Geek Squad Sued For Videoing Customer In Shower

A California woman is suing Peek Squad and Best Buy after one of their techs allegedly taped her taking a shower.

Hao Kuo Chi was paying a house call when Sarah Vasquez says he set his camera phone up in the bathroom, left it running, and recorded her bathing.

“You could see him on the video setting it up,” Vasquez said. “I was shocked.”

Gotta be careful when you let strange people into your house these days. They could be total pervert douchebags.

Geek Sued For Peeking At Woman In Shower Via Video [CBS] (Thanks to Bob and Zolton!)


Edit Your Comment

  1. Falconfire says:

    ok Im kinda confused here. They dont really make it clear but did he like set up his phone in the house knowing he was coming back, or was it like he was there she went to shower and he slipped his phone in there.

    only because it begs the question… WHO THE HELL SHOWERS WITH A STRANGE MAN IN THEIR HOUSE.

  2. mantari says:

    Sounds like something you’d see on a Revenge of the Nerds sequel?

  3. Havok154 says:


    Same thing here. If he set it up, left and had some plan for getting it later, then he’s a stupid scumbag. If he set it up because she was going to take a shower while he was there, then she’s even more stupid.

  4. The Walking Eye says:

    @Falconfire: That was my first thought as well. Why oh why was she in the shower?

    [Devil’s Advocate] Maybe she wanted to be noticed by the tech and took a shower to call attention to herself? [/Devil’s Advocate]

    More details are needed, such as was there another member of the household there, and if so, how did the tech get near the shower? It would seem the daughter was there; so this guy apparently avoided a child who was curious enough to remove a SIM chip? Just a strange story at this point.

  5. The Walking Eye says:

    *correction, younger sister not daughter*

  6. faust1200 says:

    “Gentlemen, we have bush.”

  7. warchild says:

    Couldn’t he have picked a better looking woman to do this to?

  8. The Walking Eye says:

    *second correction (imadumbass)*

    Watch the video.

    Says he left the phone in the bathroom and hit the record button. She went to take a shower and noticed it behind the sink.

    He put it in there and continued working. He was still there after they discovered it and took it to a Verizon store to find out what was on the chip. After viewing it, they called the cops and their mom stalled the tech until the cops arrived.

  9. Falconfire says:

    so she really DID take a shower while he was there. Doesnt make what he did right in the least but still you got to wonder what the hell she was thinking have a member of GEEK SQUAD there while she took a shower.

    I mean GEEK is in the freaking name. While there are a number of us who get laid frequently, there are many more who have 200 gig HDs for things other than programs.

  10. hemaphore says:

    i wonder what kind of computer problem they were having that took long enough for them to identify the cellphone, run to a verizon store, verify a video on the sim chip, call the cops, and then stall him…

  11. AcilletaM says:

    C’mon, they’re geeks. Women view them as non-threatening. This probably would have been his first chance to see boobies.

    Dumb and wrong, the man is an idiot and deserves everything he hopefully will get. However, unless he had a record or string of complaints I don’t see how Best Buy/Geek Squad had any role in this other than having deep pockets.

  12. Chongo says:

    @faust1200: I drink to dat!

  13. bloodr says:

    Okay after RTFA it would seem the mother hired GS to fix the computer. The GS employee came over while the mother and two daughters were there. The printed story does not make clear the exact progression of events but the video story does.

  14. zolielo says:

    I was one of the people that sent this story in as a tip.

    (Edit: Not shown on the online video.) What I found most interesting is that Best Buy claims that this is the first that they are hearing of the recording. If Best Buy’s claim is true, did the Geek thing that they would not find out???

  15. sp3nc3 says:

    Which cellphone models show a red light when they’re recording video?

  16. LAGirl says:

    i just saw this story on the local LA news. mom hired Geek Squad. she was home with her two daughters when the tech showed up. while he was there, one of the daughters went to take a shower. which isn’t strange, since the mom was home.

    mom and daughters were at a press conference, reading prepared statements. from the way they explained it, sounded like the tech finished the job and left the house. however, it all happened while he was doing the job. they had time to discover the phone, go to Verizon + back, call the police and have him arrested BEFORE he left the house? really??

    AND they’ve hired Gloria Allred?? homegirl has filed a lawsuit against the tech, Best Buy and Geek Squad. they’re going for the big bucks!

    the funny thing is, as soon as i saw this story, my first thought? dang! Consumerist would LOVE this. they HATE the Geek Squad.

  17. JRuiz47 says:

    Headline should have read: Geek sneaks peek; woman sues freak

  18. palaste says:

    Why would the Geek Squad guy go to all this trouble, when he can get videos of women showering from the Internet, legally, for free?

  19. johnck says:

    You are all assuming that he did it. His defence could be that he put his phone down and the woman took the phone, recorded herself showering an then called the police so she could have a big lawsuit.

    Kinda like the finger in the Taco!

    It depends on what else is on that phone.

  20. timmus says:

    Not only is it weird that she’d decide to shower while the tech is over, but it’s weird that the tech supposedly set up the camera, and ouila, soapy nude action! I smell a rat.

  21. endersshadow says:

    To those wondering how the sequence of events went down, it’s more than conceivable for the daughter to come down and say to the mother, “Hey, I’m going to go take a shower,” and the tech reply, “Oh, before you do, do you mind if I use the restroom? I was going to go just after I finished this little thing.” That way, guy knows that she’s gonna take a shower and is able to plant the cell phone.

    At least, that’s how I’d do it…you know…if I did such things…which I haven’t…I’ll stop.

  22. scoobydoo says:

    Well, so much for the whole “secret agent” routine. A REAL secret agent wouldn’t have been caught.

  23. johnthelutheran says:

    So an employee of Best Buy recommends a woman use a separate company, and an employee of that separate company does something appalling, and so the woman sues… erm… Best Buy.


    What this is really about is that she’s gone to her lawyer, and the lawyer’s asked, “Who has any money here? The pervy tech? Nope. Geek Squad? Nope. Best Buy? A-ha! Now all we’ve got to do is find a pretext for suing them”.

    If the action succeeds, its main effect will be to ensure no business ever recommends another company to its customers. “If you suggest I use another company – something from which you get no revenue and no benefit other than maintaining customer goodwill – I will then sue you if that other company screws up.” Well, in that case, here’s the telephone directory. You’re on your own. Good luck finding someone who can help.

  24. Mr. Gunn says:

    This happened in LA. There has to be some angle to this we’re not getting. What’s the bidding at for the video, anyways?

  25. Matt Saracen says:

    Carl Monday is not impressed.

  26. mac-phisto says:

    @hemaphore: he was probably installing a nic card. you know those pci cards can be really tricky to put in w/o voiding a warranty!

    seriously though, a wireless install/troubleshoot across 3 or 4 computers could take awhile – especially if you don’t know what you’re doing.

  27. homerjay says:

    Who wouldn’t notice a cell phone (blinking red light or not) sitting on their bathroom counter?

    At the very least he should have pulled out all the tissues from the kleenex box on the toilet tank and poked a small hole through it, taped the camera to the inside and put all the tissues back on top of the camera like I did…

    Wait. I mean didn’t do.

  28. DaveD says:

    Can someone please enlighten me?
    I don’t have a camera phone, but was under the assumption that they couldn’t take more than a few minutes of video?

  29. Sorenso says:

    She obviously lives with her sister and her mother from the story. So she did take a shower while he was there, but it wasn’t just the two of them.

    And it’s cool how they did all this investigating before busting him. Pretty slick, but you know he had to of known something was up. You don’t just leave your camera phones video running, placed in a hidden location.

  30. Jmarsh04 says:

    Despite watching the video twice, I still don’t completely understand the timeline of events here. I have to give a thumbs down to the news affiliate for running this story without contacting Best Buy or Geek Squad. “Because we didn’t have time” is NOT an excuse for poor journalism. BB should sue the network for running a story without giving them the opportunity to give their side of the story.

    Also, is it legal to just remove someone’s memory card without their knowledge or consent, take it to a store and view its’ contents? Don’t you, like, need a warrant to do that?

  31. markwm says:

    Was this guy using a hacked phone with a memory card or something? Otherwise, the thing wouldn’t have been able to record nearly as much as she’s claiming he did.

  32. Wormfather says:


    Actually only the police need a warent. A person not acting as “An agent of law enforcment” can violate most of your rights that law enforcement cant.

    But hold on. This dude left the camera in the bathroom but didnt have the common sence to retrive it when she was done? Furthermore, he HAD to know something was up. Especially when the daughters left and the mom was stalling him.

    IMO, something’s up.

  33. iMike says:

    That wasn’t the video I was looking for.

  34. markwm says:

    After thinking about it a bit more, what if he really did use the bathroom and left his phone on the counter, not because he thought he might get some voyeur-vid, but because he used it while in there and just set it down without thinking about it. I know I’ve done that before at friends’ houses.
    Then, what if the girls found the phone and videotaped big sister in the hopes of blackmailing him or getting money from Best Buy.
    This whole story just sounds too fishy. Everything from how they hired the tech to the sister being smart enough to remove the chip and take it to a store to get it played, but not smart enough to just play the video back on the phone right then and there in the bathroom.

  35. scoobydoo says:

    @markwm: Uh, Anno 2007 almost all high end phones will record as much video as they can store. My phone will store almost 2 hours of video.

  36. etherag says:

    Not to distract from the obvious questions of why she was showering when strangers are in the house, but why exactly is she suing geek squad or best buy? if he had no prior record, they had no way of knowing he was a perv, and therefore should have no monetary responsibility.

    Oh, right, because Gloria Allred is representing them, that’s why.

  37. slicenglide says:

    sounds like bullshit to me, I know the phone they are talking about, and the damn screen would be on while recording video. Like would show exactly what it was recording. There is no little red light on it, just a little red dot on the screen that’s 3’x1′ THAT SHOWS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT.

    Sounds extremely fishy to me, but then again, the details on the story are sketchy. If he left the phone at the house, anything could have happen. Unfortunately, he’s being trounced as guilty already.

    If there is video of him placing strategically the phone though, that would be a good sign that they are right, and the guy was some screws off kilter.

  38. markwm says:

    @scoobydoo: I know they can store a lot of video, but most of them still cut off after a minute or so of continuous recording.

  39. dagnasty says:

    I have heard that the Geek Squad uses Verizon’s VX 6700 for their cell phone. It is a PocketPC based phone with micro SD card slot. It will record video as long as there is room to store it so it isn’t impossible to record a lot of video. While recording a red dot does flash on the screen, not on the phone itself. Most likely they just didn’t know how to work the phone so they popped out the SD card.

  40. macbigot says:

    JMarsh noted, “Also, is it legal to just remove someone’s memory card without their knowledge or consent, take it to a store and view its’ contents? Don’t you, like, need a warrant to do?”

    You might need a warrant if you were law enforcement; however this was a victim preserving evidence which they had (strong) reason to believe would be destroyed had they not ‘impounded’ it. Taken from another angle; the card had no information on it (that we are aware of) that belonged to the technician — instead, it had information on it that belonged to the victim (her nudidity). The only property that was clearly the technician’s was the physical card itself — which I’m sure he can file a claim against her for in the ‘theft’ of.

    But keep in mind that our rights against unreasonable search and seizure do not apply from one citizen to another — only against law enforcement procedure and personnel.

  41. bambino says:

    @warchild: To each his own. I find her to be pretty attractive.

    @etherag: That might have something to do with it, but they are correct for suing the employer of the offender since the crime was committed while on the job. It’s just like suing Exxon for the Valdez oil spill. When on company time performing company jobs, the employer is responsible for the actions of the employee. Hence the need for heightened background checks, etc.

  42. slapstick says:

    Suing the guy I get, but Best Buy and Geek Squad? Maybe her sister wouldn’t agree to slice off a pinky to plant in their fast food, so they got Best Buy on the phone.

  43. S1ghup says:

    @markwm: Everything from how they hired the tech to the sister being smart enough to remove the chip and take it to a store to get it played, but not smart enough to just play the video back on the phone right then and there in the bathroom.

    I agree it seems that we have a case of two sisters looking to make a quick buck from a large retail chain (Read: Gold diggers). And without regard to what it might do to some innocent geeks reputation.

  44. rg says:

    I wonder if the lady’s last name is Stiffler? I think she ought to be sued for being dumb as crap.

  45. bambino says:

    I’m wondering what’s up with all the hate directed at the girl on here. Imagine if it were your mom or sister that this guy took video of.

  46. Yogambo says:

    Seriously something is wrong in the state of Denmark here. So this young woman announces she’s going to go shower — in front of the GeekSquad guy — and he says “wait, let me please go use your bathroom first” and emits an evil laugh. So he slips into the bathroom first, “plants” a camera in plain view, leaves. Then the young woman come in and takes a shower. This should strike most as a bit odd. Did the house have only one bathroom? Is it possible she would announce this and he’d worm his way in there before her? Okay, it’s possible but strange.

    Then, I agree with this point, why does she notice this and then remove the chip to take it to Verizon? Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I thought only AT&T-Cingular, T-Mobile and some Sprint phones have chips that are removable. I thought all Verizon phones were programmed. Was the chip a memory card? And why not just watch it right then and there? That seems simple.

    The answers could be that she couldn’t work the phone, wanted to have a real “legit” reason to call this a crime and so went to Verizon for “verification” of the evidence — must’ve been an exciting day for that Verizon tech. But it all seems suspect. And yes, most suspect of all is Allred’s arrival on the scene. Reminds me of Seinfeld episode with Kramer smoking. Go for the deep pockets.

    Something smells fishy. :P

  47. sasquatchbill says:

    @AcilletaM: Who’s Matellica? Never heard of them.

  48. mcdonnr says:

    Actually, I’m a little confused by a part of this, and here’s why. She says she saw a red recording light from the phone, right? As a former GS Double Agent (yeah, it’s really the title) I can tell you it wasn’t taken on a GS phone. We use PPC-6700s, which don’t have any outward indication that they’re recording. On top of which, those are a little big to try and hide behind something… something doesn’t smell right here.

  49. nimrodsun says:

    I have to agree, it seems a little far fetched, but not beyond the realm of reason.

    I mean, unless he does this all the time, which begs the question, how many people shower with strange tech people in their house? Then he’d have to be quick thinking to set all this up before she got into the shower. Still it’s not impossible…

    “Mom, I’m getting a shower then heading to a friends”

    “Could you feed the dog first please”


    So not impossible, but a little unlikely.

    Still that’s why there are courts I guess. They could publish the video, plus any other evidence and we could have a trial by internet, but that seems a little unfair on the girl, if she is an innocent victim.

    Of course if she isn’t, she’d better not have made eye contact with the camera, which is what everyone but trained actors do when they are being filmed.

    Time will tell I guess.

  50. bugmenot112 says:

    Innocent until proven guilty.

    sp3nc3, that caught me as well. Which mobile phone, oh which mobile phone, shows a red light while recording??

    If the investigator is any good, he would verify that the mobile phone indeed shows a red light while recording. And further, using forensic science determine if the clip was recorded within the said time span, i.e. within the time of visit made by the geek squad member and the bathing duration of the girl.

    If the phone was taken away for a period of time, couldn’t the girl have 1) inserted the clip herself (and if so, can be confirmed by the above forensic check) or 2) initiated an actual recording of herself.

    If she had left the item at the crime scene, untouched, and called in for a third party, or better still, the police, to verify the contents of the recording, I think there will be little doubt. The fact that she took it out of the presence of the defendent for a duration that would seem to be at least an hour or more, makes the evidence tainted at best.

    It’s like a police discovering a murder scene, and starts removing the knife without the necessary forensic folks in place. This would unnecessarily taint the evident and reduce if not destroy credibility of these evidence.

    The girl should not have tampered with the evidence.

  51. mcdonnr says:

    After reading my comment, I’ve realized I didn’t really make any kind of point… my mistake. What I was getting at is that it wasn’t taken on a BBY-owned piece of equipment, thus limiting the victim’s ability to take on BBY/GS, right? I mean… she PAID the guy to be there, so it’s not like he was trespassing on company time or anything… I’d say the blame is squarely on the DA’s shoulders, and that his actions are completely seperate and unrelated to BBY/GS. Meh?

  52. homerjay says:

    @sasquatchbill: Mattellica, I believe is a heavy metal band created by the same people that brought you Hot Wheels, Scrabble, and Uno. Look it up. :)

  53. Buran says:

    @etherag: Employees of companies are representing their company while they are working. If the company fails to properly do background checks, or otherwise hires someone who does something wrong, that employee, as a representative of the company, is therefore causing the company to do something wrong.

    Since the company is therefore sending someone into a home who committed a crime, the company is therefore being sued for their part in it.

  54. kwai_chang_caine says:

    The reporter keeps saying “instead,” but he didn’t record the video instead of repairing the computer; he was in the process of repairing the computer. The reporter presents no evidence that the technician did a shoddy repair job. Best Buy should sue him for falsely implying that their technicians don’t repair computers.

  55. crayonshinobi says:

    @bugmenot112: Completely agree here. The fact that the incriminating evidence left the scene of the “crime” and was in the possession of the “victim” prior to police interaction is suspect.

    However, if the video shows the guy setting it up…he is soooo busted.

  56. jazzdonkey says:

    Okay, when I was at first shocked. Then I read further and watched the video. It’s amusing to me that while watching this video, Ms. Vasquez seemed so “shocked” while delivering her story that she couldn’t wipe the shit grin from her face in front of all of the publicity.

    Then we get to hear the sister speak. “I was jus’ thinking like, well like, and like the memory chip thingy, should like be like taken out.” Does she REALLY know what and where that “memory chip” is?
    Furthermore, she “called out to her sister Kelly”. Did the GS Agent not hear this commotion and think something was up?

    So let’s see, Somehow the cell phone is behind sink in plain sight, lady takes a shower on cue (how long does the video capability last on this phone?), lady gets out of the shower and spots it right away with it’s blinking red light, yells to sister, sister takes out memory chip without hesitation thinking about the video getting on the internet, showered lady gets dressed, they go to Verizon (which must have been downstairs and empty to get such quick service), they see the recording, go back to the home, stall the GS tech who is still there (how much time has passed!?), and finally he is arrested. Hmmm…something is not right!

    By the way, maybe she should keep flipping her hair when making a publicity stunt, it doesn’t look quite perfect yet and to keep grinning to a minimum when acting distressed. Publicity stunt…I mean press statement.

  57. itswoody says:

    Wo wo wo just a minute… this is getting out of hand! Why TF would the guy video himself planting the cellphone in the room? That is some serious BS! I agree with a few of the comments that say simply, WTF cellphone has a red light when recording video?!!

    Even if the guy really did setup a cellphone (BTW how TF do you balance a cellphone on the sink to take video like that?!) the law suit should be against that individual and should IN NO WAY involve anyone else. At least that’s how it would go down in the UK anyway… not so sure bout teh US though!!

    The bit in the video above when the girls like ” I saw myself and I just couldn’t watch anymore” that cracked me up… what utter BS.

  58. mcdonnr says:

    @jazzdonkey – Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    /completely agree

  59. jeff4379 says:

    Nobody has mentioned this yet:

    “You could see him on the video setting it up,” Vasquez said.

    If this is true, then it’s pretty much case closed.

  60. superlayne says:

    @jazzdonkey: I agree.

    The only thing that could save this would be if they had a huge house.

  61. JaredXM says:

    So He’s facing two counts of invasion of privacy and one count of child molestation? I don’t know much if anything about law but where does the two counts of invasion of privacy come from. I would think it would be one because of the girl taking a shower. And child molestation? Wasn’t the woman 22? Maybe the reporters don’t have their facts straight.

  62. Wormfather says:


    Perhaps the tech guy is in on the gig. Becuase I dont see how he could be smart enough to set it up and all that other crap and not realize that at least (by my account) 2 hours had passed and that they were stalling him for the police.

    This wouldnt be the first time the suspect was actually a part of the scam.

    Furthermore…how many people have shower curtians/sliding doors that are see through? I know that my clear sliding doors that I had at my appartment were good for about 30 seconds of viewing my girlfriend before they got all foggy and then I had to jump in…perhaps I’ve gone to far.

  63. LAGirl says:

    i thought cameras had memory cards and cell phones had SIM cards? if you record a video on a cell phone, it is not recorded on the SIM card. my cell phone is like that. are there cell phone with memory chips??

  64. kwai_chang_caine says:

    Human ignorance on full display. My God I feel terrible knowing that I live in this universe!

    Three points:

    1. My intuition (see previous comment) was proven correct, which is never a good thing. I wish for once my intuition would prove wrong.

    2. At 54 seconds remaining, when the reporter says “stalling the technician, who had just finished the computer repairs and had just noticed the memory card…” they cut away to B-roll of a dark-skinned person opening up some kind of electronic device. I don’t know what the device is, but it looks nothing like any PC I’ve ever seen.

    When B-movies or TV shows do things like this, I understand. Those are cheap forms of entertainment. I don’t expect cheap entertainment to get every detail right, but I expect more of the news media.

    3. TWO counts of invasion of privacy and one count of CHILD MOLESTATION???

    I’m not even going to explain my distress over that last point. I’ll just say that anyone who doesn’t share my distress deserves to die. Literally, deserves to die. I’ll further say that I am well aware this means a large percentage of Americans deserve to die. Hopefully in natural disasters, though I would settle for widespread patricide and civil war.

    My God what a horrible world we live in.

    Thank you, ABC!

    4. Actually, one more point.

    “Businesses need to do a better job of screening the employees whom they send to their customers’ homes,” said attorney Gloria Allred, who is representing the family.

    That’s from an article in the Orlando Sentinel.

    Now, does Gloria Allred have any idea what she’s saying?

    Does she know what it’s like to apply for a job?

    Does this somehow tie in with her well-known leftwing agenda?

    This whole story is just sick, sick, sick. Some cheeky geek captures a phone cam video and it triggers all this

    All this was just out there waiting for a trigger.

  65. crayonshinobi says:

    @kwai_chang_caine: Yeah, considering the girl was 22…the “child molestation” charge seems to have been “added for effect” by the media. I’m sure they’ll issue a retraction next week when no one cares anymore…

  66. Type-E says:

    I automatically relate people who use geeksquad to be dumb people. Those girls look dumb to me and why is she taking a shower while the technician was fixing a computer, sound like a porn scene to me.

  67. Type-E says:

    Can they be framing the geeksquad technicians? How would he be able to know the girl will take a shower? It just seem to me that 3 women tried to sue for some cooperate money.

    anyway, I can be totally wrong

  68. Yogambo says:

    Listening a second time to that video, she says she looked “at it and the little red dot was recording” I’m taking that to mean not a front-mounted red light flashing but the red record indicator that shows on the phones display screen when recording video. She says she saw the phone first and then the record indicator so that’s not too much of stretch to see, at least it has the an air of plausibility.

    I think their demeanor in front of the television cameras needs to be contextualized as well; it’s a bit exciting/nerve wracking even when it’s a crappy scene. They aren’t high-fiving here either. And, in truth, though she was allegedly violated by this invasion, she did manage to stop it before any real damage occurred beyond her now growing fear of computer repairmen.

    I guess, particularly after the Duke dustup, these kind of things popping out like this in the media makes us suspicious. That’s too bad, as this could prove to be legit. The fact that Allred got attached so quickly only makes it more suspicious. They’d do well to get another lawyer and to stay far away from the media until this gets resolved.

  69. mcdonnr says:

    Man, the more I think about this…

    How much know-how does it really take to take an Agent’s phone (which could have easily been set down for the time period in question given the scope of work he had) and record yourself showering? Why, you ask? Easy money, I say… easy, easy money. Shit, for all we know that’s the whole reason they HAD him out in the first place! Like I said, the more I think about it the more it sounds like a setup to me. The guy was an Agent for a very long time (since GS national rollout a few years ago) which lends him a lot of credibility. It means he’s been going into people’s homes for years and providing quality service without any problems like this, and I can tell you from experience that BBY/GS does some VERY thorough fact-checking on all of its employees… I call shenanigans!

  70. BlindWebster says:

    The guy could quite possibly be in on it. Taking into account all the giant holes in the story, assuming that the child molestation charge was a media concoction, and depending on how much they think they can sue Best Buy for.

  71. N.H.H says:

    Since when is there a little red dot on a camera cell phone? Then all the time that passed by since the sisters went to Verizon…And when was the last time you were in a Verizon store where you were actually helped within 60 minutes? LOOK AT HER SMILE… L I A R

    It was all planned this geek squad guy is taking the fall…he will only be fired and split the settlement with these N.H.H…to quote IMUS

  72. ohmu says:

    This report begs more information, mainly:

    A. What was actually on the video? Because she doesn’t say.

    B. Why wouldn’t they follow up with the employee from the Verizon store to see what actually happened when they came in with the memory chip?

    C. And finally, why is one of the charges child molestation if the sister he reportedly recorded is 22-years-old?

  73. Voyou_Charmant says:

    1st if this video doesnt make it to the internet, it never happened.

    2nd Can anyone explain why in the second video they say he is being charged with sexual molestation?

    Does filming someone constitute molestation? If so, someone should do something about the 89734 foreigners hanging out at the wave pool at Wet ‘N’ Wild molesting everyone.

  74. TinaB says:

    I swear I saw that girl in one of those ads. I just know it was her.

  75. Craig says:

    First, who says the technician knew someone would be taking a shower? For all we know, he could have aimed it at the toilet and the shower just happened to be behind the toilet.

    Second, what’s the big deal about someone taking a shower while a technician is in the house, especially when there are other members of their family around. You take a change of clothes into the bathroom, lock the door, and it’s no big deal.

    I’m amazed at how many people here are quick to condemn the family and let the technician off the hook. It seems pretty cut and dry to me that Hao Cuo Chi is just a voyeur who got busted (as he should have).

  76. RichAndFoolish says:

    From their expressions, tone, and manner, I’m convinced that those girls are lying.

  77. Trackback says:

    So, the Geek Squad is now the Peek Squad, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in Industry, California. Te recap, a Squaddie is accused of using a cameraphone to record a 22-year-old showering while out on a call.Interesting allegation.

  78. Idiots says:

    Well , You ALL missed one jucy titbit. HIS cameraphone RECORDED HIM setting up the phone in the bathroom. GUILTY!! Is Best Buy guilty? Stay Tuned for next weeks episode of “Our World is Screwed Up!”

  79. pgascoine says:

    Alternative view: these two are a couple and have schemed elaborately to defraud BestBuy. Geek boy will get arrested, plead horny, get off with a slap on his wrist; meanwhile Shower girl will exort hundreds of thousands of dollars from BB through a civil suit. Shower girl collects funds and splits them with Geek.

  80. enufalready says:

    Team Comment-Before-You-Read: It says that the video shows the techie setting it up. It’s one of the few details in the original story copy. So, guy’s incriminated right off the bat. Not sure how the girl and/or her family could get away with staging that.

    As for the remaining details on this story (i.e., when he put phone in bathroom, how long it took to get back from Verizon, etc.), feel free to continue debating to no end.

  81. macaddict428 says:


    Maybe she wasn’t the only one in the house, and felt she would be safe. No matter what happened, what was this geek squader thinking?

  82. macaddict428 says:

    Not really, it just proves that he may have been good enough to not been caught, until now.

    Kinda like the catholic priests who molested young children 25 years ago. Just because you are an employee with tenure in an organization, doesn’t mean you should automatically garner respect.

  83. Westchaser says:

    Purchased a new laptop at BestBuy. Salesman said, “We offer a free ‘tuning’ service that will increase your laptop processing power by 20%.” I said, sure; go ahead. When I asked for details on what they were changing or tweaking, I was told it was proprietary information. I watched the GeekSquad tech pull a thumb-drive from his pocket and started tweaking the registry, etc.

    I get the laptop home and certain things don’t work such as LightScribe. Worse than that, I am presented with errors while the desktop is loading. I only wish I kept a detailed list of all the things I discovered that GeekSquad completely f**ked up on my laptop. I can tell you this; they disabled a handful of key Windows Services which, per my aforementioned example, is why LightScribe was not working amongst other things.

    They even talked me into installing TrendMicro’s antivirus/firewall suite as well as Spy Sweeper. After a few days of UTTER CHAOS on my system, I placed a support email to TrendMicro who was quick to say their product should not / could not exist in tandem with Spy Sweeper.

    GeekSquad are amateurs at best. Anyone who didn’t have a bit of technical savvy would never have figured out what was wrong with their laptop, post-geek ‘tuning’.

    What a disaster. I highly recommend NOT using GeekSquad or any other service that REFUSES to tell you exactly and precisely what changes were made to YOUR computer.