Flagpole wrote:
4) So far, I agree that it seems odd that Hannity's name had to come out. I look forward to hearing or reading some legal reason for it. I believe in the rule of law, so if there is a legal reason his name had to be made public, then I will go with that, but until I learn what that is, I agree that his name should have been kept private (even though it couldn't happen to a nicer guy).
I'm sure you agree that the name had to at least be made known to the court. You can't claim attorney-client privilege unless you know who the client is. But how the name was made public was quite dramatic.
You can read the legal reasoning for making the name public in the court transcript. It looked like the judge was going to agree to keep it under wraps until a media lawyer spoke up from the gallery and asked to be heard. I don't remember what he said but the argument sounded impressive to a non-lawyer like me. I guess the judge found it convincing because after that she directed the name to be disclosed.
I wish I could have been in that court room when the name was read out loud. It must have been quite a scene.