current | archives | profile | notes | contact | rings | host




Sex, drugs and anarchy�a fair cop?

March 20, 2002 ~ 11:39 p.m.

Recently, a London area police chief was suspended of his operational duties pending investigations into his drug use and affair with an individual who was on bail. The officer has also stated on-line that he finds anarchy an attractive concept.

It should be obvious that the officer in question is guilty of violating drug laws and disciplinary rules. His political philosophy normally should have nothing to do with his suspension, but how comfortable would you feel knowing the commanding officer of your district (or council) supported the notion of anarchy? Seems to defeat the purpose of law enforcement, no? Therefore, it is just that research into his political affairs be undertaken as well.

Commander Brian Paddick engineered a �soft� approach to drugs in Lambeth, the London district under his supervision. Paddick, a Commander, instructed officers within the district to take a light approach to the possession and use of marijuana. Without even getting into why a soft approach to drug dealing is wrong�a topic for another entry�it is plain to see why Paddick eagerly supported the idea. His former lover claims they smoked at least 100 joints together. Forget that this violated the Misuse of Drugs Act. Might his personal use of cannabis compromise his ability to protect Lambeth residents against drug dealers and the inevitable crime that comes with it?

It has also emerged that Paddick�s former lover, an ex-male model, was on police bail pending a fraud inquiry at the time when Paddick began his affair with the individual in question. This would appear to be a clear-cut breach of disciplinary rules as Paddick did not inform his superiors of this rather significant fact concerning his new lover.

Add to these allegations his public dissemination of pro-anarchist sentiment, and you have the makings of a case in which asking whether Paddick is fit to remain a police officer, never mind a commanding one, is perfectly justified.

The case has been dragged down by political correctness. As Paddick is gay, his cause is supported by the Lesbian and Gay Police Association. If Paddick was a genuine victim of a �homophobic witch hunt,� as the Association alleges, there would be no other compelling evidence meriting the suspension of his duties. If the Met fails to present said evidence against one of its senior officers, then perhaps the Association�s claims would be justified. In the meantime, all parties should await the outcome of the case against Officer Paddick. This is not a case to determine homophobia within the ranks of the police force, and if the Lesbian and Gay Police Association was truly concerned about the fate of homosexual officers, then they would have a vested interest in how the case against Paddick gets resolved. Blind support is doing neither the Association nor Paddick any good. This is a case that rightly asks the question of whether or not this officer can live within the laws that it is his job to enforce.

Surely the prospect of being involved in criminality and the breaching of disciplinary rules should be factors in determining the fate of Officer Paddick, not his homosexuality. Even police officers have private lives, to an extent, and nobody gives a damn about Paddick�s love life, me included.

But given the officer�s devil-may-care attitude to rules and regulations and his support of a philosophy encouraging a lawless society, I cannot help but tremble with trepidation at the thought of Mr. Paddick commanding any police station, in Lambeth or elsewhere.

� M.E.M.

[Sign My Guestbook] [View My Guestbook]
Powered by E-Guestbooks Server.

Copyright � 2001-2007 by M.E. Manning. All material is written by me, unless explicitly stated otherwise by use of footnotes or bylines. Do not copy or redistribute without my permission.

Old Cinders | Fresh Fire

AMERICA FOR TRUE AMERICANS!

-