal blankets were not used. You have life-saving equipment but do not use it?

 

[Cedars]

Okay, I give up.
This is crazy...I get how some details may vary, but what on Earth were those people's sources that the timeline looks like they all made it relying on random hour generator?

RSBM

IMO, that's the reality of social media: firestorms of rumour, speculation, 2nd hand emotions and fierce opinions. No interest in facts. No interest in admitting 'I wasn't actually there, so I don't really know what happened'.

Also, if the dead person were a male friend, IMO the response would be very different.

JMO