⟡ SWANK Medical Abuse Rebuttal Archive ⟡
“They Called It a Welfare Check. It Was a Coordinated Attack.”
Filed: 24 October 2020
Reference: SWANK/TCI/ASSAULT-REBUTTAL/2020-10-24
📎 Download PDF – 2020-10-24_SWANK_Rebuttal_Letter_MedicalAssault_SocialDevFabrications_TCI.pdf
I. They Claimed to Be Helping. They Orchestrated a Violation.
On 24 October 2020, this formal letter was issued to legal counsel by SWANK’s Director.
It does not ask for justice.
It records the failure of it.
This document is a comprehensive timeline correction, setting the record straight on:
The sexualised “medical” inspections of three boys by Dr. Antrieve Benjamin,
The coercive tactics employed by TCI’s Department of Social Development,
And the years-long paper trail of deceit, fabricated referrals, and procedural theatre.
This isn’t a complaint.
It’s a surgical rebuttal — dated, footnoted, and unflinching.
II. What the Letter Makes Clear
That no medical safeguarding threshold was ever triggered
That the infamous May 2017 “exam” was neither consented to nor lawful
That housing conditions were fabricated post-hoc to justify the intrusion
That the system relied on the victim’s silence to complete the narrative
They did not expect you to respond.
They certainly did not expect you to file it, timestamp it, and publish it.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because they manipulated chronology to conceal state harm.
Because they mistook trauma for weakness.
Because they assumed — as they always do — that a disabled woman with children would have neither memory nor archive.
We filed it because:
It is the primary counter-narrative to a fabricated state dossier
It restores intellectual control over a moment engineered to strip bodily control
It names names, dates, and addresses — not in rage, but in register
This is not an appeal.
It is a formal correction to the colonial record.
IV. SWANK’s Position
We do not request clarification from those who violated consent.
We deliver it — on headed paper, with legal structure.
We do not let their summary stand.
We issue our own.
Let the record show:
They said welfare.
They meant surveillance.
They performed assault.
And we filed the reply — with timestamps and tone.
This isn’t closure.
This is archival jurisprudence.
⟡ 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.