Two men accused of raping popular social media personality Mai Jeremaya have denied the charges, claiming the incident involved consensual s@x and later escalated into a dispute over money.
The encounter reportedly took place at a lodge in Eastlea, Harare.
The accused, Thabo Blessing Dube (27) and Martin Charlie (25), were arrested over the weekend and appeared in court on Monday facing rape charges.
Mai Jeremaya, known for her significant online presence, waived her legal right to anonymity by publicly posting a video outlining her allegations. Her revelation has drawn widespread attention and support, especially from fellow women and social media figures, including Mai TT.
Although the state did not initially contest the suspects’ bail request, the presiding magistrate, Marewanazvo Gofa, sought further clarification. On Tuesday, prosecutors submitted their reasoning for not objecting, with a ruling on bail expected shortly.
In their defence, Dube and Charlie claim that the meeting was arranged with mutual consent. According to their version, Charlie and Mai Jeremaya met at Joina City in central Harare and agreed to a s@xual encounter for a fee of US$20. They say they then went to a lodge in Eastlea, where Charlie and Mai Jeremaya allegedly had consensual s@x. Dube denies participating in any s@xual activity.
The pair alleges that Mai Jeremaya was fully aware of the arrangement and even accepted the cost of the lodge being covered. They further claim she undressed herself and initiated the encounter. Following the meeting, they say she took a shower, accepted the agreed payment, and was escorted to a taxi.
However, the accused contend that days later, Mai Jeremaya demanded US$500, far exceeding the initial agreement. When they declined, they allege she sent Tafadzwa “Detective Kedha” Chidawa, a private investigator, to locate them in Mayambara, Seke. After they again refused to pay, a rape complaint was filed.
The prosecution acknowledged the accused’s claims and noted that the rape complaint was made after the failed payment demand. However, they emphasised the seriousness of the allegations, particularly a claim that the complainant was coerced into performing oral s@x.
The magistrate questioned why additional charges, such as aggravated indecent assault, were not laid. Prosecutors responded that both alleged acts appeared to be part of the same incident, and charging both could be considered duplicative.
In support of bail, the state stated there was no strong reason to believe the suspects would flee, citing their fixed residences, lack of prior convictions, and no pending criminal matters. Prosecutors proposed that if released, the two should surrender their passports to limit flight risk.
