PADDICK: FACTS BEHIND THE SMOKESCREEN

BRIAN PADDICK wants his job back. But as he lamented this week, his
notoriety might have made it impossible for him to be reinstated as police
commander in the London borough of Lambeth.

He has been portrayed as a latter-day Dreyfus, the victim of a conspiracy of
bigotry and ignorance organised by those for whom he personifies the worst
excesses of liberal decadence.

A 43-year-old homosexual, he frequents gay clubs in Soho and has pioneered a
"softly, softly" approach to cannabis possession in the Lambeth division,
which includes Brixton.

His supporters maintain that his way of life has made him the victim of a
"homophobic witch-hunt". Even though the allegations that led to his
transfer from Lambeth to a desk job at Scotland Yard were made by a former
lover, James Renolleau, the press is blamed for encouraging the disclosures
by waving a large cheque in Mr Renolleau's direction.

Mr Paddick's backers consider him to be a highly talented police officer
with a vision of how to bring together a diverse community in a concerted
attack on inner-city muggers. Yet his critics say he has been no more
successful in reducing crime in Lambeth than have other, less conspicuous,
police chiefs in similarly crime-ridden boroughs.

He is under investigation for allegedly allowing cannabis to be used at his
home. He was switched from being a commander to a desk job after Mr
Renolleau claimed in a newspaper that they had smoked cannabis together.

Whereas many in his position might adopt a low profile, Mr Paddick - backed
by a vocal platoon of admirers - has mounted a public campaign for
reinstatement. This week, he spoke at a meeting in Brixton and gave an
interview on Today, BBC Radio 4's flagship current affairs programme.

Both events have kept him in the public eye, where he claims he does not
want to be but which he finds difficult to resist. For instance, his policy
of cautioning minor drug offenders in order to release police time and
resources for more serious crime is not unique. As a recent report from the
Joseph Rowntree Foundation made clear, other forces use their operational
discretion to do the same; only they make less noise about it.

It could be argued that with his drugs policy, as with aspects of his
private life, Mr Paddick was being characteristically forthright. Certainly
he forced the hand of the Metropolitan Police - where senior commanders
appear not to have known of the policy in advance - to consider its
wholesale adoption across London.

But while this experiment has been taking place so publicly in Lambeth, what
has happened to drug crime? A Met assessment published last week was
ambivalent - there had been a 35 per cent increase in the confiscations of
cannabis and an 11 per cent increase in drug trafficking offences.

To Mr Paddick's supporters, this was evidence of how police had been able to
spend their time tackling more serious drug crime. But the figures could
also mean that cannabis is being smoked more brazenly and that drug pushers
are being attracted to Lambeth.

Fred Broughton, the chairman of the Police Federation, told MPs during an
investigation into drug laws earlier this year that beat bobbies feared that
the policy on cannabis would prove a magnet to dealers in hard drugs. He
alleged that crack cocaine abusers and traffickers were becoming "more
visible and more active" in Lambeth.

Since Mr Paddick must be judged on his success in tackling crime in one of
the most difficult beats in the country, how does his record stand up to
scrutiny?

He became police commander in January 2001. In that month in Lambeth there
were two murders, 14 rapes, 657 crimes of violence and 497 muggings. In
January this year there was one murder, 15 rapes, 624 assaults and 713
street robberies and snatches. To be fair, the big increase in street crimes
reflected a wider phenomenon across London; but Mr Paddick was no more
capable of curbing it than other commanders.

At the end of January the Met introduced Operation Safer Streets in nine
boroughs, including Lambeth, inserting hundreds of extra officers - many
transferred from traffic duties - into the inner city.

After seven weeks of the campaign, street crime - or at least its rate of
increase - is falling. In February, there were 556 street crimes in Lambeth,
a fall of one per cent on the same month last year. However, in Southwark,
the number fell by six per cent.

In Lambeth over the seven-week period there have been 926 robbery incidents
and 174 arrests. This gives a proportion of arrests to allegations of 19 per
cent and compares to 21 per cent in Southwark and Haringey and 26 per cent
in Westminster.

Furthermore, in Lambeth only 39 per cent of the arrests led to charges - a
lower proportion than any of the target boroughs apart from Tower Hamlets
(32). In Southwark, the proportion of charges to arrests was 86 per cent, in
Camden 70 per cent and Islington 63 per cent. These figures suggest Mr
Paddick has done no better and, in some cases, significantly worse than his
counterparts.

Yet there is a clamour in Lambeth for him to be reinstated to his
UKP93,000-a-year job. His critics say that an alliance of gay rights
activists and drug law reformers is behind the campaign. But Nicholas Long,
a former chairman of the Lambeth police consultative committee and now a
member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, said there was genuine support
among the community.

Mr Long said he felt Mr Paddick deserved credit, especially in forging
cross-community support for the police. He also disputed suggestions that
recent falls in street crime in Lambeth were all down to the safer streets
blitz; there were signs of a fall before, he said.

Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police commissioner, appears unsure of
how to handle Mr Paddick. Other officers in a similar predicament would most
probably have been suspended pending the inquiry.

Mr Paddick has not only been transferred to another post, he has been
allowed to speak out publicly even before the investigation has even
started.

The commissioner clearly does not want the Paddick affair to become any more
a cause celebre than it already is; he might also be unclear as to whether
the policing style will prove a success in a borough such as Lambeth.

However, Frank Pulley, a former London policeman, has no doubts that Mr
Paddick is the wrong man for the job. "Racketeers are rubbing their hands
and singing his praises in the clubs and pubs of south London," he said.

For the increasingly fearful residents of Lambeth, this sub-plot involving
gay rights campaigners, drug law reformers and querulous newspaper
columnists of the Right and Left is a noisy distraction.

The important issue for them is whether the appalling level of crime will be
brought down - and kept down after the special anti-robbery operations have
ended.

For amid the great torrent of statistics cited by Mr Paddick's critics and
supporters alike, one figure should not be forgotten. There were 556 street
crimes in the borough last month. Only 78 were cleared up.