Your argument becomes even weaker if youre now going to rely upon your hopes and wishes that the subject has moved on It is clear that the person had psychiatric problems as a result of this episode and that any reasonable person might deduce that such problems might be perpetuated and compounded by the digged determination to print the victims name Your genie in the bottle analogy again ignores the points that have been made to you above just because another publication prints his name doesnt mean WP has to particularly as WP is more likely to be first port of call for anyone searching for information on the video As for your hope that the article serves as a cautionary tale  how is the inclusion of his name going to further that hope Finally you doidnt answer the question I posed which in my opinion is the nub perhaps you might put yourself in his shoes for one moment and then ask yourself whether your determination to include what most agree is a nonessential detail has the potential to cause yet more hurt and upset to the victim here