Depends entirely on the people involved - time for a war story from way back when:

We received a call late in the evening from two hikers who had hiked out from the Galiuro Mountains, AZ, stating that their companion was hypothermic and had been left behind - as it turned out they gave his location accurately.

We responded immediately, reaching the trail head about 10 PM (quite a long drive from Tucson). Three of us immediately set out on snowshoes, traveling over about two feet of snow the last two miles to reach the location about 3 AM. Here we found the body of the victim - frozen stiff by the side of the trail where his companions had left him. No sign of any attempt at assistance (tent erected, fire built, etc). When he became distressed, his companions stopped, turned around, and departed the range by a longer, lower elevation route.

I later talked with the brother of the victim, giving him as much information as I could. i learned from him that the party had become wet the night before, sleeping out in the open without setting up the tents they were carrying. I was also told that the two surviving companions had recently taken a winter survival course after getting into difficulty on an earlier trip. I guess you could say their training was effective - after all, they did survive.

Be careful in your choice of companions. There is nothing inherently safe about a group vs solo.

Note also that this is also a situation where a PLB would have been of questionable value.

Yikes! What a horrible story! Turns out he certainly made a fatally poor choice of traveling companions! It's mind-boggling that anyone would leave an obviously hypothermic person alone, just lying with no shelter on the edge of a trail. Obviously that's your point but I still wonder why no effort was made to warm him or create a shelter? Especially if they had tents.

I will make an effort to avoid "friends" like that!

I guess it may have helped if the victim would have deployed it the instant he realized he was in trouble. Although if he couldn't be rescued by air he was probably already a goner.

Of course, without realizing it, he was in danger the moment he agreed to take the trip with those two companions.

So were charges pressed in that incident? If nothing else, I'm suprised something along the lines of negligent homicide wasn't considered.

Not sure if it would stick in court, but in today's America, I'd be very suprised if no one tried.

Good question, and I don't know for sure. I know the brother of the victim was (obviously) upset, and in a mind to do so. I am positive he had ample grounds to sue. However, none of us were ever contacted about any kind of testimony.

One of the tricky things about hypothermia, and I have started down this slippery slope a couple of times (there are those who say I am always on it), is that one of the first things to go is your ability to reason, just when you need to analyze and solve problems. His companions were obviously not thinking very clearly, and they were probably hypothermic.

I solo hike and solo camp but my itinerary is pretty tight and I use SPOT to update DW. Normally though I just solo hike. 90% of my camping is with a group.

Similar to the post I made in the PLB thread, most everyone is willing to take more risk when they know there is a backup plan, like your hiking buddy and/or a PLB. The simple fact that most of us carry gear in the back country causes us to accept additional risk. At the same time, we're willing to accept some form of additional risk because we believe we're properly prepared to handle that risk.

All in all, going solo is riskier. Overall, your chances of getting out of anywhere alive is greater in a group. There are always cases where that is not the case. But they are the exception and the same may not hold true the next time around.

For the wise, it boils down to risk tolerance and what you are willing to accept. For the unwise, stupidity leads them astray. We will all have times when we make foolish actions in the spur of the moment, that may even go against our risk tolerance level. In those moments, we may get excited by the rush; however, we must also accept the resulting consequence, whether good or bad.

Like others, I enjoy hiking solo. Enjoying the backcountry in its pure form, quiet and at my own pace. But I choose my solo routes where I know I will occasionally encounter others as well and I make sure my wife knows where I'm going. Groups get me into remote areas. We still spread out from base camp or at our final destination. But we know the general area each other will be and have the means to communicate.

Of course the anal-retentive will then question whether the 3rd person going for help solo is thus increasing the danger because they are now hiking alone..... (but I'm just pulling your chain)

I was overtaken by a somewhat unexpected Spring snowstorm when hiking alone last Spring. I had more than sufficient clothing and knowlege to cope with it but I also was acutely aware that my safety margins had just dropped dramatically. I was 1 mile short of my goal and 5 miles from the car. I immediately turned back to the car and walked very carefully all the way back mindful that getting hurt under those conditions could be fatal - even with a detailed hike plan and a specified SAR callout time given in the plan. It was still a satisfying outing :-)

I feel plenty safe hiking alone. I am well prepared and actually find it easier to navigate and "stay found" when not distracted by conversation or interaction with others.