World News

53971 readers

2859 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

376

Climber on trial for leaving girlfriend to die on Austria's highest mountain (www.bbc.com)

submitted 1 day ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

89 comments fedilink hide all child comments

More than a year after a 33-year-old woman froze to death on Austria's highest mountain, her boyfriend goes on trial on Thursday accused of gross negligent manslaughter.

Kerstin G died of hypothermia on a mountain climbing trip to the Grossglockner that went horribly wrong. Her boyfriend is accused of leaving her unprotected and exhausted close to the summit in stormy conditions in the early hours of 19 January 2025, while he went to get help.

The trial has sparked interest and debate, not just in Austria but in mountain climbing communities far beyond its borders.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

If they can't be helped without putting yourself at risk of drowning too, then yes. For instance, if someone is panicking and thrashing around, posing a threat to rescue, then they yes, you leave them to die or risk dying as well. This is an uncomfortable reality of being in dangerous situations.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 6 points 22 hours ago

Yeah one of the things you learn in lifeguard class is that it’s a wrestling match against the person you’re trying to rescue if they aren’t compliant (many aren’t and you can’t assume they will be).

LIFESAVING

The lifesaving portion at BUDS is a little bit of wrestling, a little bit of swimming, and a little bit of weight lifting.

It’s all procedural - it is pass or fail - it is not timed. You do not need to rush.

You start by jumping into the pool using a stride jump - or what I like to call a very slow step into the water. A stride jump is basically spreading your legs as far apart as possible like your taking one giant step. You are trying to create as much surface area as possible so your head doesn’t go under the water. Your arms do the same thing, out to your sides. You must maintain eye contact on your victim the entire time.

From there, you will swim head up freestyle to your victim, maintaining visual on your drowning victim.

For a compliant, non combative victim, you’ll simply grab them by the wrist and pull them into your tow. This is the wrestling portion of lifesaving and should be fast and aggressive. For an uncompliant, combative victim, you need to dive under the water, grab the victim by the hips and turn them so that their back is facing you. Now crawl up there back and get them into your tow. You must be aggressive.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 3 points 21 hours ago

Sure, but you're taking me out of context.

The comment I replied to is basically saying that if it's a risky endeavor then if things go wrong you just say "oh well you knew the risks" and leave.

As an aside, I'm Australian, I have a surf life-saving accreditation (very common here), I'm well aware of the dangers of a water rescue.

My point is, it's not a question of whether the person in need of rescue knew the risks, rather a question of the risks to the rescuer. As I said in my comment it's not clear what the risks to the guy really were. It does seem that, had the couple been appropriately provisioned, the risks to him would've been minimal.