Melbourne student pleads guilty to secretly filming women in toilet cubicles
Bao Phuc Cao, 23, admitted to covertly recording scores of women at CBD student accommodation; court recorded no conviction and ordered community-based treatment
A 23‑year‑old University of Melbourne student has pleaded guilty to secretly filming women in toilet cubicles at student accommodation in the central business district, a case that prosecutors say involved more than 100 victims.
The student, identified by media as Bao Phuc Cao, was discovered after a female resident at RoomingKos student housing in Melbourne's CBD found a mobile phone hidden under a toilet cubicle. Police said investigators later recovered hundreds of images and videos of young women; media reports have put the number of alleged victims as high as about 150.
Cao pleaded guilty to the offence in court. According to reports, the court recorded no conviction but imposed a Community Correction Order and ordered Cao to participate in a sex offender treatment program.
This was reportedly the second occasion on which Cao had pleaded guilty to covertly filming women. Media accounts said he previously admitted to secretly recording women in public toilets at the District Docklands shopping centre months before the RoomingKos incident; that earlier matter similarly resulted in no conviction being recorded.
An unnamed female student who found the device at RoomingKos told reporters she found Cao's behaviour "terrifying" and "pathetic" and said the university should expel him. Activists raised concerns about campus safety and the legal outcomes in both cases. Sherele Moody of the Red Heart Campaign said the penalties and lack of recorded convictions left questions about the protection of female students and the public.
A University of Melbourne spokesperson told media the university could not comment on whether Cao remained enrolled because of privacy and confidentiality obligations. The spokesperson said the safety and wellbeing of students and staff is paramount, described sexual assault and harassment as unacceptable, and urged students with concerns to contact the university's Safer Community Program.
Victoria Police did not comment on the matters while they were handled by the courts, media reported.
Legal experts and campaigners have previously criticised how some covert‑filming offences are processed and the frequency with which diversionary outcomes are used in summary matters. The disclosures add to ongoing public debate in Australia about the adequacy of legal responses to covert filming and about measures universities and accommodation providers should take to protect students.
Court documents and police statements released in connection with the case gave no further detail on the precise number of files recovered or the identities of those filmed. The matter remains a point of public concern in Melbourne as student groups and advocacy organisations call for stronger safeguards and clearer reporting and disciplinary procedures in campus accommodation.