By A Correspondent | ZimEye | Facebooker, Felistas Murata has been found to have used a video without permission on her social media platforms to intimidate witnesses linked to a case filed under CR 124/11/20 at the Rotten Row Magistrates Court in Malborough. This follows her earlier conviction in 2023 for related offenses. Additionally, Murata was deported from Heathrow Airport on April 28, 2024, after being found to marketed on FB and illegally exported unauthorised goods into the UK while abusing her visa.

The video she misused was originally created to support legal complainants, but was altered by Murata to falsely present herself as innocent amidst these legal troubles. Murata is also confirmed to have orchestrated a group to misuse Facebook’s content reporting mechanisms.

As a result, the account of one of her victims, named Mildred Meda has been restored of its monetisation facilities.

Murata was also found to have run a Ponzi scheme, which led to substantial financial losses for numerous individuals, with documented losses exceeding GBP 15,000 from one victim alone. Links and documentation provided by victims substantiate these claims, indicating a pattern of fraudulent behaviour facilitated through her Facebook posts.

The original creator of the video has called on Facebook to remove the content and to impose further sanctions on Murata, underscoring the urgency for social media platforms to enforce strict measures to curb misuse and protect users from online harassment and intimidation.

This evolving situation alerts accomplices and supporters of Murata to the potential legal ramifications they could face, as authorities tighten enforcement based on solid legal precedents in both the US and UK. The case serves as a critical reminder of the vigilance needed by digital platforms to detect and deter misuse, protecting users from fraud and harassment while maintaining the integrity of online spaces.

ARE YOU ALSO A VICTIM OF MAI TITI?

The following are some of the key statutes and legal principles that might be relied upon in prosecuting such cases:

United Kingdom -Fraud Act 2006: This Act covers fraud by false representation, failure to disclose information, and abuse of position. It could be applied to the Ponzi scheme allegations and any deceptive practices used in the misuse of media.

Misuse of Drugs Act 1971: If the harmful substances exported are controlled under this Act, charges could be brought for their illegal exportation.

Computer Misuse Act 1990: This Act would address illegal activities conducted online, including hacking or the misuse of social media platforms to intimidate witnesses or commit fraud.

Harassment Act 1997: Given the allegations of using media to intimidate witnesses, this Act could be relevant for addressing any behavior that causes alarm or distress.

United States Wire Fraud Statute (18 U.S.C § 1343): This could cover schemes to defraud where electronic communications are used, applicable to both the alleged Ponzi scheme and possibly the misuse of media. Controlled Substances Act: For the illegal exportation of harmful substances, if they are regulated under this Act, charges could be considered.

RICO Act (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act): If there’s an ongoing illegal enterprise involving multiple accomplices, this Act could be used to address the broader criminal network.

Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA): This could be used to prosecute unauthorized access or excess use of computers or networks, pertinent to any misuse of social media platforms.

South Africa- Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998 (POCA): This Act tackles organized crime, money laundering, and gang-related activities, which could be relevant if the Ponzi scheme is extensive and organized.

Protection from Harassment Act 2011: This could address the use of media to intimidate or harass witnesses.

Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 2002: This Act deals with online transactions and communications, making it relevant for prosecuting fraud and misuse of digital media.

Medicines and Related Substances Act 1965: Regulates the handling and distribution of harmful substances, potentially covering illegal exports.

Prosecutors would choose the specific charges based on the details of the actions involved, the nature of the evidence, and the jurisdictions where the crimes occurred. Each of these laws provides a framework to address different aspects of the alleged criminal activities.-ZimEye