I can't help but suspect this has a mirror image dilemma relating to the Christian notion of everlasting punishment and Pascal's wager.
There's an asymmetry in that you're weighing the cost of a moral obligation, which is essentially infinite (your loved one's torture), against the cost of violating a finite costing, but essential moral duty. Kant talks of both types as being part of a total moral understanding.
I'd probably violate the young man. But then, I'm amoral and horny.