The trial of former broadcaster Alan Jones on indecent assault and sexual touching charges began on Monday in Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court. Judge Glenn Walsh is presiding over a judge-alone hearing expected to run for four months and hear from 76 witnesses (The Guardian).

Jones faces 22 charges: 20 counts of assault with act of indecency and two counts of sexual touching. The charges cover alleged offending against six complainants between 2003 and 2020. The allegations include kissing complainants and touching them on the penis and buttocks (news.com.au; The Guardian).

The case straddles two legal frameworks. In 2018, New South Wales replaced the offence of indecent assault with a new charge called sexual touching, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Jones's charges are split across both the older and newer laws, depending on when each alleged offence occurred (The Guardian).

The charge sheet has shrunk steadily on the road to trial. Jones was first charged by police on November 18, 2024, over alleged historical indecent assault, and was granted bail. An additional charge involving an eleventh alleged victim was laid on March 7, 2025. In the months that followed, charges were dropped on at least three separate occasions: one on June 2, 2026, four more on July 14, 2026, and further charges dropped ahead of trial, leaving the current 22 to proceed (ABC News; ABC News; ABC News; ABC News; ABC News).

NSW Police formed Taskforce Bonnefin after alleged victims came forward in the wake of reporting by the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age (The Guardian).

On Friday, Judge Walsh rejected a defence attempt to prevent media reporting complainants' evidence. Jones's barrister, Claire O'Neill, argued under the Criminal Procedure Act that in-camera evidence was not permitted to be published. Judge Walsh disagreed, saying he was not satisfied that "in camera" meant a non-publication or suppression order. In-camera hearings are held in private, typically to protect vulnerable witnesses. The judge noted that Complainant J was not fussed by media reporting his evidence, while the defendant was. Complainant J is anonymised in line with the right of all alleged victims of sexual offences to maintain their privacy (The Guardian).

Complainant J, the youngest alleged victim at 17 years old at the time of the alleged offending, is giving evidence in camera on Monday following opening statements by the prosecution and defence. His case accounts for nine of the 22 charges against Jones (The Guardian).

The court heard that Complainant J told police he met Jones as a young man and was given a mobile phone by the then-2GB breakfast host, who invited him to visit his Macquarie Street apartment. Jones is alleged to have put his arms around Complainant J at the apartment, given him a squeeze and a peck on the mouth while saying, "I love you mate." Jones is further alleged to have touched Complainant J's penis while driving him to Fitzroy Falls in the NSW Southern Highlands (The Guardian).

The prosecution case rests on an alleged pattern of behaviour involving the targeting of significantly younger men in Jones's professional and social circle. Two of the six complainants told police they were assaulted on the first occasion they met Jones: one at a fashion show and one at a fundraising meeting. Prosecutors told the court in pre-trial hearings last month that it is "improbable that two similar accounts" of Jones allegedly touching a complainant's penis while driving "would be untrue." In each instance, the complainant was driving the car, and there was no reciprocity prior to the touching (The Guardian).

Jones has denied all wrongdoing. In December 2024, he stated: "I have never indecently assaulted these people. The law assumes that I am not guilty, and I am not guilty." The defence has argued that the allegations are either baseless or distort the truth (The Guardian).

The broader context here is worth noting for those tracking the case institutionally. The decision to proceed by judge-alone trial rather than before a jury is significant in a matter of this public profile. It removes the risk of jury contamination from pre-trial publicity, but places the entire evidentiary burden on a single judicial officer's assessment of credibility. The prosecution's reliance on pattern evidence across multiple complainants, rather than a single alleged incident, is a common but contested prosecutorial strategy in sexual offence trials. The defence will need to confront not only each complainant's individual account but the cumulative force of the alleged similarities, particularly the two driving-related allegations the prosecution has foregrounded. Judge Walsh's ruling on media reporting of in-camera evidence also establishes an early procedural posture favourable to open justice, though the practical effect on witness testimony over a four-month hearing is uncertain.

The trial is expected to conclude by year's end, though the complexity of 76 witnesses and six complainants makes that timeline uncertain.