I've read some tosh in my time but he or she who must remain nameless (Opinion, March 22) having a pop at D Martin must take the biscuit.

Because of reasons associated with the workplace, the writer is prevented from expressing any views publicly?

Then who's views were being expressed and why was the letter sneakily written at all?

I agree with E South. Correspondence from snipers withholding identity for no good reason is cheap and should not command any space in the paper.

-G Derkson, Brighton