“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 Wasn’t Angry. She Was Finished.


⟡ “I’m Only Interested in Talking About My Books Now.” ⟡
Because after a year of harassment, she owed them nothing — not even a sentence.

Filed: 9 January 2025
Reference: SWANK/WCC/EMAIL-29
📎 Download PDF – 2025-01-09_SWANK_Email_SimonOMeara_StatementOnHarassment_ClosureDeclaration.pdf
This was the moment the script flipped. Not a complaint. Not a plea. Just a boundary: she’s done explaining. Sent to every actor in the case — social workers, lawyers, GPs, therapists — with a full blind-copy to her own archive. It’s not defiance. It’s authorship.

I. What Happened

She wrote one final group email.
To everyone: Kirsty Hornal. Sarah Newman. Samira Issa. Eric Wedge-Bull. Rhiannon Hodgson. Sam Brown. Glen Peache. Simon O’Meara. Laura Savage. Philip Reid.
She said: I’ve explained myself a hundred times.
She said: You’ve harassed me while I was medically collapsing.
She said: I’m done.

And then she included a book excerpt — a cosmic one.
Not for them. For posterity.
Because they weren’t listening anyway.

II. What the Email Establishes

  • That the parent had made exhaustive efforts to communicate clearly and repeatedly

  • That her experiences of harassment spanned both social services and police

  • That she was asserting autonomy through creative authorship, not compliance

  • That institutional obsession had become one-sided — she had emotionally exited the exchange

  • That this email marked a formal, documented withdrawal of energy and investment

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because when the State won’t leave you alone,
you send them literature.
Because disengagement can be an act of power — especially when it’s eloquent.
Because this is what emotional closure looks like in the face of chronic interference.
And because the file needed a finish line.

IV. Violations Identified

  • Sustained Pattern of Procedural Harassment During Period of Medical Instability

  • Refusal to Acknowledge Prior Explanations or Boundaries by the Targeted Individual

  • Obsessive Surveillance by Multiple Agencies Despite Lack of Ongoing Cause

  • Breach of Disability Adjustment Expectations for Verbal and Emotional Load

  • Weaponisation of Authority After Target Had Fully Complied with Legal and Procedural Requests

V. SWANK’s Position

She gave them her words — over and over.
They discarded them.
So she chose her own — not to persuade,
but to archive.
She ended the conversation not by disappearing,
but by publishing.

And when she said, “I’m only interested in my books,”
what she meant was:
You’re not the story anymore.

⟡ 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