Logan woman Cassandra Joy Torrens charged with murder of her son, Jakob Michael Casey
Cassandra Joy Torrens, 40, faced court on Wednesday over the alleged murder of 18-year-old Jakob Michael Casey.
Queensland police said emergency services were called to a home at Marbura Court in Daisy Hill on May 30.
The pair were found semiconscious and were taken to Logan Hospital, then placed in induced comas.
Police said Ms Torrens recovered on June 1, but her son, who lived with disability, died three days later, on June 4.
Ms Torrens was initially charged with attempted murder, and the charge was upgraded to murder following Jakob's death.
Police confirmed it was being treated as a domestic-related incident.
Detective Senior Sergeant Daniel Cunningham said a crime scene had been established at the Logan home.
"Our investigators have worked methodically to gather evidence and support the victim's extended family through this complex and confronting investigation.
"Our thoughts are with the young man's loved ones and those in the community who continue to grieve this loss."
If you need help immediately call emergency services on triple-0
A Queensland Police Service spokesperson said police needed to consider "a number of sensitivities … which required investigators to exercise discretion in releasing details at the time of the initial attempted murder charge".
"This approach was taken to protect the privacy and welfare of those involved, particularly while both people involved remained in hospital," they said.
"As this matter is now before the courts, police will not be commenting further on this investigation."
The matter was mentioned at Beenleigh Magistrates Court on Wednesday and adjourned to August 20.
Ms Torrens was remanded in custody.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
27 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
$110,000 payment for union peace: Developer's deal in spotlight amid fresh calls to clean up industry
A gangland associate was paid $110,000 by a Gold Coast developer to strike a deal with the CFMEU's Queensland branch four months after the Albanese government forced the union into administration. The revelation of the Sunshine State deal, along with several other alarming new case studies, has prompted a major public intervention by the federal Labor-appointed CFMEU administrator, who is now urging conservative Queensland premier David Crisafulli to use his planned commission of inquiry into the union to attack the underworld. Administrator Mark Irving, SC, has also demanded the Albanese, Allan and Minns' governments shift their 'focus on crime and corruption across the industry'. The Sunshine State deal involved an attempt by Queensland-Melbourne joint venture Glen Q to secure industrial peace on the Gold Coast and culminated in a meeting between the CFMEU's Queensland co-ordinator Matt Vonhoff and Melbourne gangland associate John Khoury. Construction union sources who have spoken to authorities have confirmed the dealings were uncovered during recent federal police raids. The raids unearthed a money trail linking a front company in the name of Khoury's accountant to Glen Q's 16-level project a short drive from Crisafulli's Gold Coast seat. The sources said that acting as a fixer in the Gold Coast affair was Melbourne construction boss turned Queensland government contractor Nick Maric. Maric has for years had Khoury and his business partner Mick Gatto on a retainer to deal with the CFMEU. Revelations about the case have emerged amid separate details of persistent gangland activity in Queensland and down the eastern seaboard. They include a surge of industry involvement by the feared Comanchero bikie gang, including cases in Sydney and Brisbane, the latter in which a Melbourne Comanchero flying squad flew north and allegedly threatened a CFMEU representative. The bikies were ostensibly working with a security and labour hire contractor subcontracted to national construction giant BMD.
The Age
27 minutes ago
- The Age
$110,000 payment for union peace: Developer's deal in spotlight amid fresh calls to clean up industry
A gangland associate was paid $110,000 by a Gold Coast developer to strike a deal with the CFMEU's Queensland branch four months after the Albanese government forced the union into administration. The revelation of the Sunshine State deal, along with several other alarming new case studies, has prompted a major public intervention by the federal Labor-appointed CFMEU administrator, who is now urging conservative Queensland premier David Crisafulli to use his planned commission of inquiry into the union to attack the underworld. Administrator Mark Irving, SC, has also demanded the Albanese, Allan and Minns' governments shift their 'focus on crime and corruption across the industry'. The Sunshine State deal involved an attempt by Queensland-Melbourne joint venture Glen Q to secure industrial peace on the Gold Coast and culminated in a meeting between the CFMEU's Queensland co-ordinator Matt Vonhoff and Melbourne gangland associate John Khoury. Construction union sources who have spoken to authorities have confirmed the dealings were uncovered during recent federal police raids. The raids unearthed a money trail linking a front company in the name of Khoury's accountant to Glen Q's 16-level project a short drive from Crisafulli's Gold Coast seat. The sources said that acting as a fixer in the Gold Coast affair was Melbourne construction boss turned Queensland government contractor Nick Maric. Maric has for years had Khoury and his business partner Mick Gatto on a retainer to deal with the CFMEU. Revelations about the case have emerged amid separate details of persistent gangland activity in Queensland and down the eastern seaboard. They include a surge of industry involvement by the feared Comanchero bikie gang, including cases in Sydney and Brisbane, the latter in which a Melbourne Comanchero flying squad flew north and allegedly threatened a CFMEU representative. The bikies were ostensibly working with a security and labour hire contractor subcontracted to national construction giant BMD.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Concerns family intervention orders 'designed for adults' are being placed on young people
Luke and Claire never expected they would be fighting to remove an intervention order placed on their own child. Their names have been changed to protect the identity of their teenager, but they wanted to share their experience in the hope it would lead to change. After a move to regional Victoria, the couple became concerned about the behaviour of their child, which eventually led to a desperate call to authorities for help. "We were in crisis, needed the police to come to help settle the crisis situation down," Luke said. "Three police officers came fairly quickly, and I think the way they managed the situation was good," he said. It was what came next that shocked the family. An interim family violence intervention order was placed on their 15-year-old child, with the father, Luke, named as the person in need of protection. "They told us pretty clearly that there was no option … we took the advice we were given, even though we made it pretty clear we didn't want [the intervention order]. The family felt like they had lost one of their avenues for much-needed crisis support. "I just asked them, how does this help?" Luke said. Across Australia, each state has different family violence and restraining order laws, which makes it difficult to get a national picture of how many young people are being placed on these intervention orders. In a number of jurisdictions, data shows domestic violence orders are increasing, but it's not always clear how many young people this involves. However, a new report from Victoria Legal Aid (VLA) found in that state since 2018, there has been a 34 per cent increase in the number of children VLA has assisted with intervention order applications made against them. The Feeling Supported, Not Stuck report, reviewed 101 closed files and found 39 per cent of families did not support the family violence intervention order made against their child. The problem is that the intervention order system is designed for adults, said VLA's associate director child protection, Elicia Savvas. "Police can choose to make an [intervention order] application to the court, and that's frequently what's happening, and then ultimately it's up to a magistrate to make a decision," she said. "That system is just not appropriate for [young people]. They can't understand the order and often it's a matter of actually needing help to deal with whatever's driving that behaviour, and the court system can't do that." Advocates have warned Victoria's extremely robust family violence law might be penalising vulnerable children who need more social support. "In 2008, Victoria forged ahead with one of the most expansive definitions of family violence in Australia, and at the time that was seen as really groundbreaking because we're recognising the diversity of experiences of victims, survivors of family," said Elena Campbell, Associate Director at RMIT's Centre for Innovative Justice. Those laws mean no consent is required for police to file family safety intervention orders, but this approach, "suitable for adults," may have inadvertently created issues for children and families, she said. The authors of VLA's report believe there are nationwide lessons from their research. "The interventional system looks different in every state around Australia, but children and young people have similar experiences, particularly of violence or trauma across Australia," Ms Savvas said. The ABC reached out to Victoria Police for comment. The overall rise in VLA's child clients responding to intervention orders was partly driven by the increase in school-based disputes leading to court action. The report examined young people's experiences of not only family safety intervention orders, but also personal safety intervention orders. Eighty-one per cent of personal safety intervention order files at VLA were related to incidents between children in school. In Victoria, parents or members of the public can apply for personal safety intervention orders to be placed on children. Serena is a proud First Nations woman who had two of her teenage children placed on intervention orders over school-based incidents. "It was really stressful, not just for my kids but me too … it affected us in every way," she said. She said her daughter was being bullied and targeted at school, which ultimately led to a fight that resulted in intervention orders being filed against both her children. Serena felt more could have been done to remedy the situation. "They should have got together with both families, spoke about it and worked with both of us, to see how we could all fix this. "My daughter had to go in separate entrance from the other [child] at the school, they put my daughter in an upper year level where she didn't understand the work at all, so then she started failing subjects." Serena and her children attended court and were able to have the orders withdrawn. The VLA report included previously unpublished Crime Statistics Agency analysis of Victoria Police data, which showed an 8 per cent increase in intervention orders against 10 to 17-year-olds since 2018. It found a more significant increase in personal safety intervention orders, which rose by 28 per cent between 2018 and 2023. "Resolving conflicts between students at school is something that we acknowledge is really hard for schools to do," Ms Savvas said. Fifty per cent of intervention order applications were withdrawn or revoked once they reached the Victorian Children's Court in 2023-2024, the report found. "The decline in final orders suggests that police are making applications that may not be necessary or Magistrates are acknowledging that a final order will not address the needs of the parties," it said. Legal and community justice experts say reforms are needed to protect vulnerable children who need social support, not legal interventions. "There's no evidence that we can see to show that children are becoming more violent," Ms Savvas said. Ms Campbell, who advised both state and federal governments on domestic and family violence, said intervention orders were a blunt instrument. "Intervention orders are a very useful device or mechanism that we have in our legal toolkit, but in terms of using them in relation to young people, they're a very, very blunt instrument," she said. She is calling for a review and reform. "There's a huge and very urgent need for reform of the Family Violence Protection Act (Vic) as a whole wholesale review, and then to look at the Personal Safety Intervention Act (Vic) as well." Luke and Claire were able to support their child in court to have the intervention order dismissed but are still looking for extra support. "I think family counselling at that point in time was what we needed. Raising teenagers today is extremely difficult." The ABC reached out to Victoria's Minister for Prevention of Family Violence Natalie Hutchins for comment.
