Feb 19, 2026, 3:23 p.mFeb 19, 2026, 3:23 p.m
In the trial of a mountaineer who froze to death on the Grossglockner in Austria, her accused partner denied responsibility for her death.
The couple set out in January 2025 to climb the Grossglockner.Image: www.imago-images.de
While the public prosecutor’s office and the judge at the Innsbruck regional court pointed out the 37-year-old’s alleged mistakes, he himself presented the hours before his girlfriend’s death on Austria’s highest mountain differently.
On a winter morning in January 2025, the couple set off on the mountain tour together. After midnight, the young woman died alone in bad weather just below the 3,798 meter high summit. Her boyfriend left her “defenseless, exhausted, hypothermic and disoriented,” the prosecutor said.
“Go now, go!”
“Go now, go!” – With these words, the woman herself asked her boyfriend to leave her alone in a situation that was dangerous for both of them and to get help, the defendant said. “It saved my life,” he said. He emphasized that “I am incredibly sorry for what happened and how it happened.” But he did not plead guilty.
The man is charged with grossly negligent homicide. He faces up to three years in prison. From the prosecutor’s perspective, he was effectively acting as a mountain guide for his less experienced girlfriend and made many serious mistakes in the process.
The prosecution says he didn’t take his girlfriend’s lack of experience into account and didn’t provide the necessary equipment.
It felt like minus 20 degrees on the Grossglockner that day.Image: www.imago-images.de
He also didn’t turn around in time at the last possible turning point on the route, even though a strong wind caused a temperature of minus 20 degrees.
“Tour always planned together”
When a police helicopter rose to the couple on the mountain in the darkness late in the evening, the man did not make an emergency call. He only contacted the Alpine police after midnight, but no longer responded to calls from the emergency services.
The defendant, however, emphasized that his girlfriend was also an enthusiastic mountaineer and very sporty. “We always planned the tour together and made the decisions together,” he said – contrary to his earlier statements in which he described himself as the person responsible for climbing the summit. The man explained in court that he had taught himself his mountaineering skills through practice and online videos. He never took any courses. The parents of the deceased described their daughter in court as extremely strong-willed.
On average, around 8,400 accidents occur in the mountains of Austria every year. (symbol image)Image: MAMMUT
The judge, who specializes in alpine cases, is himself an experienced mountain rescuer. He pointed out that the deceased appeared to have had little or no experience of high alpine terrain in winter. Winter climbs are “a different galaxy” compared to summer, he said.
“This is what you need to know as a mountaineer”
The lawyer also asked many questions about rope techniques and emergency measures that the defendant had not used. “As a mountaineer, you need to know that,” said the judge about the fact that the 37-year-old had not properly informed the emergency services about his girlfriend’s total exhaustion. On average, around 8,400 accidents occur in the Austrian mountains every year and almost 300 people die, as the Board of Trustees for Alpine Safety has calculated. Many of the deaths occur because of cardiovascular disease or falls. Death from frostbite or exhaustion appears extremely rarely in the statistics.
Only a few mountain accidents end up in court. Because the judiciary emphasizes personal responsibility when mountaineering, explained alpine expert Robert Wallner to the DPA news agency. The lawyer previously worked on such cases as a public prosecutor in Innsbruck for years.
But in this trial, the public prosecutor’s office argues that the defendant was actually acting as a mountain guide due to his greater experience and therefore had special duties of care. The judge wanted to make a verdict in the evening – despite more than a dozen witnesses who were to be questioned in the afternoon. (sda/dpa)