Singapore — October 24, 2026
A 41-year-old Singapore man with an extensive history of voyeurism convictions has been sentenced to another prison term after admitting to secretly filming women in public, reigniting concerns over repeat sexual offenders and whether conventional jail sentences are enough to prevent further crimes.
Gary Huang Kunjie was sentenced to 28 weeks in prison on Friday, October 23, after pleading guilty to one count of voyeurism involving an incident at Northpoint City shopping mall in Yishun.
But what made the latest case particularly troubling was the revelation that Huang had also admitted to secretly recording approximately 20 women between May and June 2026, despite having already served multiple prison sentences for similar offences.
The judge issued a stern warning that Huang could face judicial caning if he commits another offence.
Woman secretly filmed on shopping mall escalator
According to court proceedings reported by Channel NewsAsia, the latest charge stemmed from an incident on June 20, 2026.
Huang was travelling home from work when he spotted a woman he found attractive at Northpoint City in Yishun.
He followed her onto an escalator and positioned his mobile phone beneath her skirt to capture an unauthorized video.
He later viewed the recording for sexual gratification before deleting it.
The court also heard that Huang had engaged in similar conduct roughly twice a week during May and June, targeting around 20 unsuspecting women.
Investigators were unable to recover the deleted recordings.
Police detained repeat offender at Khatib MRT station
Huang’s latest encounter with law enforcement came on July 8, 2026, when officers from the Singapore Police Force’s Transport Command detained him during an operation at Khatib MRT station.
Court documents did not explain what initially prompted officers to stop him.
He was subsequently interviewed by investigators, leading to the latest court proceedings.
Criminal history stretching back to 2018
Huang was no stranger to Singapore’s criminal justice system.
The court heard that he had previous convictions for similar offences in every year from 2018 through 2022, as well as in 2025.
He had repeatedly been sent to prison, including for a previous sentence exceeding 60 weeks.
Yet the earlier punishments had not prevented further voyeurism.
His criminal history became a central issue during sentencing, as the court considered whether another relatively short prison term could realistically discourage future offences.
Judge questions why harsher punishment was not pursued
Deputy Public Prosecutor Muhammad Salihin Salim recommended a prison sentence of between 22 and 25 weeks, emphasizing the need to deter both Huang and other potential offenders.
However, District Judge R Arvindren questioned whether the prosecution’s proposed sentence was sufficiently severe.
The judge also asked why the prosecution had not sought caning or corrective training, given Huang’s repeated convictions.
Corrective training is a sentencing option in Singapore involving extended imprisonment for certain repeat offenders, potentially lasting between five and 14 years.
The prosecution explained that it was not seeking caning because Huang faced only one charge, and maintained that its recommended jail term was appropriate.
The judge ultimately imposed 28 weeks’ imprisonment, exceeding the prosecution’s proposed range.
Accused blames work stress and mental health struggles
Representing himself in court, Huang expressed regret for his actions and described difficulties maintaining stable employment.
He attributed his repeated offending to work-related pressure and difficulties managing his mental well-being.
Huang also told the court that he was continuing to seek psychiatric assistance.
He spoke emotionally about his struggles and expressed regret over his inability to properly care for his elderly parents.
However, the court remained concerned about his repeated misconduct involving innocent women.
Judge Arvindren questioned how Huang intended to change his behavior, given that he continued committing similar offences despite numerous previous convictions.
Huang suggested that part-time employment and a less stressful working environment might help him reintegrate into society.
The judge acknowledged his stated intention to reform but made clear that another offence could bring significantly harsher consequences.
Singapore’s voyeurism laws allow imprisonment and caning
Under Singapore’s criminal law, voyeurism is a serious offence that can carry a prison sentence of up to two years, a fine, caning, or a combination of these punishments.
The law is designed to address violations of personal privacy and sexual dignity, including non-consensual recordings of intimate areas.
Huang’s case underscores the difficulties courts can face when dealing with repeat offenders who continue committing offences despite earlier prison sentences.
It also highlights the importance of identifying and preventing sexual privacy violations in public locations such as shopping malls, escalators and transport stations.
Not an isolated case: Other voyeurism convictions in Singapore
Huang’s sentencing comes against a backdrop of other voyeurism cases heard by Singapore courts.
In August 2026, The Straits Times reported that a 28-year-old man was sentenced to 81 weeks in prison after recording at least 142 upskirt videos over a period exceeding two years. His victims included colleagues and women in public places.
In another case in June 2026, a 57-year-old man was sentenced to 11 weeks in prison for filming women at VivoCity shopping mall while accompanying his wife.
Earlier, in May 2024, a serial voyeur who had secretly photographed or filmed more than 100 women over approximately a decade received a one-year prison sentence.
These separate cases demonstrate how covert recording offences can involve repeated violations against multiple victims, sometimes over extended periods.
They do not, on their own, establish whether Singapore’s overall voyeurism rate is increasing.
The bigger question: Can repeat offenders be stopped?
Huang’s latest conviction raises a significant question for Singapore’s criminal justice system: How should authorities respond when an individual continues committing sexual privacy offences after serving multiple prison terms?
Longer incarceration, rehabilitative treatment, psychiatric support and more intensive supervision are among the approaches that can be considered in discussions about repeat offending.
However, the effectiveness and suitability of any intervention depend on individual circumstances and the applicable legal framework.
For Huang, the court has now delivered another custodial sentence — along with an unmistakable warning about the consequences of further criminal conduct.
The immediate outcome is clear: Huang is returning to prison for 28 weeks. The unresolved question is whether this latest sentence will finally prevent him from victimizing more women.
