“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

She Asked for Help. He Gave Her a Folder.


⟡ She Reported Disability Harassment. He Made a Folder for Her. ⟡
When a disabled woman asked for written communication, she got bureaucratic binning instead.

Filed: 14 December 2024
Reference: SWANK/MULTI/EMAIL-16
📎 Download PDF – 2024-12-14_SWANK_Email_Laura_Savage_DisabilityHarassmentDismissed_SimonFoldering.pdf
A straightforward but devastating email record: after being harassed for requesting written communication at an Apple store, the parent reports the incident to her legal and safeguarding team. Their response? Silence — and a digital folder labelled “Simlett.”

I. What Happened

She couldn’t speak that day.
Respiratory restrictions. Verbal exemption. Documented.
At the Apple store, staff mocked her for asking for text instead of voice.
She explained, calmly, via email, to those meant to support her:
– Simon O’Meara (solicitor)
– Laura Savage (child rep)
– Kirsty Hornal (social worker)
– Sarah Newman (executive)

Their collective response:
No outrage.
No support.
Simon replied he would simply begin “sorting her emails” into a folder.

A human rights issue was answered with a filing system.

II. What the Email Establishes

  • That a disabled parent experienced direct verbal discrimination in public

  • That the incident was reported in real-time to legal and safeguarding professionals

  • That no investigation, escalation, or complaint support was offered

  • That Simon O’Meara chose to distance himself through inbox management

  • That this is not silence — it is institutional sabotage

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because nothing screams we care like Outlook rules and email filters.
Because pretending to acknowledge someone by filing them away is worse than ignoring them altogether.
And because if you’re going to file her — she’ll file you right back.
On the record.

IV. Violations Identified

  • Failure to Support Disabled Client During Active Harassment

  • Discriminatory Neglect in Legal Safeguarding Role

  • Multi-Agency Abandonment of Communication Adjustment Requests

  • Professional Complicity Through Passive Reception

  • Email Management as Proxy for Emotional Erasure

V. SWANK’s Position

This wasn’t just a miscommunication.
It was a dismissal — dressed in civility, executed in silence.
They didn’t protect her.
They didn’t object.
They didn’t even respond.
They just filed her under “Too Much Trouble” —
and hoped no one would notice.
Too late.

⟡ 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.

Documented Obsessions