Hidden camera used to film women undressing

A MAN who persuaded his girlfriend to videotape women undressing in changing rooms was prosecuted only because one of the victims was a young girl. County badminton player Karen Hudson, who did not have to appear in court, sneaked a video camera into Kings Club and the Badminton Hall in the Rohais for her former partner, Kevin Mauger, the Magistrate's Court heard.

It was hidden in a sports bag and Mauger, who has also played badminton at county level, later viewed the tapes, editing sequences he wanted, and stored them on a composite videotape.

However, one of those filmed was aged under 16 and Mauger was charged with possessing an indecent film of a child.

Crown Advocate Graeme McKerrell told the court that the defendant had shared a home with PC Christopher Dragun.

When the officer moved out he took a number of videotapes with him which he thought were his own.

He found out later that one of them contained footage of women stripping off or naked.

PC Dragun recognised one of them and took the tape to show her. She complained to police and Mauger and Miss Hudson were arrested.

Mauger declined to speak in court but prosecution witness Detective Sergeant Kevin Kreckeler and Advocate McKerrell acted out an interview which DS Kreckeler had conducted with the defendant.

Mauger, 27, of Nuages d'Or, Rue Perruque, Castel, denied the offence.

He had not realised one of the women on the film had been a minor and thought she was 16.

Mauger admitted daring Miss Hudson to use the recorder. DS Kreckeler asked what was in it for her.

The defendant said Miss Hudson was his former partner but he had ended their relationship because she was 'too possessive'. She was now his best friend. He denied that he had agreed to go to bed with her if she carried out the filming.

DS Kreckeler had traced a mother who felt she could identify the young girl as her daughter. The father was not convinced, however, and said the tape was not clear. The court classed the girl as unidentified.

As well as images of women in various states of undress, the tape contained film of Mauger with former girlfriends and hard core porn, believed to have been taped from digital TV.

'Did you ever operate the video for sexual gratification?' DS Kreckeler had asked. 'No,' said Mauger. 'I don't know what the reason was but my head was screwed up at the time.'

In some cases, Mauger had recorded the same image of women on multiple occasions. Advocate McKerrell said Mauger must have known what he was doing because only the key bits he must have wanted had been singled out.

Mauger said he had selected people he either knew or liked. He was against the filming of children and offences against children in general.

DS Kreckeler acknowledged that the only image of a minor was on the videotape and it was visible only briefly.

Defence advocate Alan Merrien said his client had not carried out the recording.

However, Mauger accepted that he had done the editing, he said.

The defendant had not shown the tape to anyone else and thought he had destroyed it. PC Dragun had shown it to the woman victim who had then shown it to her friends.

Advocate Merrien said before the image of the child was discovered, police had advised his client that he would not be prosecuted.

Mauger, a former conveyance clerk with Carey Langlois, had suffered so much trauma and stress when first arrested he had been unable to work.

After being told he would not be prosecuted, he was then put through the whole process again.

'The person who took the images and who positioned the camera has been cautioned for the offence while the man who recorded them has been prosecuted, despite originally being told he would not be,' said Advocate Merrien.

Advocate McKerrell told the court Miss Hudson had been cautioned on four counts of behaving in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace.

Advocate Merrien said the circumstances involving the filming of the minor were not a factor in whether an image was indecent.

Magistrate Russell Finch ruled that the picture was indecent.

'This was deliberately bad behaviour and you have no excuse,' he told the defendant.

Many cases of this type involved multiple indecent images of children, said Magistrate Finch. Had that been case this time, he would have taken a far different view.

He fined Mauger '1,500 and ordered the destruction of the tape.

Responding to a question from Mr Finch, DS Kreckeler said there was no question of inappropriate behaviour on PC Dragun's part.