this is with reference to the use of the epithet "coward". i can only say, "wow, what a self-righteousness!" whatever be the legal position on the issue (n the cited decision seems to be correct also), its incomprehensible for a trained lawyer (i am assuming that the author is) to be so judgmental and so oblivious of the factum of existence of different reasons (some valid n some invalid) for being anonymous. but how can one make a sweeping remark? anyway, gud luck, author. |