“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

In re Chromatic v. Westminster: On the Mouthpiece Who Mistook a Bundle for Truth


⟡ The Collapse of Independence ⟡

Filed: 2 September 2025
Reference: SWANK/TAMMY/BUNDLE
Download PDF: 2025-09-02_Addendum_TammyCredibilityUndermined.pdf
Summary: Tammy Surgenor ceased to be an assessor the moment she treated Westminster’s bundle as fact. Independence collapsed into repetition; credibility dissolved into echo.

I. What Happened

• On 2 September 2025, during assessment, Tammy Surgenor relied on the Local Authority’s bundle as unquestionable truth.
• She repeated accusations from the bundle without evidence or verification.
• The mother’s contrary evidence was dismissed because “the bundle” already “proved” otherwise.
• Specific contradictions parroted:
– “Placement with mother” declared while reunification resisted.
– Asthma evidence ignored while fabricated autism/dyslexia claims recycled.
– Disputed allegations treated as settled fact.

II. What the Document Establishes

• Credibility Collapse – An assessor cannot be independent while parroting one party’s narrative.
• Breach of Standards – Social Work England Standards (s.1, s.3) require neutrality and critical analysis, both abandoned.
• Procedural Breach – Article 6, ECHR violated by reliance on untested paperwork.
• Systemic Echo – Illustrates the broader contagion: once written, LA errors are repeated until they acquire the veneer of “authority.”

III. Why SWANK Logged It

• To archive the transformation of independence into mouthpiece.
• To preserve evidence that credibility collapsed not through malice but through intellectual laziness.
• To expose how assessments become extensions of narrative rather than fact-finding.
• To mark the humiliating spectacle of a professional undone by her own repetition.

IV. Applicable Standards & Violations

• Children Act 1989, s.1 & s.17 – Welfare and family support displaced by paperwork loyalty.
• Equality Act 2010 – Disability evidence erased, fabricated labels repeated.
• Article 6, ECHR – Fair trial rights undermined.
• Article 8, ECHR – Family life interfered with on untested grounds.
• Social Work England Standards – Independence, neutrality, and evidence-based practice abandoned.

V. SWANK’s Position

This is not assessment. This is mouthpiece theatre, archived.

• We do not accept paperwork worship as evaluation.
• We reject repetition as professional independence.
• We will document that Tammy Surgenor’s credibility collapsed the moment she recited rather than assessed.

⟡ This Entry Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡

Every entry is timestamped. Every sentence is jurisdictional. Every structure is protected.

This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.

Filed with deliberate punctuation, preserved for litigation and education.

Because evidence deserves elegance.
And retaliation deserves an archive.

© 2025 SWANK London Ltd.

⚖️ 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.