⟡ “This Is Not a Custody Dispute. This Is a Sovereignty Crisis.” ⟡
When Four American Citizens Are Removed by Foreign Authorities, the Embassy Must Step In — Not Watch.
Filed: 24 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/USAEMBASSY/DIPLOMATIC-ESCALATION-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-24_SWANK_Request_USEmbassy_DiplomaticOversight_EmergencyCourtAction.pdf
Formal consular request urging U.S. Embassy intervention and oversight during active UK emergency court action involving removal of four disabled U.S. citizen children.
I. What Happened
At 01:37 AM on 24 June 2025, Polly Chromatic submitted an urgent email to U.S. consular officials in London requesting formal diplomatic oversight of an emergency UK court action concerning her four minor children — all of whom are U.S. citizens and were removed the previous day without legal grounds. One child, Regal, age 16, was taken without warrant, safeguarding threshold, or medical continuity. The request references Vienna Convention protections and includes direct links to evidence, legal filings, and SWANK's public archive.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
Four U.S. citizen children were removed by UK authorities on 23 June 2025
No order, consent, or procedural threshold was presented at the time of removal
The children suffer from eosinophilic asthma and were mid-treatment at Hammersmith Hospital
The parent is disabled and was excluded from proceedings due to known medical access needs
A Judicial Review and Emergency Reinstatement Request are currently live before the High Court
This was not a removal. It was a cross-border jurisdictional collapse, disguised as safeguarding.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because consular silence enables cross-jurisdictional abuse.
Because this is not a question of parenting — it is a matter of citizenship, law, and human dignity.
Because Regal’s legal capacity was ignored. Because his nationality was overridden.
Because the archive exists to say: we did not whisper, we filed.
Because diplomatic neutrality, in the face of disappearance, is not professionalism — it’s complicity.
IV. Violations
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Article 36 – Failure to notify the U.S. Embassy of custody or procedural interference
Human Rights Act 1998, Articles 6 and 8 – Denial of fair process and family life
Children Act 1989 – No lawful basis for removal presented or served
Equality Act 2010 – Disability access refusal during active legal process
UNCRC, Articles 9 and 24 – Separation and disruption of necessary medical treatment
UNCRPD Article 13 – Denial of justice to a disabled parent in legal proceedings
V. SWANK’s Position
This wasn’t a welfare concern. It was an international rights violation performed under local council stationery.
This wasn’t diplomatic delay. It was inaction with global consequences.
This wasn’t domestic jurisdiction. It was a foreign act committed on American minors.
SWANK calls upon the U.S. Embassy to treat this not as an inquiry — but as a sovereign alarm.
This post is not a record of the past. It is a declaration of what still requires interruption.
⟡ 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.