New details have emerged about how former ACT attorney-general Gordon Ramsay is alleged to have groomed a boy with dinners, alcohol and by telling him he was special, before requesting increasingly sexualised images.

Sexual assault support lines:

Mr Ramsay was arrested in October last year after a complaint to police, when he was charged with grooming the teen between 2022 and 2024.

Until now, the ACT Magistrates Court had suppressed court documents containing details about the alleged offence, on which the charge is based.

But after an application by the ABC to lift the suppression, Magistrate Jane Campbell ordered a redacted version of the document be made public.

Communication began on Instagram 

The documents reveal allegations the pair began communicating on Instagram, and would catch up for dinner at least once a week, often at expensive steak houses, followed by the theatre.

Their meetings are said to have included weekend catch-ups and phone calls.

“The defendant began messaging … ‘Good morning’ and ‘Good night’ every day along with lengthy messages throughout the day,” the statement of facts alleges.

“In a single day [the alleged victim] would receive more messages from the defendant than the rest of his friends combined.”

Police say after a few months, Mr Ramsay is alleged to have told the boy he “was very special”.

He is also alleged to have said: “he would treat him as an adult and would keep the communication between only them”.

The statement of facts also suggests that Mr Ramsay knew the teen’s family had a strict ‘no alcohol before 18’ policy, but gave him small bottles anyway.

‘Continually suggested more sexualised content’

The police statement of facts alleges Mr Ramsay then began suggesting the boy send him photos he referred to as SPUN images, which related to the removal of clothing.

“The defendant created an online shared folder on iCloud … only accessible by the pair … to upload the SPUN images to,” the statement of facts alleges.

“The SPUN images were to be taken by [the alleged victim] and uploaded daily.

“The SPUN images started out as photos of [the alleged victim] posing smiling and clothed.”

The documents allege Mr Ramsay later suggested the boy take photos of himself in his underwear.

“[The boy] … was initially hesitant to do this, however the defendant reassured him, stating that if he has trusted everything until now, that he could keep trusting him,” the statement of facts alleges.

“The defendant continually pushed … boundaries with the SPUN photographs and continually suggested more sexualised content.”

Arrest following search of car, home

It is alleged that Mr Ramsay had also been buying the boy clothes, including underwear and later lingerie.

It is also alleged he purchased numerous sex toys as gifts.

The police statement notes concern raised by the boy’s family in June 2024 about how much time the pair were spending together.

Later in the year, Mr Ramsay is alleged to have messaged the boy saying due to his “parents mentioning going to the police, they needed to delete the SPUN photographs”.

Mr Ramsay is then alleged to have sent an email saying all the photos would be in one folder on his device and he would delete the shared folder and the boy should do the same.

Mr Ramsay was arrested after searches of his car and home, when several electronic devices alleged to contain the messages between the pair were seized.

He has pleaded not guilty, but the case has dragged after prosecutors and police said the forensic examination of his devices was taking some time.

Mr Ramsay will be back in court later in the month.

Material released without appropriate redactions

As well as being ordered to release the court documents, the Magistrates Court has also been asked to consider the conduct of the Office of the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), after a copy of the material was sent to the ABC without appropriate redactions.

The court heard correspondence between the ABC and the DPP’s office as the challenge to the suppressions was being put together, revealed the breach, which happened while the court prohibition was still in place.

The ABC said it erased the material soon afterwards.

Magistrate Campbell said given the document was in breach of the court order revealing suppressed material, the court should look at whether the incident should be referred to the police.

But she said she had stopped short of any reference to contempt of court.

In a statement issued outside court, the ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions put the mistake down to “human error”.

“As soon as the error was noticed, the office contacted the ABC and sought their assurance the document would be destroyed and the court’s non-publication order adhered to, and the office similarly alerted lawyers for the accused to the mistake that had occurred,” the statement said.

“The office will of course cooperate with any investigation, if the matter is referred.”