Lorcan Murphy’s use of ‘spy pen’ to record women in Dublin part of ‘path to future crime’

Lorcan Tadgh Murphy, who was earlier this month jailed for murdering US nurse Mackenzie Michalski in Hungary, had obsessively tried to pick up women across various European cities.He even covertly recorded attempts in Dublin.The south Dublin law and marketing graduate was jailed for 14 years earlier this month for the brutal assault and strangulation of the nurse, from Portland, Oregon, during a visit to Budapest in November 2024.During their investigation into Michaelski’s murder, Hungarian police discovered video footage of Murphy’s efforts to pick up 16 young women in Dublin city centre, probably in the summer of 2020. The recordings had been made on a “small camera disguised as a pen” or a “spy pen”, police said.READ MOREThese women may never realise they were recorded by Murphy (38), whose digital footprint also revealed a serious porn addiction and detailed notetaking about his pickup “success rate” and derogatory views about women.The Dublin Rape Crisis Centre has been concerned for some time at the increasing use of hidden cameras, spy glasses, pen cameras and other covert recording devices to secretly film women and girls without their knowledge or consent, says the organisation’s chief executive Rachel Morrow. Recordings such as those made by Murphy are “often minimised as harmless”, but this type of “harassment” was “part of a path to future crime”, she says. “Victims may never discover that recordings of them have been captured, shared or repeatedly viewed by strangers ... The number of known cases is likely to represent only a fraction of the true extent of the problem.”There is a strong case for criminalising the covert recording of individuals where a reasonable person would regard it as sexualising, she says.Section 3 of the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020, also known as Coco’s Law, made it an offence to record, distribute or publish intimate images of someone without their consent. Photographing up skirts or down blouses falls under this offence. There have been 48 section 3 prosecutions since the offence was introduced six years ago, according to the Director of Public Prosecutions.But Morrow says Coco’s Law does not affect a man who conceals a camera to film a woman above her clothes in public.“Without updated laws sending a clear unambiguous message to everyone that this behaviour will not be tolerated, we have little hope of turning the tide on the covert filming epidemic we see growing before our eyes,” she says.The State’s data privacy watchdog, the Data Protection Commission (DPC), says privacy laws generally do not prohibit people from taking photos or videos in a public space, provided no harassment is involved. A data protection issue could arise if the imagery was shared publicly or sold for commercial gain, it says.University College Dublin law lecturer and data protection expert TJ McIntyre says data laws are engaged if identifiable images are taken of people in public spaces. Exemptions permitting processing of this data include journalistic photography and recordings for recreational purposes or personal, family or household affairs.He believes the description of Murphy’s use of the recordings would not qualify for one of the exemptions and would equate to a breach of privacy laws. Alleged breaches of data protection laws are not a criminal matter but can be reported to the DPC or pursued through the civil courts.Policing privacy breaches arising from covert recordings is difficult, says McIntyre. A more impactful intervention would be to target the companies providing devices that “systemically” lend themselves to surrepetitous recording, he says.He pointed to the most prominent discrete recording device: Meta’s AI glasses, which to the uninitiated look like regular spectacles or sunglasses. Along with other smart features, a small camera on the side of the glasses records outwards from the wearer’s perspective. A tiny LED light illuminates to indicate to others when the camera is on.Critics of the technology, including McIntyre, say the light is not obvious enough and can be easily covered. An internet search for ways to block the light returns a plethora of results.Meta says the camera disables if the glasses detect the light has been covered. However, in a recent blog post it acknowledged some people have gone to sophisticated lengths to interfere with the light.“We are continuously improving our ability to detect tampering, and now we’re updating the glasses to disable the camera if they detect the LED was physically tampered with,” the company said. [ Kathy Sheridan: The ‘rough sex’ defence didn’t work for Lorcan Murphy. He wasn’t the first to try itOpens in new window ]When contacted, a Meta spokeswoman said many people use the glasses because they were genuinely helpful in everyday moments, such as listening to music or making hands-free calls. The company would keep strengthening protections as the glasses become more capable, she added.McIntyre says society should ask whether technology enabling surreptitious recording should be allowed.“At the very minimum it should be socially unacceptable for people to be using these in public,” he says.Ruth Breslin, director of the Sexual Exploitation Research and Policy Institute, says the filming of women on the street without their knowledge is “very problematic behaviour”. There appeared to be an element of sexual gratification at play for Murphy when he was recording women in public, she says.Breslin notes the Dubliner was a prolific consumer of pornography and spy camera footage is a popular category on explicit content websites.She suggests a law should be introduced to criminalise the secret recording of people in public if a sexual motive can be proved. Murphy’s spy pen use was “chilling”, according to Olga Cronin, surveillance and human rights policy officer at the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. She says his recordings are a “sad reminder” that society must be vigilant about adopting certain technologies for the sake of convenience.[ Eoghan Cleary: What caused the Lorcan Murphy I knew to become a killer?Opens in new window ]“We cannot think of any good rights-respecting reason for someone having a spy pen, but the use of other devices like bodycams, doorbell cameras, location trackers or Meta smart glasses ... can also have a very dark side.”Cronin says devices that can discretely record will “inevitably” be abused by some, but overt recording can also be problematic, such as when used to target and harass minority communities. As more of this technology becomes embedded into daily lives, she says, the risks to people’s privacy and safety grow.