I don't post often, but I have experience in both FB and exposure. You definitely want to expose via private messages rather than posting on the wall for various reasons:

1. While the legal stuff won't stick, it's an added expense and hassle you don't need.

2. Posting on someone's wall is highly ineffective. It only shows up on people's home pages for a short while, depending on how many friends they have and how active they are. The WS/OP can delete it. That means only those people who logged in soon after you posted, actually went to the WS/OP's wall and all before the WS/OP get there themselves (and they will likely be alerted by somebody. There is no guarantee you will hit the important targets and you won't get a second chance as you will be blocked.

3. People who read your post on someone's wall may perceive it to be vindictive. The same people, when reading the same information in a private message, will feel like they are "in on something". It's basic psychology.

4. Any adultery supporters/sympathizers or the like will not only perceive the wall posting to be vindictive, they will have the ability to add a comment and completely change the tone of your post. So, even if someone who could support you comes along, they will be influenced by what the affair cheerleaders have to say. With private messages, these cheerleaders won't know who else you contacted and any reaction from them will make them look paranoid. DON'T send a bulk email - send the same message but to each person one at a time!!!

5. Once you have PM'd a bunch of these people, you will have effectively compiled a list of potentially influential people. This could come in handy down the road in the event there is a false recovery or if the OP has a BS who needs the same info but gets blocked etc. It also means you have access to far more people who can help spy later on (you would be surprised how many of these people will stay in touch with you afterwards).

It's basic common sense. It's not illegal, even if you do post it, but posting it publically will be perceived differently and you also lose control of the content and distribution rather quickly.

I have seen you refer to FB exposure with a negative connotation like this before. Like Mr. Wondering's exposure thread. I believe you were told on that thread that is not the way FB exposure is advised...or something along those lines...

Can you point to where you are seeing this advised on these boards?

EXACTLY. But, that is not how we advise exposure in the first place. Like you said, it is ineffective. Better to send out personal messages/emails and sign your name.

I will add that marriedforever killed her H's affair DEAD and got a lot of support when she exposed the OW and her H on a running forum. So there are some situations where that kind of approach is effective. She also mass emailed the OW's teaching colleagues at her school. Affair: DEAD. Marriage: SAVED.

For the life of me, I don't understand why anyone could view exposure as "negative?" Why? Because it is embarrassing? Of course it is!! A wayward should be embarrassed!

Being embarrassed over being bad is a POSITIVE thing, not a negative thing. I view this fear and negativity of exposure as a sign of the fog.

So does Dr Harley:

here

Problem solved.

From a legal perspective, the only possible cause of action I can think of that a person could allege for someone having communicated to their FB friends that they are having an affair is defamation. Truth is a defense to a defamation claim. As long as a BS has proof that the two are having an affair, they would be able to defend against any legal claim for defamation.

SB, it needs to be pointed out that you are a wayward, so people understand why you would have this irrational perspective of exposure in the face of a very real threat, ADULTERY. That is like worrying about the toxicity of the paint in the girl's bathroom on the sinking Titanic. Why else would a person be on a marriage board trying to scare others about using the most effective, impactful weapon against adultery? I can think of no other way to explain your lack of perspective.

Surely, you can see that yours is not the most objective view given your very recent history? It is a little self serving to see a wayward on an infidelity board trying to scare folks against exposure, don't ya think?

Why else would you not be concerned about "claims" that might be brought when the marriage collapses from an affair? Rather, you focus on an almost UNHEARD of, and easily defended risk - but one that often kills affairs and saves marriages.

It should be pointed out that BritsBrat is a corporate attorney for a leading international company.

First off, anyone can sue anyone for practical anything. That being said, in my almost 6 years here, I have yet to see someone actually get sued for exposure. I've HAVE seen plenty of divorces over infidelity but not one specifically because of exposure (infidelity is by far the bigger problem in marriage NOT exposure)

Thus, even though it is SOOO unlikely it's hardly worth mentioning, anyone who enters this "exposure" situation SHOULD be somewhat aware of and protect themselves to some extent from such frivolous lawsuits (the practice of bringing lawsuits with little to no chance of winning). The deeper the exposure targets pockets and/or the closer association such target has with lawyers the greater the risk.

Wayward Spouse's VERY OFTEN threaten lawsuits. As I've said many times in the past, though they threaten...Waywards very RARELY follow through and sue anyone. Remember, the last thing a wayward spouse wants to do is walk into an OPEN and PUBLIC court room and attempt to defend their adulterous behavior. They want secrecy and the exposing party to STOP exposing them...not MORE exposure in court. In addition, any lawsuit involves "Discovery", a period of time both parties get to ascertain the facts of the lawsuit through depositions, interrogatories, admissions, private investigators, experts, etc. Again, Waywards don't want "discovery" and public courtroom drama, they just want you to stop exposing them. Thus, they "threaten" to manipulate you.

This is PRESUMING the wayward spouse IS having an affair. If you are wrong about such and expose to any third party that someone is having an affair and they are not...you are subject to being sued. I'm not concerned with liars because anyone that anonymously comes telling us their spouse is having an affair when they aren't; and, we anonymously tell them to expose such affair, isn't a problem with the exposure advice but the initial lie. If they get sued...it's not our problem. A bigger problem though is when a wayward KNOWS he/she is having an affair, they MAY threaten and actually sue you because they don't believe anyone can prove it. Most waywards are hiding behind a wall of denial which tells them that if no one has pictures, audio tapes and/or video of them actually screwing their affair partner, then it didn't happen. Lying is no big deal to these people in this state of mind so they MAY sue you even though THEY (and their affair partner they trust to lie for them too) know it's the truth. In addition, they may take exception to the exposure of their affair because they have not YET consummated the "adultery" and the exposure insinuates they have. They will claim you have defamed them implying "sexual immorality" when it's not true. In such situations, IF avoiding lawsuits is paramount to the "collectible" individual or person anticipating a protracted child custody dispute, then they better be sure to obtain some semblance of "proof" of the truth they intend to expose. They don't necessarily have to have overwhelming evidence like video tapes or witnessing of physical intercourse....rather, they just need enough circumstantial evidence to carry their burden of a "preponderance of the evidence" that what they are saying is the truth. This will then switch the burden of proof back to the wayward to prove it hadn't happened ever or yet. Evidence may include emails, text messages, direct witness testimony, cell phone bills, hotel receipts, private investigator reports, statements, admissions, deposition testimony, etc.

Another issue here is that the question of "truth" is generally a FACTUAL question. What that means is that if someone sues you for defamation/slander/breach of privacy and you don't have absolute proof of an act of adultery/infidelity....the case will GENERALLY survive Summary Deposition because the judge can't throw the cases out based upon the law. The JURY (or Judge) is the "trier of fact". By getting past Summary Deposition, the plaintiff has successfully made the case really expensive regardless of how frivolous it may be.

So it MAY be important for the exposing spouse, depending on the amount of proof they have of the infidelity, to coach their "exposure" language very carefully. Generally, the advice we give here is so "coached". It is not mean or vindictive. No one is advised to proclaim to anyone "my spouse is screwing [OW}". Beside such being a bad exposure tactic...it's "graphicness" also is more likely to result in lawsuits especially if you can't prove they are "screwing". Rather, we advise more generally statements like "My [spouse] is having an affair with [ow/om] and I am looking for your prayers and support". Though anyone can sue anyone for anything...this is quite un-actionable. The word "affair" could mean anything and doesn't necessarily imply "sexual immorality".

I will try to come back later and discuss the different types of potential lawsuits and discuss their relative low risks.

Mr. Wondering

Mr. Wondering is dead on. One other thing neither of us mentioned is that the only people who can file suit are the WS and the OP - they are the only ones who have what's called "standing" to make a claim. The people to whom exposure is made do not. "Standing" means that a person has sufficient stake in an otherwise justicable controversy to obtain judicial resolution of the controversy. In other words, it is a legal concept used to determine whether a person has been sufficiently affected such they have a legal claim for the wrong.

I'm sure you feel that by using scare tactics you are being responsible.

Every time I run across one of your posts, the fog becomes so thick I can hardly see. PLEASE for your own sake and that of your M, take the time here to learn and let the haze clear.

Far be it from me to censor anyone, it is merely my recommendation that you refrain from posting advise for now, and spend the time posting and receiving assistance with healing your M.

One should never fear telling the truth. Whether it happened today, or thirty years ago.

Problem solved.

In all these discussions of POTENTIAL lawsuits let's not forget the fact that any individual has the freedom of speech to state the facts about their life to anyone they want. The fact a wayward spouse may THREATEN you with lawsuits could also be considered "extortion"...wherein he/she is trying to coerce you into not exercising your legal first amendment rights to say whatever truthful thing you want to to anyone you want about your life by threatening legal action against you.

Having a good counter-claim helps so pay attention when your wayward spouse threatens you....If they say or more particularly write (by email)... "If you don't stop telling everyone...I'm going to sue you". That COULD BE considered extortion.

This is why collection companies or lawyer letters also advise people of POTENTIAL lawsuits for collection or whatever and tell you to discuss your options with your own attorney. We can't flat out THREATEN lawsuits. We have to coach our words carefully and speak in hypotheticals. "Pay up or we will sue you"...is extortion.

Mr. Wondering

I think butternut is my favorite...




Anyway - I wouldn't let fear of legal rebuttal deter me from defending my M, nor would any financial cost be too much.

If your WS doesn't want ya broke, they shouldn't have broke ya.

I don't doubt your training. It is also my opinion that you are probably, in most cases, objective. I have yet to see you be objective here.


The problem isn't your answer - it's your continual, chip-on-the-shoulder attitude. You won't learn what you need to learn until you set that down.

I am very sorry for the confusion my response may have caused. Again, I was answering a brand new poster who simply asked about posting to a social networking site. She did not specify private, and since she was new, I assumed she might not intrinsically know what "we" me mean when we say FB exposure. I was sharing a perspective, and since cautioning against posting on a public wall is not opposed to written MB principles, I didn't forsee an initial problem.

I am curious though. Since, I seemed to disagree, does that mean that I am now a wayward as well?

I'm not an attorney, but the easiest solution to the OP/WS suing you might be filing suit right back at them...certainly for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and maybe for malicious prosecution, and whatever else the situation might warrant. Then, in my state, if the adultery results in divorce, the BS can also sue for alienation of affection. I know of two people who have won AOA suits.

A sue-happy bum once physically attacked my son, and my son successfully defended himself. The guy filed assault charges against my son, but my son had witnesses and was acquitted. THEN, the guy filed a civil lawsuit against my son for injuries...this time, claiming that my son beat up his ol' truck with a baseball bat (not true).

What we did? Filed a lawsuit right back at him for defamation of character, malicious prosecution, and I forget what else. That ended the whole matter, although it did cost a few bucks.

Why did it work? Well, sometimes lawyers are happy to sue someone based on a contingency...a percentage of the court award, if any. However, when it comes to DEFENDING someone, lawyers usually want their cash up front.

Also, I think that, by filing suit ourselves, we put his lawyer on notice that his client was probably lying to him.

Anyway, EXPOSE ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN! Just be sure that you have proof.

There are no viable legal claims that could arise from exposure.

I think the lesson to be found in Seeking Balance's posts is that if your spouse (or the OP) is an attorney or either has a hungry aggressive lawyer on constant retainer, you better document the crap out of things before you expose AND coach your words very carefully when you do so as to MINIMIZE (not eliminate) the possibility of a frivolous lawsuit.

Interesting, from a legal standpoint and these marriage recovery plans, it's SNOOPING that presents itself much more often in lawsuits than exposure. I've only read one case on the internet involving defamation with regards to exposure of adultery and the plaintiff lost because "adultery" was no longer considered an "illegal act" in such state thus, it wasn't defamation per se (which left the plaintiff with the burden of proving the affair didn't happen in a regular Defamation lawsuit which they lost in the lower court anyway).

Snooping presents many more likely issues of lawsuits yet every infidelity website recommends it. Wiretapping and invasion of privacy issues abound. In New Jersey they are particularly aggressive with enforcing privacy laws and punishing those that break them. I've read a custody dispute case where one spouse was snooping on the other and it appeared to have significant weight in the custody decision made by the court.

Thus, Snooping is the area of considerable legal risk. Exposure...not so much.

Mr. Wondering

p.s. - MaritalBliss...thanks for the word "Inflammatory". It was the word I was looking for. The more "inflammatory" the specific words are within any given exposure...the more likely it MAY result in litigation. There is a common sense defense of "unclean hands" (an equitable defense in which the defendant argues that the plaintiff is not entitled to obtain an equitable remedy on account of the fact that the plaintiff is acting unethically or has acted in bad faith with respect to the subject of the complaint). Courts (Judges and Juries) are FAR FAR FAR more unlikely to award or even listen to a wayward spouses legal complaint, however stated, about being exposed (presuming it's the truth) if you do it like it's always advised herein...nicey, seeking support. However, if you run around the world saying "my spouse is F__king OP" and include pictures of the OP and the spouse the court is MUCH more likely to see both of you in the wrong and thus, listen more closely to the plaintiff's arguments.