“Though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back… she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.” - Aslan, C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

Non-Contact and Procedural Safeguards Against State-Initiated Harm


🛡️ Application for Protective Relief

Non-Contact and Procedural Safeguards Against State-Initiated Harm

Filed by: Polly Chromatic
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom (with reference to prior violations in the Turks and Caicos Islands)
Date: 18 May 2025
📮 pollychromatic@me.com
Filed under: Civil Rights Preservation / Anti-Retaliation Shielding / Medical Sovereignty Enforcement

I. 🧾 Type of Relief Requested

This is a formal application for protective legal measures—non-contact orders, discretionary safeguards, and institutional distance—against any further unsolicited safeguarding interventions, surveillance, forced contact, or psychological intrusion initiated by:

  • Department of Social Development (DSD), Turks and Caicos Islands

  • TCI Ministry of Health and Human Services (MOHHS)

  • TCI Police Force

  • UK Local Authorities: Westminster, RBKC, Islington, Camden Children’s Services

  • Any third party operating under or in coordination with these bodies

This is not a personal protection order. It is a jurisdictional boundary drawn in law to protect against procedural abuse masquerading as concern.

II. ⚠️ Grounds for Relief

This request arises from a sustained pattern of institutional coercion, including but not limited to:

  • Safeguarding as a weapon of bureaucratic retaliation

  • Unwarranted home intrusion and psychological terror framed as welfare checks

  • Deliberate medical endangerment through obstruction, misinformation, and neglect

  • Violation of family integrity and educational autonomy

  • Disability-based discrimination, specifically through forced verbal engagement and denial of written access

This pattern is not speculative. It is fully archived, evidenced, and legally actionable.

III. ⚖️ Legal Foundations for Relief

The following legal frameworks provide explicit grounds for this application:

  • Family Law Act 1996 (Part IV) – Protection against non-physical harassment and coercive intrusion

  • Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 6 & 8) – Right to a fair process and respect for private and family life

  • Equality Act 2010 (Sections 15, 20 & 27) – Disability discrimination, failure to make adjustments, and victimisation

  • Children Act 1989 (Section 1) – Child welfare as paramount, inclusive of emotional stability, educational continuity, and freedom from state-manufactured distress

These agencies have repeatedly failed to operate within the confines of law. Protective relief is not only appropriate—it is overdue.

IV. 📚 Supporting Evidence Archive

This request is not made in abstraction. It is made with precision, supported by a fortified archive:

  • Master Abuse Record – Formal Addendum to N1 Claim

  • Joint Police Complaint: United Kingdom & Turks and Caicos Islands (2016–2025)

  • Hate Crime Witness Statement – Family of Silk A

  • Chronological Record of Systemic Retaliation

  • Formal Complaints to PHSO and ICO (May 2025)

  • United Nations Special Rapporteur Submission

Each document is timestamped, referenced, and annexed within my legal claim bundle.

V. 🛡️ Requested Terms of Protection

I respectfully request that the appropriate legal or regulatory body grant the following safeguards:

  1. Non-contact protection: No agency or agent may initiate contact with myself or my children without my express written consent and legal basis for doing so.

  2. Prohibition of retaliatory safeguarding: No safeguarding referral may be triggered as a response to lawful complaint, litigation, or disclosure of disability.

  3. Communication restriction: No verbal or in-person contact shall be permitted unless I have explicitly consented and it is medically safe to do so.

  4. Recognition of procedural harm: Formal acknowledgment that prior safeguarding interventions were procedurally retaliatory and legally improper.

  5. Health and education protections: All future procedural contact must consider the psychological and physiological risk such interventions pose to my children and myself.

This is not a barrier. It is a reinstatement of lawful boundaries.

VI. ✉️ Communication Restrictions – Medically Mandated

Due to documented clinical diagnoses—including eosinophilic asthma, muscle tension dysphonia, and panic disorder—I am medically unable to engage in spoken communication during stressful encounters.

All communication must be conducted in writing.
Any attempt to circumvent this restriction will constitute a breach of the Equality Act 2010 and be formally recorded as discriminatory harm.

Filed by:
Polly Chromatic
📍 London, United Kingdom
📮 pollychromatic@me.com
🖋️ Legal silence is not absence. It is precision.


No comments:

Post a Comment

This archive is a witness table, not a control panel.

We do not moderate comments. We do, however, read them, remember them, and occasionally reframe them for satirical or educational purposes.

If you post here, you’re part of the record.

Civility is appreciated. Candour is immortal.

Documented Obsessions