“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 Racism Denial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Racism Denial. Show all posts

The Email Where I Gave Them Everything — And They Gave Me Nothing.


⟡ “I Asked for Air. She Sent Me a Compliment.” ⟡
An email thread between Polly Chromatic and Westminster safeguarding officer Kirsty Hornal, requesting CP conference rescheduling and child inclusion due to disability and medical recovery. The parent is articulate, medically transparent, and legally correct. The reply deflects racism, sidesteps disability, and closes with a comment about dinosaur costumes. The archive makes a note. Westminster didn’t.

Filed: 11 May 2024
Reference: SWANK/WCC/CONF-06
📎 Download PDF – 2024-11-05_SWANK_Email_KirstyHornal_CPConferenceReschedule_DisabilityClause_RacismDeflectionThread.pdf
Thread includes direct medical disclosures, a rescheduling request due to breathing difficulties and psychiatric harm, and the child’s right to attend. The reply ignores legal access requirements, rejects racism as personal perception, and closes with performative warmth. Full cross-agency CC list: NHS, RBKC, legal counsel, and private mental health providers.

I. What Happened

Polly Chromatic sent an email to Kirsty Hornal. It included:

  • A clear and clinically supported disability disclosure

  • A request to reschedule a CP conference due to:
    • Respiratory difficulty
    • Emotional trauma
    • Psychiatric recovery

  • A request for Regal (the child) to be present

  • A reminder that communication needed to be written only

  • Copies to:
    • Simon O'Meara (Blackfords LLP)
    • Dr Philip Reid (NHS)
    • RBKC safeguarding lead
    • Westminster management (Sarah Newman, Fiona Dias-Saxena)

Kirsty Hornal replied:

  • “I must say I don’t think I’ve acted in a racist manner.”

  • Made no procedural reference to child inclusion or disability rights

  • Closed with:

    “Ending on a positive, the dinosaur photos made me smile.”

This wasn’t safeguarding. It was public relations dressed in pastel empathy.

II. What the Email Thread Establishes

  • That the parent made lawful, clear, written requests

  • That disability was explicitly disclosed and medical oversight was provided

  • That institutional responses ignored both the substance and the statute

  • That safeguarding was reframed as a tone issue, not a procedural harm

  • That child welfare was treated as a logistical inconvenience rather than a right

The parent said, “I can’t speak because you hurt me.”
The system replied, “But your tone could improve.”

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because racism doesn’t need to call you names. It just needs to reframe your collapse as overreaction. Because disability doesn’t disappear when it’s ignored — it escalates. And because when you reschedule your trauma around their timetable, and they still don’t hear you, the archive takes over.

SWANK archived this because:

  • It’s a thread of recorded refusal under a smile

  • It shows patterned deflection and minimisation of harm

  • It captures a final attempt to engage before total procedural withdrawal

  • It proves medical status was available, ignored, and overwritten with warmth

IV. Violations

  • Equality Act 2010 –
    • Section 20: Adjustment refusal for communication and scheduling
    • Section 26: Institutional responses as psychological harm
    • Section 27: Retaliatory posture in denying claims of racism or bias

  • Children Act 1989 –
    • Child exclusion from CP process without lawful rationale
    • Procedural obstruction of parental input based on medical condition

  • Human Rights Act 1998 –
    • Article 8: Medical and emotional integrity of the family not protected
    • Article 14: Racism denied, disability ignored — intersectional discrimination

  • Social Work England Code –
    • Failure to reflect on practice (Standard 6.4)
    • Communication that masks harm with tone (Standard 3.4)
    • Misuse of authority to frame concern as attitude (Standard 5.1)

V. SWANK’s Position

You don’t get to deny racism by saying you don’t think it happened. You don’t get to bypass a disability clause because the photos were cute. You don’t get to reframe trauma as communication failure when the record shows you were copied in. And you don’t get to pretend this is care — it’s just coordination theatre.

SWANK London Ltd. classifies this thread as a performative safeguarding exchange, an example of recorded procedural failure, and a final documented offer of cooperation — archived before silence became necessity.

⟡ 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: