Jail sentence sought for London Airbnb host convicted of voyeurism

Article content

The couple couldn’t understand why their Airbnb host was so adamant he get back the “very important” cellphone charging cube they had mistakenly taken from a London home.

After a series of calls and text messages over four days that began 20 minutes after they checked out and became ever more urgent, they went from perplexed to suspicious.

Then, they looked closer at the charging block, then called police.

Article content

A tiny camera was inside the small device that had been plugged into an outlet that had a clear view of the bed in their Airbnb bedroom.

After a search of the host’s laptop computer and cell phone, the police discovered two short videos of a different couple, still unidentified, engaged in consensual sex in the same rental bedroom.

On Thursday, Abinash Samal, 42, pleaded guilty to voyeurism.

“I’m sorry for all that happened and I plead guilty,” he said to Ontario Court Justice Jason Miller.

“I do feel guilty of my behaviour … I would never see myself in this situation, ever.”

Though this isn’t the first case of surreptitious cameras found in areas that clearly breach privacy rights, Samal might be the first Airbnb host in the country to be convicted of spying on and filming his guests in a bedroom.

“This is a situation we never really expected to be in. When you’re on a holiday or a weekend away … you just assume that your accommodations are safe,” the couple who found the camera wrote in a victim impact statement read in court. The couple’s identity is protected by court order.

Article content

Article content

Samal, a full-time banker and part-time home renovator, had presented himself as a “good family man” and his residence appeared to be “homey and safe,” they wrote.

“We never thought for a single second that our privacy would be violated,” the couple wrote.

Since discovering the camera, the couple wrote that they have not stayed in an Airbnb or a hotel. “It affected our ability to trust others. (We) don’t know if we will ever feel comfortable travelling again or if we do, we will be hyper-vigilant about checking our space.”

How the camera was uncovered was outlined in an agreed statement of facts read into the record by assistant Crown attorney Lerren Ducharme.

The couple had checked into the Airbnb on July 15, 2023, for an overnight stay so they could attend the annual Rock the Park music festival. When they returned to the home, Ducharme noted the woman had been naked in the bedroom while she changed for bed.

The next morning, when they were getting ready to return home, the man unplugged the phone charging block, believing it was his, and packed it up with the rest of their belongings.

Article content

They left the home at about 9 a.m. At 9:19 a.m., they had a call from Samal who told them they had mistakenly taken the charging block, that it belonged to another guest and that the guest was going to charge Samal for it if he didn’t get it back. The couple promised to mail it once they returned home.

There were more phone calls and texts from Samal over the next few days demanding they send him the charging block. On July 20, 2023, Samal said he would charge the couple $70 to their Airbnb account if he didn’t get it back immediately.

“The urgency and frequency that Mr. Samal was messaging about this seemingly innocuous charging block concerned (the couple),” Ducharme said. A closer look at the device with a flashlight revealed the tiny camera.

London police conducted a search of the home and seized Samal’s laptop and cell phone. The two videos of the unknown couple, one just over seven minutes long, the other four minutes long and created on June 18, 2023, were discovered in the recycle bin of the computer and on the cell phone.

The device had been purchased from Amazon on April 17, 2023. The police found the order and invoice in Samal’s online Amazon account. What was missing was a microSD card, but the camera could be connected without a storage device for viewing and recording, Ducharme said. An app for that purpose was found on Samal’s phone.

Article content

Samal’s defence lawyer Karl Toews pointed to a risk assessment report based on four counselling sessions that said Samal was “a relatively low risk to re-offend as a voyeur” and that he was remorseful. There was a recommendation for more counselling.

Toews suggested to Miller that he impose a conditional sentence of nine months or longer, plus two years of probation. Any jail time, he said, would result in Samal, who has no prior criminal record, losing his job.

While acknowledging that voyeurism sentences have been increasing, Toews said jail wasn’t appropriate for a first-time offender found with just two videos made the same day.

He said Samal was not a danger to the community and “certainly, he won’t be running an Airbnb or anything like that.”

But Ducharme, who argued for 12 months of jail and two years of probation, said Samal “abused his position of trust as an Airbnb operator to significantly violate the privacy and sexual integrity of his guests.

“This breach of trust can only be described as shocking,” she said, pointing out Samal lied to the couple who found the camera to get it back and minimized his responsibility.

Article content

“Many people choose to stay in Airbnb rentals and expect that they will not be unlawfully filmed while they are in their private bedroom,” Ducharme said.

A conditional sentence was not appropriate and “the public would be shocked and lose confidence in the criminal justice system if Mr. Samal was to receive the benefit of serving his sentence where he committed his crime,” the assistant Crown said.

Also concerning was that Samal told the risk assessor that the videos were “an accident” and that the camera was for “surveillance.” Ducharme said if Samal wanted a surveillance camera, he could have one installed outside, not inside a bedroom.

What was missing, the judge noted, was any victim impact statement from the couple filmed having sex. Toews said Samal can’t identify them because he doesn’t have access to his rental business records.

Miller suggested that more efforts be made to find the couple before he gives his decision.

The case returns for an update on Nov. 5.

jsims@postmedia.com

Article content