I. Introduction

Fake online posts are no longer mere annoyances. In the Philippines, a false post on Facebook, TikTok, X, Instagram, YouTube, messaging apps, forums, or websites can damage a person’s reputation, cause business losses, trigger harassment, impersonate a real person, spread private information, or induce the public to believe something untrue. Depending on the content and circumstances, a fake online post may give rise to criminal, civil, administrative, or platform-based remedies.

This article explains, in the Philippine legal context, how a person may file a complaint involving fake online posts, what laws may apply, what evidence should be preserved, where to report, what to expect during investigation, and what remedies may be available.

This discussion is for general legal information and should not be treated as legal advice for a specific case. A lawyer should be consulted when the post involves serious reputational injury, threats, private images, business damage, minors, public officials, or urgent takedown concerns.

II. What Is a “Fake Online Post”?

A “fake online post” is not a single legal category. It may refer to different kinds of online misconduct, such as:

a post falsely accusing a person of a crime, immorality, corruption, fraud, or misconduct;
a fake account pretending to be another person;
a fabricated screenshot, chat, document, photo, video, or quotation;
an edited or manipulated image or video;
a post using another person’s name, face, logo, or identity without authority;
a scam post using a person’s identity or business name;
a false review intended to destroy a business;
a malicious rumor posted publicly or circulated in group chats;
a post exposing private information, addresses, phone numbers, or personal records;
a fake announcement, job offer, sale, donation drive, investment scheme, or public warning.

The correct remedy depends on the nature of the fake post. A false accusation may be cyber libel. A fake account may involve identity theft or computer-related fraud. A scam post may involve estafa, fraud, or violation of cybercrime laws. A post exposing personal data may involve privacy violations. A threat may be grave threats, unjust vexation, or cyber-related harassment depending on the facts.

III. Relevant Philippine Laws

A. Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012

The main law for cybercrime complaints is Republic Act No. 10175, or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. It covers offenses committed through information and communications technology, including computers, mobile devices, online platforms, and digital networks.

For fake online posts, the most commonly relevant cybercrime-related offenses include:

1. Cyber Libel

Cyber libel is libel committed through a computer system or similar means. It generally involves a public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice, defect, act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance that tends to dishonor, discredit, or contempt a person.

A fake post may amount to cyber libel when it publicly identifies or points to a person and makes a defamatory false statement against that person. Examples include falsely posting that someone is a scammer, thief, adulterer, drug user, corrupt official, abusive employer, dishonest professional, or criminal.

Not every insulting or offensive post is automatically cyber libel. The statement must generally be defamatory, identifiable, published, and malicious. Truth, fair comment, privileged communication, and lack of identification may become relevant defenses depending on the case.

2. Computer-Related Identity Theft

A fake online post may involve identity theft if someone knowingly and without right uses another person’s identifying information online. This may include using a person’s name, photo, account details, contact number, address, business identity, or other personal information to mislead others.

Examples include creating a fake Facebook account using another person’s name and picture, pretending to be a company representative, or using another person’s details to solicit money.

3. Computer-Related Fraud

If the fake post is used to deceive people and obtain money, property, services, or other benefits, it may involve computer-related fraud. Examples include fake investment posts, fake online selling pages, fake charity drives, false job recruitment schemes, and posts impersonating legitimate businesses.

4. Illegal Access or Hacking

If the fake post was made after someone hacked or unlawfully accessed an account, the complaint may include illegal access. For example, if a person’s social media account was taken over and used to publish false statements, solicit money, or spread malicious content, the hacking itself may be a separate cybercrime offense.

5. Misuse of Devices or Data Interference

Where the offender uses malware, stolen credentials, unauthorized tools, or manipulates digital systems to create or spread fake posts, other cybercrime provisions may apply.

B. Revised Penal Code

The Revised Penal Code remains relevant even when the act is committed online. Depending on the content, fake online posts may involve:

1. Libel

Traditional libel under the Revised Penal Code may apply when defamatory statements are published. When committed online, cyber libel under the Cybercrime Prevention Act is usually considered.

2. Slander or Oral Defamation

If the false statement is spoken in a livestream, recorded video, voice message, or audio broadcast, questions may arise as to whether the act is oral defamation, cyber libel, or another offense, depending on publication and medium.

3. Unjust Vexation

Some online acts that annoy, harass, or disturb another person, but do not neatly fall under libel, threats, or other specific crimes, may be considered unjust vexation. This is fact-specific.

4. Grave Threats, Light Threats, or Coercions

A fake online post may be connected to threats, blackmail, intimidation, or coercion. For example, an offender may threaten to release fabricated accusations or edited images unless money is paid.

5. Estafa or Swindling

If fake posts are used to deceive people into sending money, goods, or services, estafa may apply. This is common in fake online selling, investment scams, fake rentals, fake employment offers, and impersonation scams.

C. Data Privacy Act of 2012

Republic Act No. 10173, or the Data Privacy Act of 2012, may apply if the fake post involves unauthorized processing, disclosure, use, or publication of personal information or sensitive personal information.

Personal information may include a person’s name, address, contact number, photograph, identification details, employment details, or online identifiers. Sensitive personal information may include health records, government-issued identifiers, marital status, religion, political affiliation, education, and other protected information.

If the fake post exposes private data, doxxes someone, uses personal information without authority, or misrepresents someone through personal details, a complaint with the National Privacy Commission may be considered in addition to police or prosecutor action.

D. Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act

If the fake online post involves intimate images, sexual content, private photos, or videos taken or distributed without consent, Republic Act No. 9995 may apply. The law may be relevant even if the content was edited, reposted, or used for harassment.

E. Safe Spaces Act

Republic Act No. 11313, or the Safe Spaces Act, covers certain forms of gender-based online sexual harassment. If the fake post includes misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, sexual, or gender-based harassment, threats, unwanted sexual remarks, stalking, or uploading of sexual content, this law may be relevant.

F. Special Protection for Children

If the fake post involves a minor, additional laws may apply, including laws on child protection, online sexual abuse or exploitation of children, bullying, child abuse, or privacy. Cases involving minors require heightened urgency and care.

G. Consumer Protection, Business, and Intellectual Property Issues

If the fake post misuses a business name, product, logo, brand, professional identity, or company page, legal remedies may also involve unfair competition, trademark infringement, consumer protection complaints, or civil action for damages.

IV. Is a Fake Online Post Always a Crime?

No. A fake online post may be unlawful, but not every false or misleading online post automatically becomes a criminal case. Some may be better handled through:

platform reporting and takedown;
civil action for damages;
demand letter;
barangay proceedings, where applicable;
administrative complaint;
complaint before the National Privacy Commission;
complaint before a professional regulatory body;
workplace or school disciplinary process;
public clarification or correction.

Criminal remedies are strongest when the fake post contains defamatory imputations, identity misuse, threats, fraud, unauthorized access, non-consensual intimate content, or malicious disclosure of personal data.

V. Elements Usually Considered in Cyber Libel Complaints

Because many fake online post cases involve cyber libel, it is useful to understand its usual elements.

1. Defamatory Imputation

The post must contain a statement that tends to dishonor, discredit, or place a person in contempt. It may accuse the person of a crime, vice, defect, misconduct, dishonesty, or disgraceful conduct.

2. Publication

The post must have been communicated to at least one person other than the complainant. Public social media posts, group posts, comments, shared screenshots, videos, blogs, and online articles may satisfy publication.

3. Identification

The complainant must be identifiable. The post may name the person directly, show the person’s photo, tag the person, refer to a unique position, or include details that make the person recognizable to others.

4. Malice

Malice may be presumed in defamatory publications, but the circumstances matter. If the post involves privileged communication, public interest, opinion, satire, or fair comment, the issue becomes more complex.

5. Use of a Computer System

For cyber libel, the defamatory statement must be made through a computer system or similar ICT platform, such as social media, websites, email, messaging applications, or online forums.

VI. Who May File the Complaint?

The person directly affected by the fake post may file the complaint. If the victim is a minor, a parent, guardian, or authorized representative may act. If the victim is a corporation or business, an authorized officer or representative may file.

For deceased persons, defamation issues can be more complex. Generally, libel protects living persons, but related claims may arise if the post defames living relatives or causes separate legal injury.

VII. Where to File a Cybercrime Complaint in the Philippines

A complainant may consider the following offices depending on the case:

A. Philippine National Police Anti-Cybercrime Group

The PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group receives and investigates cybercrime complaints, including fake accounts, cyber libel, online scams, hacking, online threats, identity theft, and digital harassment.

B. National Bureau of Investigation Cybercrime Division

The NBI Cybercrime Division also investigates cybercrime complaints and may assist in digital evidence preservation, tracing, and case build-up.

C. Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor

A criminal complaint may be filed directly with the prosecutor’s office through a complaint-affidavit and supporting evidence. The prosecutor conducts preliminary investigation or inquest, where applicable, and determines whether probable cause exists to file a case in court.

D. National Privacy Commission

If the fake post involves unauthorized use, disclosure, or processing of personal data, a complaint may be filed with the National Privacy Commission. This may be separate from a criminal cybercrime complaint.

E. Barangay

For some disputes between individuals residing in the same city or municipality, barangay conciliation may be required before court action. However, cases punishable by imprisonment beyond the barangay conciliation threshold, cases involving urgent relief, or cases outside the Lupon’s authority may not require barangay proceedings. Cybercrime cases often require careful assessment on whether barangay conciliation applies.

F. Platform Reporting Channels

A platform report is not a substitute for a legal complaint, but it may help remove the fake post, preserve account information, or stop further spread. Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, YouTube, Google, and other platforms usually have reporting tools for impersonation, harassment, fake accounts, scams, intellectual property violations, privacy violations, and non-consensual intimate content.

VIII. Immediate Steps Before Filing

Step 1: Do Not Engage Recklessly

Avoid posting emotional replies, threats, or counter-accusations. Public arguments can complicate the case. A complainant should preserve evidence first and consult counsel before responding.

Step 2: Preserve the Evidence

Screenshots are useful but may not be enough. Preserve the following:

full screenshots showing the post, username, profile link, date, time, caption, comments, reactions, shares, and URL;
screen recordings showing navigation to the post from the profile or page;
the exact URL or link to the post, profile, page, group, or video;
screenshots of comments and replies;
screenshots of messages related to the post;
evidence of identity, such as profile photos, usernames, account IDs, email addresses, phone numbers, payment details, or linked accounts;
copies of the fake image, video, or document;
proof that the statement is false;
proof of damage, such as lost clients, cancelled contracts, distress, threats received, business losses, or reputational harm;
witness statements from people who saw the post and understood it to refer to the complainant.

Step 3: Capture Metadata Where Possible

Metadata may include timestamps, URLs, usernames, file details, headers, upload details, and platform identifiers. Ordinary screenshots can be challenged because they may be edited. Stronger evidence includes notarized screenshots, independent witness verification, digital forensic preservation, or certification where available.

Step 4: Avoid Deleting Your Own Relevant Messages

If there was prior communication with the offender, preserve it. Deleting messages may weaken the chronology or create suspicion.

Step 5: Report to the Platform

Report the post or account under the correct category: impersonation, harassment, scam, privacy violation, fake account, intellectual property violation, or non-consensual intimate content. Keep screenshots of the report confirmation.

Step 6: Consider a Demand Letter

A lawyer may send a demand letter requiring the offender to remove the post, stop posting, issue a correction or apology, preserve evidence, and pay damages. A demand letter is not always necessary, especially when there is risk that the offender will delete evidence or flee, but it can be useful in some disputes.

IX. Documents Commonly Needed for Filing

A cybercrime complaint will usually require:

complaint-affidavit;
government-issued ID of the complainant;
screenshots and printouts of the fake post;
URLs and account links;
screen recording or digital copy of the post;
evidence connecting the account to the suspected offender;
proof of falsity;
proof of harm or damage;
witness affidavits, if available;
authorization or board secretary’s certificate if the complainant is a corporation;
special power of attorney if filed by a representative;
barangay certificate to file action, if required;
other supporting documents such as contracts, medical certificates, business records, police blotter, or platform reports.

X. The Complaint-Affidavit

The complaint-affidavit is the central document in a criminal complaint. It should narrate the facts clearly and chronologically.

A good complaint-affidavit should include:

the complainant’s identity and capacity to file;
the respondent’s identity, if known;
a description of the fake post;
when and where the complainant discovered it;
the exact words, images, or content posted;
why the post is false;
why the post refers to the complainant;
how the post was published online;
how many people saw, reacted to, commented on, or shared it, if known;
the harm caused;
supporting evidence;
request for investigation and prosecution.

If the offender is unknown, the complaint may be filed against an unidentified person, John Doe, Jane Doe, or the person behind a specific account, subject to investigation.

XI. Sample Structure of a Complaint-Affidavit

A complaint-affidavit may follow this structure:

Personal circumstances of the complainant;
Statement that the affidavit is being executed to file a complaint;
Background facts;
Discovery of the fake post;
Description of the post and attached screenshots;
Explanation of falsity;
Identification of the complainant in the post;
Identity or suspected identity of the offender;
Damage suffered;
Evidence attached;
Prayer for investigation and prosecution;
Verification and signature before a notary public or authorized officer.

XII. Proving That the Post Is Fake

The complainant must be ready to show why the post is false or misleading. Depending on the case, useful proof may include:

official records;
certificates;
employment records;
school records;
transaction documents;
receipts;
CCTV footage;
chat logs;
bank records;
affidavits of witnesses;
expert forensic reports;
original unedited photos or videos;
documents showing that the alleged event never happened;
business records disproving the claim.

For example, if a post falsely says a person was arrested, the complainant may attach police clearance, court clearance, or certification from relevant offices. If a post falsely says a seller failed to deliver goods, the seller may attach delivery records, tracking confirmation, and chat history.

XIII. Proving the Identity of the Poster

One of the most difficult parts of cybercrime cases is proving who actually controlled the account. The visible name on a profile is not always enough.

Evidence may include:

admissions by the offender;
phone number or email linked to the account;
payment records;
repeated use of the same username;
profile photos;
mutual contacts;
IP logs or platform records obtained through proper legal process;
screenshots showing the offender promoting or admitting ownership of the account;
witnesses who know the account belongs to the offender;
prior messages from the same account;
connection between the fake post and known disputes.

Law enforcement may request preservation or disclosure of subscriber information through proper legal channels, subject to applicable law and platform policies.

XIV. Filing With the PNP or NBI

The usual process may include:

going to the cybercrime office or submitting an initial report through available channels;
presenting identification and evidence;
executing a complaint-affidavit or sworn statement;
submitting screenshots, links, and digital copies;
providing device access or copies when needed;
investigator assessment;
possible digital forensic examination;
referral to the prosecutor;
preliminary investigation.

The complainant should bring both printed and digital copies. Digital copies may be saved in a USB drive or other storage device, but the complainant should follow the instructions of the receiving office.

XV. Filing Directly With the Prosecutor

A complainant may file a criminal complaint directly with the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor. The complaint must generally include a sworn complaint-affidavit and supporting affidavits and documents.

The prosecutor will evaluate whether the complaint is sufficient. The respondent may be required to submit a counter-affidavit. The complainant may be allowed to file a reply-affidavit. After preliminary investigation, the prosecutor may dismiss the complaint or file an information in court if probable cause exists.

XVI. Filing With the National Privacy Commission

Where the fake post involves personal information or sensitive personal information, the complainant may consider filing with the National Privacy Commission. The complaint should explain:

what personal data was used or disclosed;
who used or disclosed it;
why the processing was unauthorized or unlawful;
how the complainant was harmed;
what relief is being requested.

Privacy complaints may seek enforcement, correction, blocking, removal, or other relief depending on the facts.

XVII. Platform Takedown and Preservation

Legal complaints may take time. Platform reporting may be faster for immediate removal. The complainant should report the post under the closest policy violation.

Common takedown grounds include:

impersonation;
harassment or bullying;
hate speech;
nudity or sexual content;
privacy violation;
scam or fraud;
intellectual property violation;
manipulated media;
fake account;
threats or violence.

Before reporting, preserve evidence. Once a post is removed, it may become harder to document unless screenshots, URLs, and recordings were saved.

XVIII. Jurisdiction and Venue

Jurisdiction and venue in cybercrime cases can be technical. Online posts may be created in one city, viewed in another, hosted abroad, and accessed nationwide. In practice, complainants often file where they reside, where the post was accessed, where the harm occurred, or where the offender is located, subject to procedural rules and prosecutorial assessment.

Because cybercrime venue can be contested, it is advisable to consult a lawyer or coordinate with cybercrime authorities when the offender, victim, and platform are in different locations.

XIX. Prescription Periods

Prescription refers to the period within which a complaint must be filed. Different offenses have different prescriptive periods. Cyber libel and other cybercrime-related offenses may involve technical rules on prescription. A complainant should act promptly and avoid delay.

Even when the post remains online, delay may create evidentiary problems. Accounts may be deleted, links may disappear, platforms may purge data, and witnesses may become unavailable.

XX. Civil Remedies

Aside from criminal prosecution, a victim may seek civil remedies. These may include:

moral damages;
actual damages;
exemplary damages;
nominal damages;
attorney’s fees;
injunction or restraining relief where available;
correction, apology, or retraction;
removal of defamatory or false content.

A civil case may be filed separately or civil liability may be included in a criminal case, depending on the strategy and applicable rules.

XXI. Remedies for Businesses

Businesses harmed by fake online posts should preserve:

screenshots of posts and reviews;
customer cancellations;
lost sales records;
messages from confused customers;
proof of fake pages or impersonation;
brand registrations;
DTI or SEC registration;
permits and licenses;
proof of ownership of logos and marks;
customer affidavits.

A business may consider cybercrime complaints, civil damages, intellectual property remedies, consumer protection reports, platform takedowns, and public advisories.

XXII. Fake Reviews

Fake reviews can damage a business or professional practice. A fake review may become actionable if it contains false statements of fact, defamatory imputations, malicious accusations, or fraudulent representations. However, negative opinions from real customers are not automatically unlawful. The issue is whether the review is false, malicious, defamatory, misleading, or made by someone pretending to be a customer.

XXIII. Fake Screenshots and Fabricated Chats

Fabricated screenshots are common in online disputes. A complainant should gather the original chat logs, device records, account history, timestamps, and witness statements. If the fabricated screenshot is used to accuse someone of misconduct, crime, infidelity, fraud, or immorality, it may support a complaint for cyber libel or related offenses.

Digital forensic examination may be useful where the authenticity of screenshots, images, or videos is disputed.

XXIV. Deepfakes, Edited Photos, and Manipulated Videos

Manipulated media may involve cyber libel, identity theft, privacy violations, gender-based online harassment, or anti-voyeurism laws depending on the content. If the manipulated media is sexual, degrading, threatening, or used for extortion, urgent legal action should be considered.

Victims should preserve copies, links, comments, reposts, and evidence of who uploaded or distributed the content.

XXV. Anonymous Accounts

A complaint may still be filed even if the account is anonymous. The complainant should identify the account by username, profile URL, page link, group link, post URL, screenshots, profile photos, and any identifying details. Law enforcement may attempt to trace the account through lawful investigative methods.

However, anonymous accounts can be difficult to prosecute unless evidence links the account to a real person.

XXVI. Group Chats and Private Messages

A false statement in a private group chat may still be actionable if it was published to third persons. The complainant should preserve the full conversation, group name, member list if visible, timestamps, and context.

If a private message is sent only to the complainant, it may not be libel because there may be no third-party publication, but it may still constitute threats, harassment, unjust vexation, extortion, or another offense depending on the content.

XXVII. Public Officials and Public Figures

Cases involving public officials, candidates, influencers, or public figures may raise additional issues involving fair comment, public interest, criticism, and freedom of expression. False statements of fact may still be actionable, but opinions and fair criticism may receive greater protection depending on context.

Public figures should carefully distinguish between legitimate criticism and defamatory falsehood.

XXVIII. Freedom of Expression and Its Limits

The Constitution protects freedom of speech and expression. People may criticize, comment, complain, review, satirize, and express opinions. However, freedom of expression does not protect defamatory falsehoods, fraud, identity theft, threats, unlawful disclosure of private data, non-consensual intimate content, or malicious impersonation.

The legal challenge is often determining whether a post is a protected opinion or an actionable false statement of fact.

XXIX. Common Defenses

A respondent may raise defenses such as:

truth;
lack of malice;
fair comment;
privileged communication;
lack of identification;
lack of publication;
opinion rather than fact;
consent;
account was hacked;
no proof that respondent made the post;
prescription;
improper venue;
insufficient evidence;
post was not defamatory;
complainant failed to prove falsity.

Because these defenses are fact-specific, the complainant should prepare evidence carefully.

XXX. Evidence Checklist

Before filing, prepare the following:

Printed screenshots of the post;
Digital copies of screenshots;
Screen recording showing the post online;
URL of the post;
URL of the account, page, group, or profile;
Date and time of discovery;
Date and time of posting, if visible;
Names of people who saw the post;
Witness affidavits;
Proof that the post refers to the complainant;
Proof that the post is false;
Proof of harm;
Platform report confirmation;
Copies of related messages;
Respondent’s known identity details;
Police blotter, if any;
Medical or psychological records, if relevant;
Business loss records, if relevant;
Notarized complaint-affidavit;
Government-issued ID.

XXXI. Practical Tips

Act quickly. Online evidence can disappear. Preserve before reporting or confronting the poster.

Use complete screenshots. A cropped screenshot may be challenged.

Save links. Screenshots without URLs are weaker.

Keep the original files. Do not edit screenshots or videos.

Document harm. Save messages from people who reacted to the fake post.

Avoid retaliation. Counter-posts may expose the complainant to liability.

Consult a lawyer early. This is especially important for cyber libel, business defamation, intimate content, minors, public officials, and anonymous offenders.

Coordinate with law enforcement. Cybercrime investigators may advise on evidence preservation.

Report to the platform. Takedown and legal prosecution can proceed separately.

XXXII. What Happens After Filing?

After filing, the case may proceed through investigation and preliminary investigation. The respondent may be summoned to answer. The prosecutor evaluates whether probable cause exists.

If the complaint is dismissed, the complainant may have remedies such as motion for reconsideration or appeal under applicable rules. If the case is filed in court, the respondent will be arraigned and the case proceeds to trial unless resolved earlier.

Cybercrime cases can take time, especially when the offender is anonymous, the platform is foreign-based, or digital evidence requires verification.

XXXIII. Possible Outcomes

Possible outcomes include:

removal of the fake post;
deletion or suspension of the fake account;
settlement or undertaking not to repost;
public apology or correction;
prosecutor dismissal;
filing of criminal information in court;
conviction or acquittal;
civil damages;
privacy enforcement action;
business or administrative sanctions.

XXXIV. Risks of Filing a Weak Complaint

A weak complaint can be dismissed and may expose the complainant to counterclaims. The complainant should avoid exaggeration, speculation, and unsupported accusations.

The complaint should focus on verifiable facts: what was posted, where it was posted, when it was posted, why it is false, how it identifies the complainant, who likely posted it, and what harm resulted.

XXXV. When Urgent Action Is Needed

Urgent action may be needed when the post involves:

threats of violence;
extortion;
non-consensual intimate images;
minors;
doxxing or publication of home address;
ongoing scam using the victim’s identity;
hacked accounts;
business fraud;
suicidal distress or severe harassment;
viral spread causing serious harm.

In urgent cases, the victim should immediately contact law enforcement, preserve evidence, report to the platform, and seek legal assistance.

XXXVI. Basic Complaint Narrative Example

A basic complaint narrative may read as follows:

“On [date], I discovered that the account named [account name], with profile URL [link], posted a statement on [platform] accusing me of [false accusation]. The post was publicly accessible and was seen, commented on, and shared by several users. The post identified me by name and photograph. The accusation is false because [explanation and supporting documents]. As a result, I suffered reputational damage, distress, and [specific harm]. I am filing this complaint for investigation and prosecution for cyber libel and other applicable offenses.”

This should be customized to the facts and supported by documents.

XXXVII. Conclusion

Filing a cybercrime complaint for fake online posts in the Philippines requires more than showing that a post is false or offensive. The complainant must identify the legal wrong, preserve reliable digital evidence, show publication and harm, prove falsity where relevant, and connect the post to the offender.

The strongest complaints are organized, evidence-based, and filed promptly. Victims should preserve screenshots, URLs, recordings, witness statements, proof of falsity, and proof of damage before the post disappears. Depending on the case, remedies may be pursued through the PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group, NBI Cybercrime Division, prosecutor’s office, National Privacy Commission, courts, and platform reporting channels.

A fake online post can cause serious damage, but Philippine law provides several possible remedies. The key is to match the facts to the proper legal theory and support the complaint with clear, credible, and properly preserved evidence.