⟡ Formal Notification: The United States Has Been Informed ⟡
If the British state won’t protect its own residents, it may wish to explain itself to Washington.
Filed: 20 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/USA/EMBASSY-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-19_SWANK_Letter_USAEmbassy_RetaliationSupportRequest.pdf
A formal transmission to the U.S. Embassy in London requesting federal review of retaliatory safeguarding misuse, disability discrimination, and procedural harm against five American citizens residing in the United Kingdom.
I. What Happened
A disabled American mother published an evidentiary archive.
The British state responded not with transparency — but with surveillance, intrusion, and coercion.
They violated her medical rights.
They attempted to destabilise her home education provision.
They targeted her children — four medically disabled U.S. nationals — with safeguarding theatre designed to punish lawful documentation.
So she filed it. Not to a borough complaints inbox. To the Embassy.
II. What the Letter Establishes
That a U.S. citizen was subjected to sustained harassment by UK authorities for publishing lawful evidence
That four disabled American children were targeted as leverage to suppress a parent’s testimony
That safeguarding frameworks were weaponised as a tool of institutional retaliation
That disability rights — medical, educational, and procedural — were denied across multiple agencies
That these events constitute a transnational breach of civil protections
That the United States government is now on record — and on notice
III. Why SWANK Filed It
Because one cannot rely on British authorities to investigate British misconduct.
Because the agencies named in the archive have escalated instead of answering.
Because retaliation is not “policy.”
Because safeguarding, when falsified, becomes persecution.
Because this is no longer a local matter. It is a cross-border indictment of bureaucratic impunity.
IV. Violations Identified
Retaliation for Lawful Expression
Disability Discrimination (Targeting Both Parent and Children)
Procedural Misuse of Safeguarding Powers
Cross-Border Breach of Civil and Parental Rights
V. SWANK’s Position
This marks the formal jurisdictional handover.
The silence of Westminster has now been replaced by the timestamped evidence of federal escalation.
If further retaliation occurs, it will not be read as oversight — it will be read as escalation in full knowledge of international attention.
This is not a cry for help.
This is a legal record.
And it has already crossed the Atlantic.
⟡ 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.