Harare is grappling with a disturbing case involving allegations of rape against social media personality Mai Jeremaya, and the subsequent release on bail of the two men accused of the crime. The case has cast a spotlight on Paradise Guest Lodge, a discreet establishment in Eastlea, Harare, where the alleged assault is said to have taken place.
The lodge, located at number 15 Frank Johnson Avenue, Eastlea, now finds itself at the centre of a storm following Mai Jeremaya’s explosive allegations. The establishment’s name, “Paradise Guest Lodge,” stands in stark contrast to the horrifying events she claims to have endured within its walls.
As a result of her allegations, Thabo Blessing Dube, 27, and Martin Charlie, 25, were apprehended and brought before the courts. This week, a Harare magistrate granted them bail, a decision that has raised eyebrows and sparked debate within legal circles.
The State chose not to oppose the application for bail, citing what it considered mitigating factors.
A visit to Paradise Guest Lodge by H-Metro revealed the establishment’s nature as a lodge, one of two situated along Frank Johnson Avenue, within close proximity to each other.
Paradise Guest Lodge markets itself on its Facebook page as “Harare’s premier destination for intimate, private escapes, designed with discretion and comfort in mind, it offers exclusive accommodation.” The lodge boasts amenities such as unlimited WiFi, luxurious beds, and secure parking, its location readily accessible via Google Maps.
Intriguingly, the lodge offers varying rates for its services. Guests can secure a room for a daytime stay, between 9am and 5:30pm, for US$20. An overnight stay, commencing from 4pm, costs between US$25 and US$30. “All rooms have hot showers,” the lodge advertises in its Facebook posts.
During H-Metro’s visit, the electric gate opened automatically upon sensing the crew’s presence. Posing as prospective guests, the crew inquired about accommodation costs, receiving a response that hinted at the lodge’s clientele.
“Our charges vary with the time you want to take with your loved one,” the receptionist stated. “We charge US$10 for two hours, US$20 for the whole day, and US$25 for a night that starts from 4pm, thank you.” This pricing structure suggests a business model catering to short-term encounters.
As the H-Metro crew departed, they observed a man in a kombi leaving the lodge, subsequently dropping off a woman, who had been in his company, along Josiah Chinamano Avenue.
Meanwhile, the rape case against Dube and Charlie has taken an unexpected turn. Despite the gravity of the charges, the State consented to bail for the two accused men, with the Harare Magistrates Court remanding them out of custody to June 5, 2025.
In Zimbabwe, rape is classified as a Third Schedule offence, which typically mandates that accused persons appearing before a magistrates’ court are automatically referred to the High Court for bail consideration. This process often results in suspects spending weeks in remand prison, with the onus on the accused to demonstrate why they should be granted bail. However, in this instance, the magistrates court deviated from this norm and granted bail.
The State defended its decision not to oppose bail, arguing that Dube and Charlie have fixed addresses, possess no criminal records, and presented a low flight risk.
“It is the State’s view that such forceful and convincing reasons, which will make the court feel very strongly that the accused should not be released on bail, do not exist,” prosecutors submitted. “They do not have any known previous convictions or pending cases… and they did not exhibit any conduct from which any inclination to abscond can be inferred.”
The State further indicated its willingness to impose conditions, such as the surrender of passports, to ensure compliance.
Magistrate Marewanazvo Gofa had previously raised concerns regarding the scope of the charges, questioning why the pair were not also charged with aggravated indecent assault, given allegations they forced the complainant to perform oral sex.
The State acknowledged the point, submitting: “It is… submitted that considering that the acts constituting aggravated indecent assault appear to have taken place in a single transaction with those acts constituting rape. It also appears that the dominant intention was rape. It is also worth noting that the same evidence will be used to prove the acts constituting rape and those constituting aggravated indecent assault. In the result, charging the accused with both rape and aggravated indecent assault may be an unnecessary splitting of charges.”
Mai Jeremaya, known for her substantial online following, appeared to have waived her right to anonymity by publicly posting a video detailing the alleged assault.
The State had initially consented to bail, but Magistrate Gofa demanded further justification.
In court documents, prosecutors also disclosed the men’s version of events, which was presented during initial vetting. The accused deny any wrongdoing, asserting that the encounter was consensual and arranged in advance.
They then went to a lodge in Eastlea, where Charlie had consensual sexual intercourse with Mai Jeremaya. The situation allegedly soured when Mai Jeremaya demanded US$500, instead of the agreed-upon US$20.
“She wanted US$500 but we had agreed on US$20,” the accused told the court. “She knew she was at a lodge for sex,” they added.
Mai Jeremaya would later engage a private investigator, Detective Kedha, to recover the money she felt she was owed.
“She later sent a private investigator, Detective Kedha, to try and get the money. When we refused, a rape report was then made,” the statement read.
Despite the seriousness of the case, the State maintained that there were no compelling reasons to deny the duo bail.
“It is the State’s view that such forceful and convincing reasons, which will make the court feel very strongly that the accused should not be released on bail, do not exist,” the State argued.
“The State does not have any well-founded fears that if released on bail, the two will abscond and not attend their trial, they are of fixed abode shown by their residential addresses on the face of the Request for Remand form.
“They do not have any known previous convictions or pending cases before the criminal courts and they did not exhibit any conduct from which any inclination to abscond can be inferred.”
Follow @MyZimbabweNews
