Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Photo of husband posted on Facebook group with allegation - legalities?

622 replies

Hattie24 · 04/07/2025 23:35

Earlier I was alerted to a post by a woman on our town’s community Facebook page. It is a rant about a flat in her block being used by a group of prostitutes which is causing issues at unsociable hours and how the landlord isn’t doing anything about it. Under this there are photos of various men at the entrance of the block of flats and one of them is my husband. The insinuation is that these have all been visiting that flat.

I want to know the legalities of this woman posting such an allegation as she is outright refusing to remove the post. It is obviously extremely humiliating for me (friends and no doubt colleagues have seen it) and there’s so many comments underneath. We’ve been on a ‘break’ due to various issues but still living together and haven’t been intimate for nearly a year so I don’t need a lecture on how I shouldn’t have married such a man.

Is it me or is someone putting up a post like this without any thought for the consequences on various families etc utterly disgusting?

OP posts:
Delphiniumandlupins · 05/07/2025 12:12

If I was living in a flat and a neighbouring flat was being used as a brothel I would want to do something about it. I would be concerned for my comfort and safety (and my DD's) if multiple men were in the building every day, expecting to buy sex. Posting photos on a local FB group, of visitors to that flat, might be an effective way to discourage those visits. I'm sure your DH's massage-buddy would rather not live next door to a brothel either.

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:14

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:07

It's only libel if it is not true. Truth is an absolute defence to defamation in the UK. If the men are not using prostitutes they can sue for libel.

And if they are using prostitutes then they have no reason to hide anything at all since obviously they think that's ok.

And if their families believe these men are degrading and harming them by using prostitutes they should throw these men out.

Anyway, the OP can very easily find out if it's true or not - she just has to go along to the "physio" with her husband and it will all be sorted out.

How is the poster going to prove it’s true though? A photo of him at the property isn’t enough and apparently the women in the flat change every 3 weeks and don’t speak English. The chances of the poster getting a witness statement from one of them about the OP’s husband is minuscule. And it’s for the poster to prove it’s true not for the husband to prove it’s not true so 🤷‍♀️

Hattie24 · 05/07/2025 12:16

EggnogNoggin · 05/07/2025 12:09

Well go and fuck your husband and get your marriage back on track.

Ikea do really big rugs, might be handy for sweeping things underneath.

😂😂

Such anger - classic batshit MN!

OP posts:
amicisimma · 05/07/2025 12:16

"That’s not how defamation law works. Innuendo is as actionable as saying things outright hence why Sally Bercow ended up paying Lord Macalpine a very large sum indeed for posting only the words “why is Lord McAlpine trending 😜”"

But there is no innuendo. She says that a flat is being used by prostitutes. She shows men at the entrance to the entire block. It's a bit of a leap to assume, or suggest that it's being implied, that all the men, or any particular one, who enter the building (or even approach the front door), have anything to do with a particular flat. I wouldn't risk money on hoping that a judge would decide that.

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:17

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:14

How is the poster going to prove it’s true though? A photo of him at the property isn’t enough and apparently the women in the flat change every 3 weeks and don’t speak English. The chances of the poster getting a witness statement from one of them about the OP’s husband is minuscule. And it’s for the poster to prove it’s true not for the husband to prove it’s not true so 🤷‍♀️

If it was NOT true any decent man would be absolutely and completely outraged and go through the woman posting like a wrecking ball. The very first thing they would do is reply publicly stating they were going to sue for defamation of character and libel and the second thing they would do is call a lawyer, and the third thing they would do is report it to Facebook.

Instead, based on the information available, it sounds like the men have done nothing at all. Odd.

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:19

amicisimma · 05/07/2025 12:16

"That’s not how defamation law works. Innuendo is as actionable as saying things outright hence why Sally Bercow ended up paying Lord Macalpine a very large sum indeed for posting only the words “why is Lord McAlpine trending 😜”"

But there is no innuendo. She says that a flat is being used by prostitutes. She shows men at the entrance to the entire block. It's a bit of a leap to assume, or suggest that it's being implied, that all the men, or any particular one, who enter the building (or even approach the front door), have anything to do with a particular flat. I wouldn't risk money on hoping that a judge would decide that.

That’s fine. You do you but this is a pretty clear cut case of innuendo. Virtually text book. So the OP’s husband wouldn’t be taking a massive risk though obviously he needs to take his own legal advice on this and make his own judgment.

EggnogNoggin · 05/07/2025 12:19

Hattie24 · 05/07/2025 12:16

😂😂

Such anger - classic batshit MN!

I'm not angry because my husband isn't fucking prostitutes.

But please do take the win if you can't see a way to move your own life forward and DARVO suits you better. Perhaps you and your husband are made for eachother.

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:20

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:17

If it was NOT true any decent man would be absolutely and completely outraged and go through the woman posting like a wrecking ball. The very first thing they would do is reply publicly stating they were going to sue for defamation of character and libel and the second thing they would do is call a lawyer, and the third thing they would do is report it to Facebook.

Instead, based on the information available, it sounds like the men have done nothing at all. Odd.

All of which would be irrelevant in a defamation action and doesn’t help the poster prove it’s true!

Gloriia · 05/07/2025 12:20

'She says that a flat is being used by prostitutes. She shows men at the entrance to the entire block'

How does The FB Outer know? Unless she too is a sex worker perhaps and knows the others as she's seen them in action?

You cannot go around accusing people of stuff and including their photos. This stuff is so very basic.

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:23

Right. If it is not true it would be a really simple thing to make a case for defamation.

The woman posting on FB said she knows none of them live there and according to the OP they were seen seen arriving and leaving a known prostitute within the space of an hour. And the woman posting on FB has had support from other residents, according to the OP.

Instead of offering his wife proof that he was seeing a "physio" which would be so easy, OP's wretched husband has offered to have his mate vouch for him.

OP could simply visit the "physo" with him and clear it up in five minutes then go from there with any legal pursuit.

If he wasn't using prostitutes I would be astonished. I think OP knows this too. She's bothered about people's judgement, and is fine with him using prostitutes - or so it seems.

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:25

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:20

All of which would be irrelevant in a defamation action and doesn’t help the poster prove it’s true!

Er, no. If if her wretched prostitute using husband was actually innocent it would be incredibly easy to prove he had been to the physio and start legal action.

CeffylCoch · 05/07/2025 12:26

Sounds like it’s probably true?

Gloriia · 05/07/2025 12:27

'The woman posting on FB said she knows none of them live there and according to the OP they were seen seen arriving and leaving a known prostitute within the space of an hour. And the woman posting on FB has had support from other residents, according to the OP.'

It could be gossip, it could be malicious, it could be bullying. We don't know. This is not the way of doing things. There are official channels. What next a bag of dog shit through the letterbox that'll tell 'em!

aquashiv · 05/07/2025 12:28

Sorry, Op, he's scum. You know full well why he's there, and so does he. Coward, making you deal with the woman.

CorbyTrouserPress · 05/07/2025 12:29

The more the OP posts the more I don’t believe a word of this.

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:29

Gloriia · 05/07/2025 12:27

'The woman posting on FB said she knows none of them live there and according to the OP they were seen seen arriving and leaving a known prostitute within the space of an hour. And the woman posting on FB has had support from other residents, according to the OP.'

It could be gossip, it could be malicious, it could be bullying. We don't know. This is not the way of doing things. There are official channels. What next a bag of dog shit through the letterbox that'll tell 'em!

Oh well, never mind, looks like she's done it anyway and you getting incredibly triggered by it all for some reason won't change that.

Reading the OPs posts, she knows full well her husband has been using prostitutes.

I actually don't give much of a shit about any of it, beyond being disgusted in general by men who use prostitutes.

The bottom line is, if he's using prostitutes he can do absolutely nothing about the photos legally.

If he's not, he can.

Which sums the thread up really.

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:30

CorbyTrouserPress · 05/07/2025 12:29

The more the OP posts the more I don’t believe a word of this.

You mean she's made the whole story up? Possibly. She doesn't sound quite right, for sure.

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:32

Boddica2000 · 05/07/2025 12:25

Er, no. If if her wretched prostitute using husband was actually innocent it would be incredibly easy to prove he had been to the physio and start legal action.

The husband doesn’t have to prove anything! Honestly this wouldn’t even make it to a trial based on this thread. The judge would easily determine at a preliminary hearing that this was defamatory and as the poster would not be able to produce any evidence that it was true, the husband would get a judgment without trial and the judge would award damages. There are processes in place to ensure in cases like this that people who post defamatory statements and can’t defend them don’t get to drag the people they’ve defamed into court

cabbageking · 05/07/2025 12:34

Let him sort his own problem. You are doing the worrying when this is up to him to sort.

He has confirmation of the time of the appointment and can easily sort out the problem. The image will have a time stamp and he has an appointment time.

amicisimma · 05/07/2025 12:35

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:19

That’s fine. You do you but this is a pretty clear cut case of innuendo. Virtually text book. So the OP’s husband wouldn’t be taking a massive risk though obviously he needs to take his own legal advice on this and make his own judgment.

No. It's nothing of the sort. There's a picture of the entrance to a block of flats in which she claims there's an issue. This picture just identifies the block. There happen to be various men around it.

Possibly you could claim that she's trying to make you believe that because there are men near the entrance it must be true that there are prostitutes working there.

She is not insinuating that any particular man in the picture is visiting any particular flat.

This is not 'doing me'. It's what would be needed to make a decent case for defamation by innuendo or any means. You can, of course, spend your money on anything you want. As this is a public forum, however, I would just like to warn anyone reading that you need to be quite cautious and clear on the facts before you commit to spending money and effort on a legal case and not just think 'someone on the internet said...'

Omeara · 05/07/2025 12:36

Ask your husband which number flat the “physio” lives in.

Katrinawaves · 05/07/2025 12:36

amicisimma · 05/07/2025 12:35

No. It's nothing of the sort. There's a picture of the entrance to a block of flats in which she claims there's an issue. This picture just identifies the block. There happen to be various men around it.

Possibly you could claim that she's trying to make you believe that because there are men near the entrance it must be true that there are prostitutes working there.

She is not insinuating that any particular man in the picture is visiting any particular flat.

This is not 'doing me'. It's what would be needed to make a decent case for defamation by innuendo or any means. You can, of course, spend your money on anything you want. As this is a public forum, however, I would just like to warn anyone reading that you need to be quite cautious and clear on the facts before you commit to spending money and effort on a legal case and not just think 'someone on the internet said...'

Which bit of the husband needs to take his own legal advice wasn’t clear in my post?

BadIdeaRight · 05/07/2025 12:40

I can’t believe you’re buying this bullshit physio excuse, OP. Did the dog eat his homework, too?

cabbageking · 05/07/2025 12:40

Let him sort it rather than you doing the legwork

The photo will also be time-stamped and he has an appointment time.

AuntyHistamine · 05/07/2025 12:41

BedChem · 05/07/2025 10:03

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Yeah, pulled a muscle did he? 😂