A surprising twist in the torture and abuse case of the Channel Seven star couple

A surprising twist has emerged in the trial of two Channel 7 identities facing a range of assault-related charges, after torture charges against one were dropped.

Family and supporters of the man and woman – who cannot be identified – gasped and audibly shouted in relief after magistrate Stuart Shearer found there was no prima facie case for the man – who faces two charges of torture under his series of charges – to be answered.

One applauded when the charges were dismissed.

Both still face multiple assault charges, which will appear in court next year.

They made no comment outside the court as they were led away in a waiting car.

The pair – who appeared together on a prominent Channel 7 show – were charged in August 2023.

At a hearing on Monday, Magistrate Shearer questioned how statements from witnesses were admissible when the details appeared to be ‘completely hearsay’.

One of these included text messages that were presented without an accompanying statement from the witness.

Torture charges dropped against one of two Channel 7 stars facing a raft of abuse-related charges

The pair appeared on a prominent Channel 7 show and were charged in August last year

Police prosecutor Tom Wirawan said the evidence “may become relevant later” but was restrained by Magistrate Shearer.

“You should only submit evidence that is admissible,” Magistrate Shearer said.

“They’re just rumors.”

He also questioned why witnesses were kept in a domestic violence safe room next to the court ‘before and after’ their cross-examination.

Officer Wirawan said some felt uncomfortable in the presence of the defendants.

Magistrate Shearer replied: ‘I would imagine the defendants would also feel uncomfortable in their presence.’

‘This is absurd. There is a presumption of guilt floating around, rather than the opposite, which is the reality of the matter,” he continued.

“When you accuse someone, you bear the burden of proof.”

The man faces multiple charges of assault causing actual bodily harm, common assault and one charge of observations or recordings invading privacy.

The woman faces more than 40 charges, including rape, common assault, assault causing actual bodily harm while armed, assault, torture and assault causing actual bodily harm.

Police allege in court documents that the alleged offenses span several locations in Queensland and date back several years.

The court proceedings remained closed for most of the day while witnesses gave evidence.

When the hearing resumed in the afternoon, Magistrate Shearer asked about the details of the man’s torture charge – which he said would have lasted more than 18 years.

Constable Wirawan said he would not press the charges on their face – something the man’s lawyer, Stephen Kissick, noted was a “concession”.

“I can’t commit someone without there being a prima facie case,” Magistrate Shearer said.

“Given the concession, there is no prima facie case for any of the allegations of torture, and each of these allegations is dismissed.”

The pair’s hearing was adjourned until January 15 while an accompanying suppression order continued.

The woman was given a non-publication order by Magistrate Aaron Simpson after he found she was at risk of harm to herself should further media reporting identify her.

Queensland legislation previously prevented media outlets from identifying people accused of a ‘prescribed sexual offence’ – including rape, attempted rape, assault with intent to commit rape, and sexual assault.

Changes to the legislation in October last year eased restrictions on identifying people accused of the above-mentioned crimes.

Mr Simpson’s ruling on the woman’s identity was one of the first non-publication orders carried out after Queensland’s new sexual offenses identification laws were introduced.