“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

The Email Where She Said She Understood — Before She Did the Opposite.



⟡ “You Were Warned. You Chose Retaliation.” ⟡

Formal complaint submitted to Social Work England against Kirsty Hornal for knowingly violating the Equality Act 2010 after written medical disclosures.

Filed: 19 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/SWE/COMPLAINT-01
πŸ“Ž Download PDF – 2025-05-19_SWANK_SWEComplaint_KirstyHornal_DisabilityRetaliation.pdf
This file constitutes the official complaint alleging that Kirsty Hornal escalated safeguarding measures after being notified of medical risk, speech disability, and legal boundaries.


I. What Happened

Polly Chromatic notified Kirsty Hornal (in writing) of:

  • Severe asthma

  • Muscle dysphonia

  • Panic disorder

  • Scheduled psychiatric assessment

  • Legal requirement for written-only communication

Hornal acknowledged this in email correspondence — and proceeded anyway, accelerating child protection actions in a manner that bypassed accommodations and triggered documented medical harm.


II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • Kirsty Hornal knowingly disregarded disability notifications

  • She escalated proceedings after receiving legal and medical evidence

  • Written-only communication was unlawfully denied

  • The registrant’s actions forced emergency legal filings, including:

    • N16A application

    • Judicial Review pre-action

  • Her conduct constitutes procedural retaliation under the Equality Act 2010


III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because this was not a safeguarding act — it was retaliation masquerading as care.
Because written communication is not a “request” — it’s a right.
Because acknowledging medical risk and then escalating anyway isn’t just negligent —
it’s a violation.


IV. Violations

  • Equality Act 2010 — Sections 15 and 20

  • SWE Professional Standards — Failure to respect disability and mental health disclosures

  • Retaliatory procedural escalation after legal notification

  • Obstruction of judicial and medical processes

  • Safeguarding misuse to suppress lawful self-advocacy


V. SWANK’s Position

She was told. She confirmed.
Then she retaliated.
That’s not social work — that’s misconduct.

And now, her decision is permanently archived — with the Bates stamps to prove 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.

Documented Obsessions