⟡ Annex X – A Father They Refused to Name ⟡
On the Racial and Procedural Erasure of a black father by Westminster Children’s Services
Metadata
Filed: 8 July 2025
Reference Code: N1/ADDENDUM/ALAIN-EXCLUSION
Court File Name: 2025-07-08_Addendum_N1Claim_AlainSimlett_ExclusionAndRacialDisplacement.pdf
Filed by: Polly Chromatic
Court: Central Family Court
Children Involved:
• Regal
• Prerogative
• Kingdom
• Heir
I. What Happened
On 23 June 2025, four disabled children were removed by force — without notice, without medical cause, and without so much as a phone call to their father.
Despite being married to the Claimant since February 2008, and listed on all birth certificates, Mr. Simlett was excluded from every single document, threshold conversation, and safeguarding decision. The children’s legal father was, quite literally, written out of their lives by bureaucrats with poor spelling and poorer ethics.
This addendum is not a request. It is a formal accusation of racial exclusion and procedural sabotage.
II. What the Addendum Establishes
That the Local Authority knew of Alain Bonnee Annee Simlett’s identity, legal status, and marital position
That his Black fatherhood was treated as negligible, optional, and discardable
That this omission was not accidental — it was operational
III. Procedural and Racial Violations
No Section 20 consent was signed or sought
No emergency threshold was lawfully met to override dual-parent rights
No consultation, notification, or inquiry was extended to the father
No respect was paid to the children’s cultural, racial, or paternal identity
IV. Legal and Civil Breaches
Violation of Article 8 ECHR (Right to family life)
Discriminatory exclusion of a Black British and Turks & Caicos citizen parent
Suppression of kinship care alternatives
Procedural dishonesty and archival omission
Had Mr. Chromatic been white, British-born, or institutionally affiliated, we have no doubt he would have received both a letter and a microphone. Instead, he was airbrushed from state records in a process so profoundly racist it would have felt more at home in colonial archives than in 2025 London.
V. SWANK’s Position
SWANK London Ltd. identifies the exclusion of Alain Bonnee Annee Simlett as a textbook act of racialised safeguarding misconduct.
The Local Authority failed not only the father, but the law itself. This was a ritual of administrative cleansing — removing the inconvenient Black parent from view to stabilise a narrative that never aligned with facts.
The consequences are not symbolic. They are legal.
The Claimant reserves the right to:
Escalate this matter to the EHRC
Submit evidence of racial exclusion to the High Court
Seek compensatory damages on behalf of the children for unlawful family separation
This addendum has now been filed to the Central Family Court, served to Westminster, and added to the Claimant’s N1 civil claim.
⟡ 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.