There was insufficient newspaper reporting yesterday on the reasons for the dismissal of the charge against Mr. Sherod Duncan for referring to a person as a ‘trench crappo’ and a ‘jagabbat’ to determine whether this type of vulgar abuse is legally permitted. Or whether it is vulgar abuse at all. For example, it is not known whether or not the Court ruled that some essential legal element of the charge was not proved or whether the words did not constitute cyber bullying, for which Mr. Duncan was charged. Some reporting clarity would have been useful because, while I do not descend to vulgar abuse privately or publicly, I might have considered a revised approach to polemics, even though it’s rather late in my blogging career. Who knows? The use of vulgar abuse might even elevate me to the high stature of Mr. Duncan, a parliamentarian, educator, scholar and man of faith.
