Former Long-Term Inmate Blames Trend After Committing New Voyeurism Offense with Smartphone

Repeated voyeurism and trespassing

“By seeing women in vulnerable situations or obtaining keys and personal information, I felt as if I was controlling them.”

A 57-year-old man, who repeatedly broke into women’s apartments, secretly filmed them naked, and stole their keys, described his motive this way in court. On May 11, 2026, the fourth hearing in the trial of Masahiro Suzuki (57), a cleaning worker from Taito Ward, Tokyo, was held at the Tokyo District Court, and the case was concluded.

Suzuki was arrested on November 4, 2025, by Ayase Police Station of the Metropolitan Police Department on suspicion of voyeurism involving sexually explicit images and trespassing. He is suspected of entering the premises of an apartment building in Tokyo in July 2025 and filming a video of Resident A naked through a gap in the window using his smartphone.

“In fact, Suzuki was arrested once before in October 2025. At that time, he was suspected of attempted non-consensual indecency for allegedly entering A’s room and attempting to commit indecent acts such as touching her body. He was later released without indictment, but was re-arrested after videos of naked women, including A, were found on his smartphone. After that, he was repeatedly arrested and indicted.”

What became clear during the trial was Suzuki’s pattern of habitual offending—wandering at night and committing opportunistic crimes such as entering rooms because the door was unlocked and filming naked women after spotting them through gaps in windows.

According to the indictment and opening statement read by the prosecutor, the victims were four women, identified as A through D.

In July 2025, Suzuki twice entered the premises of Apartment A and secretly filmed A naked through gaps in the window. In August of the same year, he entered B’s unlocked room and stole a key. In September, he filmed C naked through a gap in the window of a lodging facility. Furthermore, in November 2024, he entered D’s room, stole a key, and filmed D naked.

Although he initially remained silent after his arrest, Suzuki later admitted in court that he committed the crimes of voyeurism, trespassing, and theft, stating, “There is no mistake.”

Prison — Smartphone information heard inside

The offense against B was discovered because images of B and B’s younger sister’s driver’s licenses had been photographed and stored on a smartphone. During a house search, it was found that the key to B’s room had a tag attached to it on which B’s name had been written by the defendant Suzuki.

B’s statement record described feelings of disgust and fear.

“If I had not changed the lock, I feel like the offender might have entered my home and I could have suffered further harm, and that thought is very frightening. The idea that the offender deliberately attached a tag with my name written on it is truly disgusting.”

The defendant Suzuki had served 17 years in prison from 2006 for crimes including four rapes. He was conditionally released on November 30, 2023, but committed the incident involving D less than a year later. When asked by his defense counsel why he committed the offense again in such a short period after release, Suzuki answered:

“Work stress and an indescribable sense of loneliness after getting out brought out my bad habitual tendencies. I started going out alone at night, and I think that’s how I ended up committing the offense.”

The bad habitual tendencies refer to peeping through windows and entering unlocked homes if he found any. In the incident involving D, he explained that when he entered the room and stole the key, he happened to see someone naked and recorded a video. He then stated, as mentioned at the beginning, that he felt as if he had gained control over them.

“I was not making plans such as using a spare key to re-enter or anything like that. I had stolen and kept the victims’ house keys, and just knowing that I could enter again anytime if I wanted made me feel as if I was controlling them.”

Suzuki said he got a smartphone for the first time after being released. His previous incarceration was 20 years ago, when smartphones were not yet widespread. He stated that inside prison he had heard some information, such as that video voyeurism with smartphones was becoming common, but he testified that he could not clearly remember at what point he came up with the idea of recording a woman’s naked body on video.

“I find it strange myself.”

During sentencing arguments, the prosecutor pointed out: “All of the offenses in this case were committed for sexual purposes, and this is consistent with his prior convictions.” They further stated that “in addition to the recognized habitual nature, it must be said that his sense of norms regarding sexual crimes has become significantly dulled,” and demanded a sentence of five years’ imprisonment.

On the other hand, the defense counsel, while saying “it cannot be overlooked that he repeatedly committed the same type of offense—sexual crimes,” also stated, “the defendant is deeply remorseful,” and “he has pledged to receive treatment at a specialist clinic in the future.” The defense added that “after being given the opportunity to work on preventing reoffending through specialized support, it is necessary for him to actually return to society, face the weight of his crimes himself, and prevent reoffending,” and argued that “a sentence of one year and six months is appropriate.”

In court, Suzuki repeatedly explained the circumstances leading to the offense: “I just happened to enter because the door was unlocked, and it just so happened that (a woman was undressed), so I ended up recording it.”

When the prosecutor asked, “At the time of the offense, did it ever cross your mind that you might end up going back to prison?”, he replied, “I find it strange myself why I didn’t think that.”

Suzuki, who promised that he “wants to break his bad habitual tendencies once and for all with the help of external support,” had reoffended within a short time after release. What kind of judgment will the judiciary hand down to him?

The verdict is scheduled to be handed down on May 27.