That "refusing to continue communication" might have even just been "couldn't hear or feel vibrations from incoming calls". It's also possible he thought they weren't being helpful and decided it was a waste of time to rely on them (all depends on how that initial call went, though the fact that they say he didn't ask for help but he says he did could suggest a communication breakdown or tone mismatch).

It did sound like he was unprepared for how to handle such an emergency if they didn't even use the warming gear they had. But the question is at what point does unpreparedness become criminal and did he really have extra responsibility for her safety even if he thought they were equally experienced, or that she was at least experienced enough to handle her own safety? Unless the defense is lying completely, it sounds like the prosecution isn't approaching this in good faith and might be seeking revenge instead of justice.

Yes. What was the point of him putting his phone on silent? What was the reasoning behind that?

Her footwear selection (light snowboarding boots) might indicate she’s on the wrong side of the knowledge curve. Dunning Krueger is a bitch sometimes. But I read elsewhere that her family is standing by him, and I assume there’s a reason for that.

I think it really depends how dangerous it would have been for him to stay with her.

On Everest, if someone is incapacitated, then there's no point waiting with them because then you'd die too and no rescue is coming.

This situation is different because a rescue could be mounted, and its not certain the guy would've died if he had have waited with her.

Like imagine you're swimming a few hundred metres from the beach and your partner gets a cramp, do you just say "oh well you knew the risks" and leave them?

Arctic mountains

This one was in central Europe, though.

Allowed her to wear? Does he control her wardrobe?

That tidbit right there takes in a darker direction.

Otherwise, I'd say just leaving someone when you're both freezing to death is scummy, but understandable.

Fun fact: … is called an ellipsis.

There seems to be at least some level of neglect.

Especially since he is claimed to have quite a bit of alpine experience compared to her. That's really what brings the liability of negligence to the whole scenario.

Alpine hiking at night is already incredibly dangerous, but not ensuring the person with the least amount of experience has the correct equipment and knows how to use it is just wild.

I wonder, though, did she not have a phone? Was there no reception, or why did she not call or signal for help herself?

Well the confusing thing is that they had helicopters overfly them multiple times as they made their climb and both failed to signal and continued their way to the summit. The person on trial claims that she was doing fine until right after the last flyover and then suddenly started to get worse.

As someone with a mild amount of cold weather experience..... I don't really believe this at all. If I were a betting guy I would wager that she was already suffering from the mental affects of hypothermia. You can enter a super suggestive state the colder you get and your mental faculties and decision making ability rapidly deteriorate to the point where you can get lost and just start walking in circles.

Were there other ways to make it through the night?

She did have a bivy sack that could have provided at least a decent amount of shelter, but he didn't help her set it up before he left her on the mountain.

Tbh it really seems like he was purposely trying to endanger her, or at very least is a huge piece of shit that didn't care about her well-being. This would be like a scuba diver taking an amateur on a night dive, not teaching them how to operate their regulator, and than abandoning them a hundred feet underwater in the dark. It really is criminal.