Date: 2008-03-03 07:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lizw.livejournal.com
Searching thelondonpaper website for "Paddick" produces only one hit, which is from 12 February and doesn't mention detention at all. Searching on Time Out for "Paddick detention" produces one hit, which turns out not to be relevant. The same search on This Is London produces this, where he opposes 90 days. "Paddick" on the Metro site gets 11 hits, one of which is this one, where he criticises Ian Blair for supporting detention beyond 28 days and accuses Blair of forcing him to make public statements in support of 90-day detention when he was still in the Met. Could that be what you were thinking of?

(Edited for bad HTML)
Edited Date: 2008-03-03 07:38 am (UTC)

Date: 2008-03-15 01:05 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com
Hm. I'm pretty sure it was a recent and positive statement, and also that it was about the new proposed longer detention period, NOT 90 days. Have gone thru about half our old papers and can't find it. We may still have it in the house, I am still looking, but my hopes are not high right now.

Date: 2008-03-15 08:24 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lizw.livejournal.com
We did ask two of his campaign team about this at Conference, and they didn't know of any such article and were quite vehement that this is not Brian's view. Do let us know if you find it, because I know the team would want to correct it.

Date: 2008-03-15 02:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com
As I said, I was a bit shocked when I read it. I shall try and find it, because I'm wondering if it was a WILDLY out of context quote or what.

Profile

ciphergoth: (Default)
Paul Crowley

January 2025

S M T W T F S
   1234
5678 91011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 5th, 2026 05:18 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios