Actor J.P. Manoux’s condo had hidden camera, tenants testify in court
By Alex Ballingalln
09 September 2016
Actor J.P. Manoux, right, in an episode of CTV's Spun Out. (Toronto Star file photo)
Two women testified in court on Friday that they found a hidden camera
in a faux-DVD player while subletting a Queen St. condo from a
television actor last year.
J.P. Manoux, known for his role on the CTV sitcom Spun Out, as well as
other shows in the U.S., is on trial for two counts of mischief
relating to the camera. Two voyeurism charges were dropped in July 2015.
The 47-year-old actor rented a condo at 1171 Queen St. W., and
connected with the two women online in late 2014, when he was going to
be working in Los Angeles for four months, according to testimony heard
Friday. They agreed to pay two-thirds of the rent and stay there from
January to April 2015, the women told the court.
Their names are covered by a publication ban.
they were being watched”
One of the complainants testified that she and her roommate “felt like
they were being watched” in the condo, because Manoux knew she had
moved in early and once texted to accuse her of lying that her roommate
wasn’t home when he called. She said they searched for cameras and
couldn’t find any, and then scoured the Internet for products that can
hold secret recording devices. That’s when they found an image of the
DVD player, which they had previously ignored because they always
watched Netflix, she said.
Everywhere I go now I’m looking for
“I didn’t know how to react, what to do, where to call,” she said. “I
don’t want to ever rent again. Everywhere I go now I’m looking for
Manoux’s lawyer, Adam Weisberg, described the DVD player as a home
security device with a camera, and asserted in cross-examination that
the agreement between his client and the women was that Manoux was
still a “roommate,” and that their presence was similar to
house-sitting while renting two bedrooms.
The complainants said they felt the entire unit was their rented space,
and Weisberg suggested they were lying because it’s “advantageous” in
their civil suit against Manoux, in which they each claim $185,000 for
invasion of privacy. Both women disagreed.
The trial continues at Old City Hall on Oct. 25.
Actor guilty of mischief for hiding camera in rental condo
By Peter Goffin Staff Reporter
11 January 2017
An actor has been convicted of two counts of mischief for operating in
a hidden camera in the Toronto condo he sublet to two women.
“acted willfully” in violating the privacy of his tenants
J.P. Manoux “acted willfully” in violating the privacy of his tenants,
Justice Rebecca Shamai said in a decision delivered in a Toronto court
During the trial, the court heard that Manoux rented a condo on Queen
St. W. near Dufferin St. while waiting for construction on his own
condo to be completed.
Beginning in December 2014, he sublet the unit to a pair of women while he went to Los Angeles for work.
found a web camera hidden in a BluRay player,
In January 2015, one of the women found a web camera hidden in a BluRay
player, which Manoux had purchased to keep tabs on people in the
Manoux did not contest the fact that he had kept a hidden camera in the
apartment’s living room, or that he viewed images of people in the
apartment a “handful of times.”
he was merely using the camera for security purposes
He maintained, however, that he was merely using the camera for
security purposes, out of concern that his tenants might steal from
him, as he said previous tenants had.
In her decision, the judge said Manoux is a “sophisticated, modern man”
whose “appreciation of privacy cannot be so at odds” with what society
views as a right to privacy in a person’s residence.
While the images Manoux saw may not have been sexual in nature, they were intimate, the judge said.
“He clearly preferred not to reveal the presence of the (camera),” she added.
Manoux had said during the trial that the women were not true tenants
of the apartment, but rather were house sitters paying for the
privilege of staying over temporarily.
The judge said she found this argument unconvincing, saying in her
decision that Manoux was “manipulating words” to plead his case.
The judge ruled that the apartment was the women’s home, adding that nowhere is privacy as important as it is in one’s own home.
“I didn’t know how to react, what to do, where to call,” said one of
the victims, during the trial. “I don’t want to ever rent again.
Everywhere I go now I’m looking for cameras.”
The court heard that Manoux’s tenant agreement with his landlord
forbade him from subletting to other tenants without permission.
Manoux frequently texted the women, telling them not to invite friends
over to the apartment and to keep visits with their boyfriends in the
apartment to a minimum, for fear that building management would
discover their living arrangement.
The two women testified that they became suspicious Manoux was watching
them after he sent them texts that seemed to indicate he knew where
they were and who they had over.
One of the women began searching the internet for hidden camera products and found one that resembled Manoux’s BluRay player.
Text messages between Manoux and the women show that, after the woman
disconnected the hidden camera, Manoux admitted that he had installed
it and suggested the women could disconnect it when they were at home.
The judge said this offer, made only after Manoux had reason to believe
the women had discovered the camera, was “frantic” and “desperate” and
undercut his argument that he needed the camera to protect him from
Manoux has appeared on television in roles on Veep, Community and ER.
Two voyeurism charges against Manoux were dropped in July 2015.
A sentencing date has yet to be determined.