Harare is bracing for fireworks in court as Martin Charlie, one of the men accused of raping social media influencer Ashley Masendeke, known as Mai Jeremaya, is set to testify. Charlie claims he paid Mai Jeremaya for sex on the day in question, a stark contrast to the State’s allegations that he and his accomplice, Thabo Blessing Dube, lured and gang-raped her at a Harare lodge.
The case has taken several twists and turns, with conflicting testimonies and accusations of extortion clouding the truth. Last week, Dube’s application for discharge at the close of the State’s case was dismissed by presiding magistrate Letwin Rwodzi, who ruled that he had to proceed with his defence.
According to the State, Dube initially contacted Mai Jeremaya on April 9, inviting her for a meeting, but they failed to connect. On April 30, Charlie allegedly messaged Mai Jeremaya, inviting her to meet him. They met along Samora Machel Avenue, and he drove her to number 11 Frank Johnson, Eastlea.
Charlie allegedly entered the building, pretending to see his boss, and returned with a woman named Sbahle. They drove to town, dropped Sbahle off, and during this time, Mai Jeremaya allegedly spoke privately with Dube, revealing she had recently separated from her husband and was desperate for money.
Dube and Charlie claim Mai Jeremaya complimented Charlie’s double cab truck and iPhone, describing him as “well-off,” before proposing an hour of consensual sex for US$20. Dube claims he relayed this message to Charlie, and they agreed to the terms.
Charlie says he drove to the lodge, where Mai Jeremaya demanded advance payment, which he provided. He claims she then voluntarily undressed, engaged in foreplay, including kissing and caressing, assisted him in putting on a condom, and actively participated in consensual intercourse.
Both men claim that after the encounter, Mai Jeremaya unexpectedly demanded US$500, claiming she had given Charlie “extras” by kissing and engaging in foreplay.
Ms Duringo told the court that Mai Jeremaya initially disclosed to her that she had consensual intercourse with only one individual, contradicting her official statement in which she alleged being raped by both accused persons. Ms Duringo also denied Mai Jeremaya’s claims that she had attempted to perform an exorcism on her following the alleged incident. She further testified that Mai Jeremaya was distressed when her husband became aware of the matter, allegedly expressing a desire for the issue to remain a secret between them.
The court also heard that Mai Jeremaya pleaded with one of the two men suspected of gang raping her to use a condom just before she was allegedly raped at a lodge in Harare on April 30.
During her testimony, Ms Duringo revealed that Mai Jeremaya told her she had agreed to be intimate with one of the men because he was “talking to her nicely.”
“She told me that the two were taking her to their boss and when they got to the reception, they spent some time chatting and watching her skits. She told me that later on, someone directed her to a room that had two doors and one of her assailants went with her and the other one used the other door to get in,” said Ms Duringo.
“She said that’s when she saw that it wasn’t an ordinary meeting, but just played along so that they wouldn’t hurt her as she had seen a gun,” said Ms Duringo.
She added that Mai Jeremaya said she played along and was comfortable with one of the two people, who was light in complexion as he was talking to her nicely. She said Mai Jeremaya agreed to stay with him in the room and consented to have sexual intercourse with him.
“She said the encounter was very long because she didn’t like it and there was someone who kept coming in and out of the room, which made her uncomfortable. She told me that after the encounter, she was given US$10, which she used to come back home,” said Ms Duringo.
The defence team has seized upon these discrepancies, arguing that the prosecution’s case lacks credibility and is marred by inconsistencies that cast reasonable doubt on the complainant’s testimony. They submitted an application for discharge at the close of the State’s case, arguing that the case did not warrant continuation and that the accused should be discharged.
In contrast, Mai Jeremaya, during her testimony, painted a graphic picture of how she was raped and how the incident has destroyed her eight-year-old relationship with her partner.
She told the court that she started crying when she realised she was about to be raped by Charlie. Fear of her attacker forced her to remove her clothes, when Charlie removed his clothes, she pleaded with him to use condoms. Charlie allegedly fondled her and demanded that she should lick his private parts.
She also claimed that after being allegedly raped by the duo, she initially decided she was not going to tell anyone about her ordeal because she feared the backlash, including the embarrassment she would have to endure. One of her attackers scared her when he claimed he had access to some classified information and he would hunt her down and find her wherever she would hide.
She further testified that she suffered physically and has since been forced to rely on medication, including some which she reacted to, which makes it difficult for her to sleep. She now suffers from anxiety and although she was having challenges with her partner, before this incident, she feels the case has destroyed that partnership.
Dube and Charlie claim that after the alleged sexual encounter, Mai Jeremaya unexpectedly demanded US$500, claiming she had given Charlie “extras” by kissing and engaging in foreplay. When Charlie refused, she allegedly reduced the amount to US$300, but he still couldn’t afford it.
They maintain that Mai Jeremaya never expressed distress or a lack of consent. They further allege that she later engaged controversial private investigator Tafadzwa Chidawa, who kidnapped them and their parents, demanding US$500, which they refused to pay. The duo claims that the rape allegations stem from this failed extortion attempt.
With Charlie now taking the stand, the court will be eager to hear his account of the events of April 30. Harare Magistrate has reserved judgement in the matter and postponed it to June 27, for the court to deliver a ruling on whether the accused will be discharged or put to their defence.
Follow @MyZimbabweNews
