Facebook stalker

Jaded

Member since
December 2018

138 posts

Posted Sat January 12, 2019 9:38pmReport post

Not looking for any advice, just a story for you. After the whole debacle was over and we’d started to move on a very kind soul set up a fake Facebook account. The purpose was to ‘out’ my husband and to ruin my new business. That was nearly a year ago. This person has created an online identity which purports to be a concerned Mother. The police have been involved and are doing what they can but we cannot identify this person to tackle the crap they are writing. ‘She’ has managed to get over 400 ‘friends’ we suspect not a single one actually knows this person in real life.

‘She’ waits for months, simply re-posting local crap but every now and again bubbles back up with her personal hatred of me. She’s recently started again but this time, whilst it makes me anxious I’m just perturbed as to what her fixation on me/us is? It’s not about safeguarding children, it’s vindictive, jealous, personal and sinister.

Mid be interested in other members thoughts?

Edited by moderator Fri January 25, 2019 10:47pm

Onwards&upwards

Member since
October 2018

241 posts

Posted Sat January 12, 2019 10:50pmReport post

Hi Jaded

It does sound as if she has another agenda. Facebook is such a nightmare as it can be anonymous. I'm guessing if you ever met this person in real life they wouldn't say any of those things to your face.

Through no fault of our own we are brought to the attention of closed minded people. Sounds like a frustrating & tough situation.

The only positivity I can find is you have survived this before & you will again (however unfair it is)xx

Keep taking each day as it comes, onwards & upwards xx

Big sigh

Member since
December 2018

89 posts

Posted Sun January 13, 2019 11:20amReport post

That is creepy. And also I’m surprised people have the time. From following your other posts I thought you partner eventually didn’t have any charges brought? So what on earth has ‘she’ got to put on her FB page?

i can’t offer any insights as this isn’t something I would have done before this happened, though I have noticed there are some mums who seem to think there is someone waiting to attack their child on every corner. Ironically these are the ones who also drive big, fast cars - they are more likely to harm children with their car!

Jaded

Member since
December 2018

138 posts

Posted Sun January 13, 2019 2:34pmReport post

High Big Sigh,

the case against my husband was dismissed after the CPS offered no evidence. This was after desperate attempts and re-attempts by the prosecution to reframe the ‘evidence’ they had, all fantastically rebutted by his barrister and forensic expert.

Unfortunately the police presented the same ‘evidence’ to disciplinary and professional hearings and he was very publicly humiliated. The police were so desperate to smear him they gave details of legal, adult pornography he’d looked at, just to make him look perverted. He’s not, he’s a normal bloke. Any issues about legal, adult pornography are between me and him, man and wife, not for the authorities to interfere or have any say whatsoever.

The reporter in court didn’t see fit to report the court outcome but reported a hugely one sided report from the professional hearing. There is no equality of arms in those hearings. None of the defence material provided was publicly read out, of course the police attended, they get their pay. We’d had enough by then so he just submitted a written response, he knew no one listened unlike the court where there are actual evidential rules everyone has to comply with. A massive injustice.



This was then then picked up by this troll who we believe is a disgruntled professional involved in the lost court case.

Its a huge injustice using well recognised tactics of police ‘noble cause corfuption’



I hope what comes around goes around for some people and that karma exists.

Jaded

Member since
December 2018

138 posts

Posted Sun January 13, 2019 3:09pmReport post

Noble cause corruption! It’s hard to type on your phone!

thank you Onwards & Upwards for your kind comments.

I just want to add I’m not personally comfortable with authorities having a moral position on legal pornography, what breaches my moral code may be perfectly acceptable to the next person. I’m not saying it’s right it’s just where do you draw the line in state interference? Is this moral code the same for men and women? Moral codes have a tendency to change over time, thresholds get higher and or lower dependent on cultural norms. It’s a very dangerous territory and a fine line to tread especially where sex is concerned. I want to be clear here, I am talking about images of Adults, not children and consenting ones at that. I would never, ever condone looking at sexual images of children or non sexual nude ones either. However I think there is an agenda which is not clear about the future of online pornography in the western world and it’s dangerous territory, that’s why I would recommend online pornography isn’t used. Buy a DVD from your local sex shop!

Big sigh

Member since
December 2018

89 posts

Posted Sun January 13, 2019 4:32pmReport post

Oh Jaded that sounds awful. You went through 2 trials. I know what you mean about standards of evidence. In my case I absolutely respect SS’s right to protect children and look at risks, but it seems that sometimes their standard of evidence is low and far lower than the “balance of probabilities” that they are meant to work to.

im sure you are doing it already, but just screenshot anything on FB which is inflammatory. They will probably slip up in the end and reveal themselves. Or ignore them - surely they will get bored in the end?

Jaded

Member since
December 2018

138 posts

Posted Sun January 13, 2019 6:29pmReport post

Thanks Big Sigh,

actually we’ve been through 3 trials. The criminal one where the prosecution had as much time and financial resources to find the evidence required. They couldn’t and had to concede. Don’t forget to continue with charges they had to meet the evidential test, balance of probabilities. It’s the jury who have to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt. Then we had another hearing supposedly on ‘balance of probabilities’ or ‘more likely than not’, they cherry picked evidence to suit their agenda which was to get rid ASAP. Our third trial was by social media, no rules, literally gunfight at the ok corral with the Facebook plebs who often have more to hide than most. Yes we’ve been through hell and back again, I’m sure we’ll go through more but we’re still together based on ALL the evidence, not convenient, cherry picked evidence that suits the authorities. I feel for you all I really do.

FREE CONFIDENTIAL ADVICE

0808 1000 900

More info >