Former Deputy Arrested on Stalking and Voyeurism Charges After

Summary

The cameras installed to help protect a Louisiana woman’s home
allegedly became the instruments used to invade it.

Ascension Parish investigators accused former St. Mary Parish
Sheriff’s Office deputy Minh Ngo of repeatedly accessing his
ex-girlfriend’s home surveillance system after their relationship
ended.

Authorities said Ngo had helped install the cameras while the two
were dating. That earlier access allegedly left him with the account
information or technical knowledge needed to continue viewing the
camera system after he no longer had permission to do so.

The investigation began on September 11, 2025, when the woman reported
that she believed Ngo had been accessing the cameras and watching her
while she was inside her Ascension Parish residence.

Detectives obtained a search warrant for several of Ngo’s electronic
devices. According to the sheriff’s office, the resulting digital
evidence indicated that Ngo had accessed the cameras regularly over
a period of at least four months.

The public statement did not specify which rooms were visible, what
activities were allegedly observed, whether recordings were saved or
whether any images were shared with another person.

Investigators nevertheless concluded that the evidence supported an
arrest warrant for video voyeurism, stalking and computer tampering.

Ngo was employed by the St. Mary Parish Sheriff’s Office at the time
the allegation was reported. Because the reported conduct occurred
in Ascension Parish, the matter was referred to the Ascension Parish
Sheriff’s Office for investigation.

St. Mary Parish officials said their agency cooperated with the
outside investigation and simultaneously opened an internal review
through its Office of Professional Standards.

On September 16, 2025, detectives contacted Ngo and transported him
to the St. Mary Parish Law Enforcement Center. His employment with
the sheriff’s office was terminated at the time of his arrest.

“No one is above the law, not even those who wear our badge.”

St. Mary Parish Sheriff Gary Driskell said arresting an agency
employee was difficult but necessary to preserve public trust and
accountability.

Ngo was transferred to the Ascension Parish Jail later that evening.
The jail record lists a booking time of 6:54 p.m. and identifies him
as a 33-year-old Morgan City resident.

The booking record classifies the video-voyeurism charge as a felony.
It identifies stalking and computer tampering as misdemeanors.

Ngo posted a $25,000 bond associated with the video-voyeurism charge
and a $3,500 bond associated with the stalking charge. The
computer-tampering count was resolved for release purposes through
his own recognizance, meaning no cash or secured bond was required
on that particular booking count.

He was released at approximately 9:02 p.m. on September 17, 2025,
roughly one day after entering the Ascension Parish Jail.

Release on bond did not resolve the criminal accusations. Bond
determines whether a defendant may remain outside jail while a case
proceeds. It does not establish innocence or guilt.

1. The Crime

Investigators alleged that Ngo intentionally used access to his
former girlfriend’s surveillance-camera system to observe her inside
her residence without her knowledge or consent.

The alleged conduct differed from physically entering the residence.
Instead, authorities described a remote intrusion in which the
cameras themselves became a digital window into the woman’s private
living space.

Ngo reportedly helped install the cameras while the couple was still
dating. Access that may have been authorized during the relationship
allegedly continued after the relationship ended and after the woman
no longer consented to him viewing the system.

Louisiana’s computer-tampering law specifically recognizes that a
person may act without authorization by exceeding the limits of
access that was previously granted.

Detectives said their search of Ngo’s devices showed regular access
over at least four months. The repeated nature of that alleged access
was relevant to the stalking accusation, which generally requires
repeated conduct rather than one isolated act.

The publicly released summary did not say how the woman first
realized that the cameras might have been compromised. Possible
technical indicators such as login alerts, camera movement, account
history or unfamiliar devices were not described.

2. Crime Location

The alleged surveillance occurred at the victim’s private residence
in Ascension Parish, Louisiana.

Authorities did not release the address, neighborhood or municipality
where the woman lived. That information is omitted to protect her
safety and privacy.

Although Ngo worked in St. Mary Parish and lived in Morgan City,
Ascension Parish investigators handled the criminal case because
that was where the alleged offenses occurred.

3. Date and Time of the Crime

Authorities described an alleged pattern rather than one isolated
incident. The camera access reportedly occurred regularly for at
least four months before the September 2025 arrest.

• Approximately May through September 2025
  Detectives alleged that Ngo regularly accessed the home-camera
  system during a period lasting at least four months.
• September 11, 2025
  The Ascension Parish resident reported the suspected surveillance
  involving her former boyfriend.
• September 16, 2025, at approximately 4:14 p.m.
  Ngo was arrested on the Ascension Parish warrant and initially
  processed at the St. Mary Parish Law Enforcement Center.
• September 16, 2025, at approximately 6:54 p.m.
  Ngo was booked into the Ascension Parish Jail.
• September 17, 2025, at approximately 9:02 p.m.
  Ngo was released after the required bonds were posted and the
  recognizance release was finalized.

4. Police Department

The criminal investigation was conducted by the
Ascension Parish Sheriff’s Office.

The St. Mary Parish Sheriff’s Office received information concerning
its employee and forwarded the matter to supervisors. Because the
alleged conduct occurred outside St. Mary Parish, the case was
referred to Ascension Parish authorities.

Ascension Parish detectives obtained a warrant authorizing the search
of several electronic devices. Investigators said the examination of
those devices revealed regular access to the victim’s cameras.

The St. Mary Parish Sheriff’s Office opened a separate internal
investigation through its Office of Professional Standards and
cooperated with the criminal inquiry.

The Morgan City Police Department was also thanked by St. Mary Parish
officials for assisting with the investigation.

5. Suspect Name

The Ascension Parish booking record identifies the defendant as
Minh Ngo.

The St. Mary Parish Sheriff’s Office release identifies him as
Mihn Ngo. The difference appears to be a spelling
inconsistency between the press release and the booking system.

6. Suspect Age

Ngo was 33 years old when he was arrested.

The Ascension Parish booking record lists his date of birth as
August 30, 1992. It describes him as five feet eleven inches tall and
weighing approximately 180 pounds.

7. Charges

The Ascension Parish booking record lists three counts:

The publicly available booking information does not identify the
precise statutory paragraphs prosecutors intended to apply.

That distinction matters because Louisiana’s video-voyeurism statute
contains different penalty provisions depending on what was viewed,
the victim’s age, the defendant’s purpose and whether a conviction
would be a first or subsequent offense.

For a standard first conviction not involving one of the law’s
enhanced circumstances, video voyeurism can carry up to two years of
imprisonment and a fine of up to $2,000.

More serious forms involving specifically listed intimate activity
can carry one to five years of imprisonment and a fine of up to
$10,000. A conviction under the video-voyeurism statute is classified
as a sex offense and can trigger sex-offender registration.

Those are possible statutory consequences only. They do not establish
which penalty provision would apply to Ngo, and they do not mean that
he has been convicted.

8. Bond Amount

Ngo’s booking record lists two posted bonds totaling
$28,500.

• $25,000 associated with the felony video-voyeurism charge.
• $3,500 associated with the stalking charge.
• Release on his own recognizance for misdemeanor computer
  tampering.

The summary field at the top of the jail record displays a current
total-bond figure of $0 because the bonds were posted and the release
was completed. The individual bond entries preserve the original
$25,000 and $3,500 amounts.

9. Conviction

No verified conviction was located in the reliable, publicly indexed
sources reviewed for this article.

The Ascension Parish jail record contains no docket number, sentence
date or final adjudicative disposition. Its use of the word “bonded”
describes Ngo’s release from custody and is not a finding of guilt.

Ngo should therefore be described as arrested, charged or accused,
rather than as convicted of spying on the woman.

10. Sentence

No verified criminal sentence was located as of July 30, 2026.

Statutory maximums describe what a court could potentially impose
following a conviction. They are not evidence that Ngo received
imprisonment, probation, a fine or sex-offender registration.

11. Outcome

The immediate outcome included Ngo’s arrest, termination from the
St. Mary Parish Sheriff’s Office, transfer to the Ascension Parish
Jail and release the following evening.

The professional consequence was swift. St. Mary Parish officials
said Ngo’s employment ended at the time of his arrest, rather than
after a later trial or disciplinary hearing.

The current booking record does not establish how the criminal case
was ultimately resolved. No reliable public source reviewed for this
update reported a guilty plea, trial, dismissal, acquittal or
sentencing.

This article will require another update if a court judgment or
prosecutor’s announcement becomes publicly available.

12. Victim

Victim Name

The woman’s name was not disclosed in the official release or the
reliable news reports reviewed for this article.

Victim Age

The alleged victim’s age was not publicly reported.

Employment Consequences

Ngo was working for the St. Mary Parish Sheriff’s Office when the
allegation was reported.

The agency’s public statement refers to him both as an employee and
as a deputy. It does not provide his rank, division, length of service
or specific job responsibilities.

Sheriff Gary Driskell said the agency cooperated fully with Ascension
Parish investigators. Ngo’s employment was terminated on September
16, 2025, when he was taken into custody.

Employment termination is an administrative action and does not
substitute for a criminal conviction. A law-enforcement agency may
apply workplace standards that are separate from the burden of proof
required in court.

How Authorized Access Can Become Unauthorized

The case highlights a common security problem involving shared smart
devices after a relationship ends.

A partner may initially have permission to install, configure or use
home cameras, doorbells, locks, thermostats or voice assistants.
That permission does not necessarily remain permanent.

Louisiana’s computer-tampering statute states that unauthorized
actions include conduct that intentionally exceeds the limits of
authorization.

A person who once had legitimate access can therefore face allegations
of unauthorized access when continuing to log in after consent has
been withdrawn.

People ending a relationship involving shared smart-home technology
should consider changing account passwords, enabling two-factor
authentication, reviewing logged-in devices, removing shared users
and performing a factory reset when necessary.

Those practical precautions do not shift responsibility away from
anyone who unlawfully accesses a system. They simply reduce the
number of forgotten digital doors left unlocked.

This article is based on official sheriff’s office records,
Louisiana statutes and published reporting available as of
July 30, 2026. An arrest or criminal charge is not proof of guilt.
No verified conviction or final sentence was located for this case.
The alleged victim’s identifying information has been omitted.