“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

Documented Obsessions

Re: Procedural Silence and the Ghost of an Order


⟡ A Post-Removal Supplement to Madness ⟡
The Interim Care Order Is Unserved, Undisclosed, and Unsalvageable

Filed: 27 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/APPLICATION/0626-ICO
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-26_SWANK_Application_Supplement_DischargeICO.pdf
A legal supplement demanding the discharge of an Interim Care Order enforced without service, grounds, or justification.

I. What Happened

Following the unannounced and traumatic removal of four U.S. citizen children on 23 June 2025, Westminster Council reportedly enforced an Interim Care Order (ICO) without ever serving the order, disclosing any threshold document, or observing jurisdictional or procedural obligations.

This supplement, filed on 27 June 2025, asserts the legal impossibility of continued separation without lawful basis and reiterates the request for discharge.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • No formal ICO has been served to date

  • No safeguarding evidence or Section 47 referral disclosed

  • Emergency removal occurred amid ongoing Judicial Review and civil litigation

  • Redirection of legal communication was deliberately ignored

  • Children are U.S. citizens — no consular notification was given

  • Mother's disability rights were bypassed entirely

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because an order that exists only in theory — with no documentation, no service, and no justification — does not deserve the force of law.

SWANK records the abandonment of both legal process and ethical duty in enforcing an unserved ICO against four disabled American children, in violation of international norms and domestic fairness.

IV. Violations

  • Children Act 1989 – s.33, s.38 (procedural safeguards for ICO)

  • Family Procedure Rules 2010 – Parts 12 and 29

  • Equality Act 2010 – Disability accommodation breach

  • Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (1963) – Article 36

  • Human Rights Act 1998 – Article 8 (Family Life), Article 6 (Fair Trial)

V. SWANK’s Position

There is no such thing as an invisible care order.
If it was never served, it was never lawful.
If it was never justified, it cannot endure.
If the children are citizens of another country — and the mother is disabled — then everything Westminster did here is subject to not only judicial review, but international scrutiny.

We do not accept post-removal fiction as legal fact.
We file. We expose. We demand the discharge of this ghost order.

Would you like this added to the SWANK website queue or sent to the Family Court with a fresh email?⟡ 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.