The other thing that tickled me was (this is from the Forbes article):
"A 17-year-old student who cannot be named for legal reasons"
Yeah, I appreciate why that is and why it makes sense, but it doesn't make it any less ironic that somebody from 'Anonymous' can't be named in the coverage of this case.
"A 17-year-old student who cannot be named for legal reasons"
Yeah, I appreciate why that is and why it makes sense, but it doesn't make it any less ironic that somebody from 'Anonymous' can't be named in the coverage of this case.