“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
Showing posts with label £23M Complaint. Show all posts
Showing posts with label £23M Complaint. Show all posts

The Complaint Is Filed. The Press Has Been Told. — £23 Million, Multiple Defendants, and a System That Called It Safeguarding


⟡ Public Notice Filed: £23M Complaint Over Criminal Safeguarding Abuse ⟡

“This isn’t safeguarding. It’s systemic misconduct, now quantified in damages and submitted in law.”

Filed: 2 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/PRESS/RELEASE-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-02_SWANK_PressRelease_DisabledFamily_23MComplaint_SafeguardingAbuse.pdf
A formal press release sent to journalist Maeve McClenaghan summarising a £23 million legal complaint over coordinated safeguarding abuse, collusion, and systemic retaliation against a disabled family. Sent under lawful access terms. Received, now archived.

I. What Happened

On 2 June 2025, Polly Chromatic, Director of SWANK London Ltd., issued a formal press release to The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, summarising a multi-claim, multi-defendant action rooted in:

  • Criminal safeguarding misuse

  • Disability-based retaliation

  • Obstructed access to medical care

  • Police-social work collusion

  • Coordinated regulatory delay

The press release:

  • Names multiple institutional actors under active complaint

  • Cites the Equality Act 2010, Fraud Act 2006, Human Rights Act 1998, and Children Act 1989

  • Notes ongoing referrals to Social Work England, Metropolitan Police DPS, and the IOPC

  • Asserts a total claim value of £23 million, filed under sworn evidence

  • Reiterates a written-only communication policy as legally mandated and repeatedly violated

II. What the Press Release Establishes

  • That the legal claim exists, is filed, and is quantifiable

  • That the journalist has been directly and lawfully placed on notice

  • That there is public evidence of pattern-based institutional harm

  • That no future ignorance of the case can be claimed in good faith by media or regulators

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because journalism is part of the system.
Because silence from the press protects the same institutions that weaponised safeguarding.
Because this isn’t outreach — it’s recordkeeping, timed to the moment legal action becomes public.

This release isn’t a pitch.
It’s an invitation to truth — and a declaration of jurisdictional standing.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept that press interest should follow only after harm has ended.
We do not accept media neglect when systems collapse in slow motion.
We do not accept that a family must suffer in silence while their abusers wear lanyards.

SWANK London Ltd. affirms:
If the press will not investigate,
We log that too.
If justice is ignored,
We publish the price.
And if £23 million is not enough to merit coverage,
We will make it archival — and impossible to delete.

⟡ 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:

Documented Obsessions