“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

Showing posts with label Foster Care Abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Foster Care Abuse. Show all posts

Chromatic v Westminster: On the Criminal Improvisation of Foster Placements and the Archiving of State Cruelty


💠 SWANK Evidentiary Catalogue 💠

✒️ Filed: 2 August 2025 | Ref Code: WCC-SAFEGUARDING-CRIMINAL-RETALIATION | PDF: 2025-08-02_SWANK_CriminalNotice_FosterAbuseRetaliation.pdf

🔹 Formal Notice of Criminal Child Abuse, Retaliation, and Intent to File Police Report

In the Matter of Westminster’s Foster Placements, Uncorrected Harm, and the Archive of State-Endorsed Cruelty

I. What Happened

On 2 August 2025, Polly Chromatic issued formal notification to Westminster Children’s Services, documenting criminal safeguarding violations committed against her four U.S. citizen children while placed under an Emergency Protection Order obtained through misrepresentation and discrimination.

The notice was sent to:

  • All senior Westminster safeguarding personnel

  • Ofsted, CAFCASS, Social Work England

  • The U.S. Department of State

  • UN Special Rapporteurs on Arbitrary Detention, Torture, and Child Protection

The catalyst: Regal’s handwritten journal, now archived in the SWANK Evidentiary Catalogue, describing a climate of deprivation, humiliation, and emotional suppression inside the foster placement.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

Regal’s diary evidences:

  • Food denial to Kingdom (age 10) on the basis of age — institutional starvation

  • Hydration and journaling suppression — pencils and water bottles banned upstairs

  • Guardian manipulation — Regal told the case would last “6 months or more if your mom doesn’t comply”

  • Silencing of sibling affection and emotional support — enforced through carer rules

  • Direct humiliation by carers Del and Shopna — including bike insults and emotional threats

These are not protective boundaries.
These are the curated instruments of state-enabled child abuse.

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because this is no longer about one letter.
This is an entire government department refusing to act on:

  • A child’s handwritten testimony

  • A known injury and emotional breakdown

  • Parental witness accounts corroborated by judicial filings

  • International legal disclosures made on record

Because Westminster has chosen to side with its image, not its obligations.

IV. Violations Cited

  • Children Act 1989 – Section 47 failure

  • ECHR Articles 3, 8, and 14

  • UNCRC Articles 12, 19, 24, 37

  • Equality Act 2010 – disability and nationality discrimination

  • Criminal acts including:

    • Neglect

    • Assault by proxy

    • Psychological abuse

    • Retaliation for protected disclosures

V. SWANK’s Position

We affirm:
This letter is not performative.
It is legal. It is evidentiary. It is future admissible.

The journal entries have been published as a permanent indictment of this local authority’s safeguarding pretence — and as a warning to every institution that chooses containment over care.

Westminster has 48 hours.
After that: court, police, press, and international diplomatic channels activate in full.

The children are watching. So is the world.

⚖️ 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:

In Re: Nutritional Deprivation and Discriminatory Restriction in Foster Placement by Shopna


🪞 SWANK London Ltd.

Asthma Is Not a Behavioural Problem
Documenting Nutritional Neglect, Xenophobic Humiliation, and Medical Endangerment in Foster Care

Filed:
2 August 2025
Reference Code: SWANK-LOI-0825-SHOPNAABUSE
Filename: 2025-08-02_SWANK_LOI_ShopnaFosterAbuse_PoliceReport.pdf
1-Line Summary:
Police report filed against foster carer “Shopna” details medical neglect, cultural humiliation, and targeted abuse of disabled U.S. citizen children in UK state care.

I. WHAT HAPPENED

Between 23 June 2025 and 2 August 2025, four children — all U.S. citizens with eosinophilic asthma — were placed into the care of a foster carer named Shopna by Westminster Children’s Services. The police report now filed against her includes testimony and documentation from Regal, aged 16, and his younger siblings.

The children report:

  • Being told “you can’t eat because you’re 10”

  • Bans on water bottles and pencils upstairs

  • Derogatory remarks such as “you’re from America”

  • Restriction of emotional and private expression

  • Deliberate sabotage of asthma management through dehydration, stress, and movement suppression

All four children were homeschooled, medically vulnerable, and accustomed to a structured, loving environment. They were not removed due to risk of harm — but rather following a disproven medical allegation (now subject to NHS resolution).

What followed was not protection. It was calculated degradation.

II. WHAT THE COMPLAINT ESTABLISHES

The Shopna Police Report confirms:

  • Medical Negligence: Refusing water to asthmatic children is not discipline — it is bodily endangerment.

  • Nutritional Abuse: Denying food to a child on the basis of age is not structure — it is psychological violence.

  • Xenophobic Mockery: Saying “you’re from America” to dismiss or punish a child is not neutral — it is racialised othering.

  • Suppression of Dignity: Banning pencils and privacy denies children the right to expression, education, and processing trauma.

  • Patterned Control: These behaviours are not incidental. They reflect an entrenched culture of institutional dehumanisation.

This is no longer anecdote. It is archive.

III. WHY SWANK LOGGED IT

Because the authorities failed to act.

Because Westminster knowingly placed U.S. citizen children in a home that banned writing, hydration, and dignity — and called it “care.”

Because the family submitted journal entries to court, the police, Social Work England, and international bodies — and yet the foster placement continued.

Because when safeguarding is weaponised, justice must be documented with velvet teeth.

IV. VIOLATIONS

  • Children Act 1989, s.1(3)(a): Welfare and developmental needs

  • Children and Families Act 2014, s.19: Duty to promote physical and emotional well-being

  • Equality Act 2010, s.20–21: Disability-related neglect, failure to accommodate

  • Article 8, ECHR: Private and family life

  • Articles 12 & 13, UNCRC: Freedom of expression, right to be heard

  • Protection from Harassment Act 1997

  • Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000: Discriminatory public service provision

V. SWANK’S POSITION

We do not redact the voices of children because the state finds them inconvenient.

We do not remove our velvet gloves because the carers had government badges.

We do not mislabel chronic asthma as misbehaviour.
We do not permit racism to be repackaged as “rules.”
We do not tolerate abuse masked as British childcare.

This was not a misunderstanding. It was a programme.

We file it now — in gold, in fury, in defiance — as an affidavit of failure and a testament to resistance.

Filed in honour of Regal, Kingdom, Prerogative and Heir —
and the paper they weren’t allowed to hold.

Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
www.swanklondon.com

⚖️ 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: