Content creator Cassandra Vanessa “Cassie” Japos is facing multiple counts of cyber libel, alongside separate charges for violation of the Data Privacy Act and unjust vexation in relation to cybercrime, following a barrage of complaints over her viral “scam” videos on social media. The cases have been lodged before the Mandaue City Prosecutor’s Office, Hall of Justice.
Three other individuals, Wilwenrose Agor, Peter Paul Daradal, and Enecleto Adapon Coyme Jr., were also charged after being involved in amplifying the defamatory posts of Japos.
Court filings showed that Meunnie Cullantes initiated the majority of the complaints. Other complainants, who are all members of Elites Empire and distributors of AIM Global Group of Companies (AGG), also stepped forward. Fellow Cebu-based vlogger Jomie Hospital filed a complaint against Japos and another complainant identified as Gregg. Elites Empire founder Pearl Hung added complaints of data privacy violations and unjust vexation related to cybercrime.
Viral videos
The cases stemmed from a series of videos uploaded by Japos accusing Elites Empire of being a scam and alleging that she had been defrauded of ₱30,000.
To support her claims, she shared screenshots of her private exchanges with Cullantes. However, the same screenshots revealed she had insurance coverage, directly contradicting her allegations.
(L-R) Atty. Princess Charmine Rodriguez, Atty. Justine Marie Balanag, Jomie Hospital, Louise Katrina “Pearl” Hung, Meunnie Cullantes, Gregg Pungyan, Atty. Ma Gabriellen Quijada-Tabuñag and Atty. Vincent Tabuñag
Hung, through her legal counsel, had earlier served a cease-and-desist letter dated September 15 demanding that Japos stop making “false and malicious statements” that, they said, were calculated to damage the reputation of Elites Empire.
“You have personally stated, under the guise of being a ‘concerned citizen,’ misleading posts and comments regarding my client, making it appear that she is engaging in fraudulent activities,” the letter stated.
Elites Empire and AIM Global
The complainants also asserted that Elites Empire is formally affiliated with AIM Global, a recognized international distribution company that markets health, wellness, and entrepreneurship products. Members, they said, receive packages of AIM Global products equivalent to their membership fee or an insurance package of equal value, which they stressed is proof of transparency in the group’s operations.
Beyond product packages, AIM Global representatives emphasized that the company provides equal opportunities to all its distributors. Earnings are based on performance, whether through personal product sales or by building a network, and not on seniority, position, or who joined first. They pointed out that members who dedicate effort and hard work to selling products or expanding their team can expect to earn fairly, reinforcing AIM Global’s reputation as a results-driven company.
Company representatives underscored that success in AIM Global depends on consistent effort and commitment, and not on false promises. For years, the company has built a global reputation by offering entrepreneurship opportunities through direct selling, allowing members to earn from product sales or from expanding their networks.
Defending reputation
Elites Empire said it would not take the allegations lightly, warning that reckless online posts and content creators cannot be allowed to destroy reputations without consequence.
“This is not something we want to do, but we are compelled because their actions affected a lot of people who are dependent on Elites Empire,” the group said.
“We strongly caution the public against spreading baseless accusations,” the statement continued. “This is a clear reminder that those who irresponsibly destroy reputations online will face the heavy force of the law.”
Elites Empire stressed that the cyber libel charges highlight the growing accountability faced by netizens who misuse digital platforms.
Cautionary tale
With 38 counts of cyber libel already filed, along with complaints for violating the Data Privacy Act and unjust vexation in relation to cybercrime, the case has become a cautionary tale about the risks of online defamation.
While freedom of expression is constitutionally protected, legal experts have long emphasized that it does not extend to false, malicious, or defamatory statements. In this case, complainants say, reputations built through years of work and service were unfairly maligned for online clout.
For Japos and her co-respondents, the complaints represent not just a legal battle but also a warning to content creators and their audiences: in the age of social media, posts have consequences.