⟡ “A Few Questions at the Playground” ⟡
Where safeguarding ends, and intimidation begins — documented.
Filed: 5 January 2024
Reference: SWANK/RBKC/SAFEGUARD-0124
📎 Download PDF – 2024-01-05_Statement_PlaygroundQuestioning_Trauma_SocialWorkerMisconduct.pdf
Direct statement to RBKC detailing coercive playground interrogation, emotional harm to children, and repeated failure to respond to lawful disability and legal support requests.
I. What Happened
On 5 July 2023, social workers Eric Wedge-Bull and “Jess” arrived uninvited at the Applicant’s home in Elgin Crescent. Despite recent illness, they insisted on the visit. Once inside, the children — delighted to showcase their new home — took the social workers to the communal garden. Without warning or consent, Eric led two of the children away for isolated questioning in a public playground surrounded by neighbours and peers.
When they returned, the children were visibly shaken. Later, they disclosed that Eric’s questioning was aggressive and humiliating. This took place in the open, in front of friends and adults in their new community. No safeguarding justification was ever provided. No consent was ever given. No follow-up report was issued until the Applicant forced the issue months later.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
Boundary Violation: Questioning minor children in public without consent or privacy
Safeguarding Misuse: No cause, no caution, no child-centred practice
Emotional Harm: Children reported trauma and visible distress after the event
Disability Dismissal: Requests for help (asthma support, name change assistance) were ignored
Procedural Apathy: No follow-up report filed; only released under pressure
Narrative Aggression: Apparent aim to manufacture concern, not to resolve it
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because this wasn’t oversight — it was orchestration.
Because social workers are not entitled to interrogate children like state agents in a park.
Because “just a few questions” becomes weaponised surveillance in the wrong hands.
Because trauma masked as protocol is the oldest trick in the safeguarding abuser’s playbook.
And because children remember who humiliated them in front of their friends. So do we.
IV. Violations
Children Act 1989 – breach of duty to act in best interests
Equality Act 2010 – failure to accommodate known medical conditions
Article 8 ECHR – unlawful interference with private and family life
Social Work England Professional Standards – violation of consent, dignity, and procedural transparency
V. SWANK’s Position
What Eric Wedge-Bull did was not safeguarding. It was theatre.
Conducted in public. Against the wishes of the family.
No explanation. No consent. No care.
We do not accept intimidation as engagement.
We do not accept silence as response.
And we do not accept the trauma of children being mined as material for a file.
We document it. We name it. We archive it.
⟡ This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡
Every entry is timestamped.
Every sentence is jurisdictional.
Every structure is protected.
To mimic this format without licence is not homage. It is breach.
We do not permit imitation. We preserve it as evidence.
This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with velvet contempt, preserved for future litigation.
Because evidence deserves elegance.
And retaliation deserves an archive.
© 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved.
Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited — as panic, not authorship.
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.