Reality TV Star Accused of Beheading Boyfriend

Crime scene tape with investigators in the background — Photo: Prath / Shutterstock

A burned home, a dismembered body, and a skull found by a dog turned a TV footnote into a homicide case that demands full attention.

Story Snapshot

Police found Julian Story’s dismembered body after a fire at a Port Lincoln property.
A local later found a skull in scrub; forensic tests identified it as Story’s.
Tamika Chesser pleaded not guilty to murder and destroying human remains.
The court is examining mental fitness and possible mental impairment under South Australian law.

The Night, The Fire, The Discovery

Emergency crews went to a Flinders Highway property near Port Lincoln on June 19, 2025. They found a fire scene and the dismembered remains of 26-year-old Julian Story. His head was missing, which raised the stakes and the questions. Police later charged Story’s partner, reality television figure Tamika Chesser, with murder and destroying human remains. Reports describe a blaze, a gruesome scene, and a search that moved from a burned home to the bush beyond it.

On July 31, a resident walking a dog found a human skull in scrubland outside Port Lincoln. Forensic testing identified it as Story’s skull. That single recovery closed one urgent mystery and built out the physical case. It linked the fire scene with a disposal site and strengthened the charge that someone tried to hide or destroy evidence, which prosecutors say fits the count of destroying human remains to pervert justice.

What Police Say Chesser Did After

Investigators released still images and video they said showed Chesser walking in Port Lincoln around midnight on June 17, close to the alleged time of the killing. Police used the images to anchor their timeline between the property and the streets outside it. Surveillance does not tell a whole story on its own, but it can tie a person to places at exact times and frame how investigators think the night unfolded.

Prosecutors also charged conduct that goes beyond an unexplained death. The counts include destroying human remains. Fire, dismemberment, and off-site recovery of the head suggest interference with evidence. These are the facts the state plans to test at trial. The legal message is clear: the case is not only about how Story died, but also about what someone did after, and why.

The Court Track: Plea, Fitness, And Responsibility

Chesser appeared in the Supreme Court of South Australia and pleaded not guilty to murder and to destroying human remains. The court then turned to a separate track that many readers mix up: mental health in criminal law. South Australian law splits this into two main questions. First, is the accused fit to stand trial now. Second, was the accused mentally incompetent at the time of the conduct. The law treats those as different tests with different outcomes.

A private defense report told the court that Chesser was unfit and provisionally mentally incompetent to commit the offenses. Prosecutors and the defense sought further assessment, and the court ordered another report. The legal baseline still applies: the law presumes mental competence unless the defense proves mental incompetence on the balance of probabilities. Fitness to stand trial concerns present ability to understand and take part; mental incompetence concerns past state at the time of the acts.

What Matters Next: Evidence, Not Spotlight

Media headlines focused on the “reality star” angle and the beheading claim. The real weight sits in the evidence that a jury or judge can test. Forensic work must show cause and timing of death. Investigators must tie movements, devices, or traces to the accused. Fire experts must explain what burned, how, and why. Those steps, not celebrity, decide accountability. A not-guilty plea means the prosecution must prove its case at trial like any other homicide.

American conservative common sense favors two guardrails at once: respect the presumption of innocence and insist on clear consequences when the facts prove guilt. The state says it can show a killing, dismemberment, and efforts to cover it up. The defense cites mental fitness and possible mental impairment. The court will test both. Justice needs cold facts, not spectacle. Let the lab reports, the timelines, and the fire patterns do the talking.