No interactions present.
Although the photo is not good, I didn't think the eyes were hairy and if you look closely you can see the hind femora are black in the basal half.
Even assuming that the femora are dark in basal half, you just cannot see the hairs on the eye witout a good background and a hand lens, at least. vitripennis has bare eyes, but female torvus can have very sparse hairs, as well. It is just not possible from this photo; but, if you checked with a lens, and the eyes were totally bare, then fair enough!
My Flickr photos...
I would always check with a microscope rather than just a hand lens. Some torvus are sufficiently sparse-haired that I would not trust a lens. The background and lighting are so crucial too.
recording wildlife with The Recorder's Year on www.hbrg.org.uk/TRY.html.
I agree, a microscope is really best...eye hairs can be surprisingly difficult to see, as Syrphus says. In the field, though, a hand lens will get you there some of the time, for more obvious examples of torvus, say..
Lat/Lng: 51.44478, -2.63942
OS grid ref: ST556719