“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

Recently Tried in the Court of Public Opinion

Chromatic v The Reputation Launderers: An Email to the Uninterested


🪞Mirror Misconduct:

“The Peculiar Cruelty of Professional Consensus – How Liars Build Empires by Email”

Filed Date: 13 August 2024

Reference Code: SWANK-REID-HARASSMENT-0813

PDF Filename: 2024-08-13_SWANK_Email_ReidMpalanyiBullyingHarassment.pdf

Summary: A single email captures the institutional collusion that allowed social workers to sabotage clinical neutrality.

I. What Happened

On 13 August 2024, Polly Chromatic sent a direct email to a group of professionals spanning health, education, and children’s services. The subject line was plain—“Bullying and harassment”—but the subtext revealed institutional betrayal. After seeking support from a psychologist regarding the trauma inflicted by social workers, Polly discovered that Edward (a social worker at RBKC) had sabotaged that clinical relationship by disseminating false information to the clinician.

The list of recipients reads like a roll call of those either complicit in or silently adjacent to sustained misconduct:

  • Dr. Philip Reid – GP

  • Eric Wedge-Bull – RBKC

  • Annabelle Kapoor – Drayton Park School

  • Sarah Newman – Westminster

  • Dr. Liz White – Psychologist

  • Dias-Saxena, Pullen, Savage procedural actors

II. What the Complaint Establishes

The email serves as contemporaneous proof of:

  • Procedural sabotage by RBKC social workers.

  • A pattern of manipulating external clinicians to erode the credibility and wellbeing of the mother.

  • Awareness among multiple professionals of the allegations of bullying—none of whom appear to have intervened.

III. Why SWANK Logged It

This email stands as a primary document evidencing the horizontally-integrated gaslighting of a mother seeking therapeutic recourse. It illustrates not only the emotional weaponisation of "concern" but the suffocating network of silence around social worker misconduct. It also highlights a chilling theme of SWANK’s archive: that whistleblowing about safeguarding misuse results not in correction—but in escalation.

IV. Violations

  • Article 8 ECHR – Interference with private and family life

  • Equality Act 2010 – Disability-based discrimination

  • Children Act 1989 – Duty to act in the best interests of the child

  • Common Law Duty of Care – Gross breach via collusion and dishonesty

V. SWANK’s Position

There is a reason institutions distrust email: it makes misconduct traceable.
Here, we see how a simple declarative statement—“I went to a psychologist… the social workers turned her against me”—condenses years of systemic abuse into a single, mournful sentence.
The email's tone is restrained. The harm is not.
To receive therapeutic harm in response to reporting social work harm is not only unethical—it is violently unprofessional.

Polly Chromatic logs this email into the SWANK archive as an artefact of orchestrated reputational sabotage and procedural abuse. That the psychologist in question was cc’d only strengthens the chilling precision with which silence was enforced.

⚖️ Legal Rights & Archival Footer This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. Every entry is timestamped. Every sentence is jurisdictional. Every structure is protected. This document does not contain confidential family court material. It contains the lawful submissions, filings, and lived experiences of a party to multiple legal proceedings — including civil claims, safeguarding audits, and formal complaints. All references to professionals are strictly in their public roles and relate to conduct already raised in litigation. This is not a breach of privacy. It is the preservation of truth. Protected under Article 10 of the ECHR, Section 12 of the Human Rights Act, and all applicable rights to freedom of expression, legal self-representation, and public interest disclosure. 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. It is a legal-aesthetic instrument. Filed with velvet contempt. Preserved for future litigation. Because evidence deserves elegance, retaliation deserves an archive, and writing is how I survive this pain. Attempts to silence or intimidate this author will be documented and filed in accordance with SWANK protocols. © 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.