“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

Polly Chromatic v Glen Peache On the Gradual Collapse of Duty by Dignified Neglect and the Discreet Endorsement of Retaliatory Harm


🪞SWANK LONDON LTD.

LOI — The Peache Impeachment

Filed Date: 28 July 2025

Reference Code: SWANK-LOI-GP-0801

PDF Filename: 2025-07-28_LOI_GLENPEACHE_INSTITUTIONALNEGLECT_AND_COMPLICITY.pdf

1-line Summary:

A formal criminal filing against Glen Peache, for administrative complicity in safeguarding retaliation and the lawful ruin of a disabled mother and her four U.S. citizen children.

IN THE MATTER OF COMPLICITY, DELAY, AND SOFT-FOCUS COLLAPSE

Chromatic v Glen Peache, Public Officer Presiding over Procedural Harm, Re: Gaslight, Neglect and Municipal Shrugging

I. What Happened

Mr. Glen Peache — functioning as a senior officer within RBKC and Bi-borough management — played a central, if allegedly passive, role in the administrative sanctioning of repeated harm to a medically vulnerable family.

Despite repeated written disclosures, regulatory complaints, environmental health emergencies, and formal documentation of systemic misconduct, Mr. Peache did not act. Worse — he deliberately did not act. This refusal was not ignorance. It was cultivated complicity.

SWANK has now submitted a Laying of Information (LOI) to Westminster Magistrates’ Court, under Section 1 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 and Part 7 of the Criminal Procedure Rules, to commence criminal proceedings for misconduct in public office.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That Mr. Peache failed to intervene or act when repeatedly notified of:

    • Environmental health dangers (sewer gas poisoning)

    • Discriminatory safeguarding decisions

    • The unlawful seizure of four children with known medical vulnerabilities

    • Documented procedural abuses by social workers in both boroughs

  • That his signature, presence, and role were cited in multiple points of inaction that now constitute a criminal chain of procedural retaliation

  • That no lawful response was ever issued to multiple formal complaints

  • That silence was strategically deployed to facilitate unlawful safeguarding escalation

III. Why SWANK Logged It

SWANK does not log lightly. Mr. Peache’s conduct represents a fluent dereliction of duty — a knowing withdrawal from oversight, disguised as administrative restraint.

While hiding behind the velvet curtain of “not my department,” Mr. Peache's indifference greased the wheels of institutional abuse. He enabled actors now under prosecution to flourish unchecked, while issuing no lawful redress to the mother attempting to protect her children.

IV. Violations

  • Misconduct in Public Office (Common Law)

  • Breach of Section 6, Human Rights Act 1998

  • Failure to act under Section 47 Children Act 1989

  • Complicity in Disability Discrimination (Equality Act 2010)

  • Obstruction of Justice by Omission

V. SWANK’s Position

The days of managerial erasure are over.

Glen Peache’s legacy of delay, procedural vagueness, and dignified neglect now stands in the dock of legal memory. It is not enough to disapprove in private while remaining institutionally mute. We do not prosecute bad personalities. We prosecute public patterns.

With this filing, SWANK reasserts its ceremonial jurisdiction over institutional harm and aesthetic revenge. The Record will not forget.

Filed By:

Polly Chromatic

Founder & Director, SWANK London Ltd
Litigant in Person, Keeper of Procedural Memory, Voice of the Forgotten Submissions

⚖️ 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.