⟡ SWANK ENTRY — METROPOLITAN POLICE REPORT: PLACEMENT INCIDENT ⟡
Filed: 07 October 2025
Reference: SWANK/WESTMINSTER/CRIMINAL-BIAS
Download PDF: 2025-10-07_SWANK_Report_RomeoFosterBiasIncident.pdf
Summary: Formal Metropolitan Police report (Ref: TAA-50103-25-0101-IR) documenting discriminatory and verbally abusive conduct by Westminster-approved foster carers toward Regal (aged 16), supported by the Council’s internal incident admission.
I. What Happened
On 7 September 2025, during a morning interaction at a Westminster-commissioned foster placement in Ilford (715A High Road, Seven Kings, IG3 8RH), the male foster carer shouted “I’ve f**ing had enough*” within earshot of all four children, following a disagreement with Regal (aged 16, dual U.S.–U.K. citizen) about leaving the house early to ride his bicycle.
The incident occurred in front of his siblings (Prerogative, Kingdom, and Heir), prompting visible distress.
A Metropolitan Police online report was filed by Polly Chromatic (mother) on 6 October 2025 at 19:51, citing harassment, verbal abuse, and discriminatory behaviour based on nationality.
The police report identifies:
• Victim: Regal (16, Mixed White–Black Caribbean heritage, severe eosinophilic asthma)
• Reporter: Polly Chromatic, mother and Director of SWANK London Ltd.
• Incident Location: 715A High Rd, Seven Kings, Ilford IG3 8RH
• Offence Type: Verbal assault and discriminatory conduct under delegated state care
• Bias Factors: National origin and ethnicity
The foster carer’s own admission of misconduct is confirmed in an internal Westminster email from Bruce Murphy (Social Worker, WCC) dated 9 September 2025, co-signed to Kirsty Hornal and Sam Brown, describing Del’s outburst as “not acceptable.”
II. What the Document Establishes
• The Metropolitan Police Service formally recorded a criminal complaint concerning verbal abuse and bias within a Westminster-commissioned placement.
• Westminster City Council internally corroborated the event — confirming the carer’s conduct, tone, and apology — yet continued the placement.
• The foster carers had previously made derogatory comments, including that Regal “doesn’t know how to ride a bike because he’s American”, revealing a sustained national-origin prejudice.
• The Local Authority’s framing of the event as a “disagreement” rather than discriminatory misconduct demonstrates systemic minimisation of racial and national bias within its placements.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because the pattern of foster-care hostility toward U.S.–born children is neither accidental nor harmless — it is cultural cruelty legitimised by paperwork.
Because a system that normalises verbal abuse, excuses bias, and recasts it as “boundary setting” is unfit to protect any child.
Because Regal’s dignity was once again subordinated to institutional convenience.
SWANK logs this as a mirror instance of custodial incivility — a child’s humiliation transformed into administrative prose.
IV. Violations
• Children Act 1989, s.22(3): Failure to safeguard and promote the welfare of the child in care.
• Human Rights Act 1998, Art. 3 & 14: Degrading treatment and discriminatory bias by state agents.
• ECHR, Art. 8: Interference with family and private life under hostile placement conditions.
• Equality Act 2010, s.26: Harassment related to nationality and race.
• UNCRC, Art. 19 & 29: Failure to protect from psychological harm and to ensure respect for cultural identity.
V. SWANK’s Position
This event encapsulates the unrefined temperament of state care: bureaucratic contrition masking emotional violence.
The council’s own admission that the carer’s outburst was “not acceptable” yet its choice to retain the placement confirms Westminster’s institutional tolerance for misconduct.
SWANK London Ltd. deems this incident a documented act of national-origin harassment under delegated custody, warranting immediate placement suspension, formal investigation, and public accountability for supervisory negligence.
Filed under the Jurisdiction of the Mirror Court — SWANK London Ltd.
A Velvet Tribunal for the Evaluation of Civilised Decay.
🪞 We file what others forget.
⚖️ 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.