[raisetheroof]

The scenario is that Neighbor A calls the police about Neighbor B raping a child. But it turns out that not only did B not do it, it did not even happen. So the police spent the time and effort investigating this nonexistent crime, and B had to put his life on hold, hire a lawyer at his expense to defend against the accusation about something that did not happen. Yet, your arguing that Neighbor A, who started it all, not by making an innocent mistake, but out of sheer malice, should be kept anonymous and protected.

[gleeaikin]

It was someone who responded to my initial comment who introduced the idea of a neighbor with malice. I merely commented to their comment. The WB act provides for anonymity as I understand it. Am I wrong.