“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
Showing posts with label constitutional breach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitutional breach. Show all posts

When Lawyers Must Remind the State of Basic Procedure


⟡ SWANK Legal Dispatch ⟡

A Formal Dressing Down Delivered in Legal Stationery
September 2020

Noncompliance Requires a Plan to Exist First

I. Representation Acquired, Patience Exhausted

After three years of silence, evasions, and procedural delusion, Polly Chromatic appointed legal counsel to confront the Department of Social Development (DSD) in Grand Turk.

The result? A legal letter so fundamental, it had to remind the state that a person cannot be accused of noncompliance with a plan they have never received.

The social worker’s assertion: noncompliance.
The solicitor’s response: defamatory nonsense.

II. F CHAMBERS Responds with Elegance and Fire

Let the record show:

  • Polly’s communications—meticulous, archived, repeated.

  • DSD’s engagement—non-existent, until prompted by legal pressure.

  • The infamous “August 2019 Care Plan” was never served, never disclosed, and possibly never existed.

“How can our client be non-compliant with a Care Plan she has never received?”

The question is legal. The answer is obvious. The shame is theirs.

III. Legal Violations Identified by Counsel

The Department of Social Development failed to:

  • Disclose any complaint or allegation

  • Provide a single report regarding the family

  • Honour constitutional protections

  • Observe natural justice or procedural fairness

“It is trite law that any person, before having their fundamental rights and freedoms infringed, deserves to know the complaint against them.”

Apparently, this was news to DSD.

IV. Requests Made on Record

The solicitors at F CHAMBERS issued the following demands, on the legal record:

  • All case reports from the beginning of proceedings

  • All medical records held on the children

  • The mythical August 2019 Care Plan, if it exists

Until these are disclosed, the letter states, any expectation of engagement is unreasonable—and legally void.

V. Legal Tone, But the Message Is Crystal Clear

“Our client wishes to do all that is required… but this does require that all parties act with full transparency, fairness, and reasonableness.”

Translation?
Do your job—or kindly get out of the way.


© SWANK Archive. All Patterns Reserved.
This letter stands as official proof that the gaslighting was mutualised—and rebutted.

Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
www.swanklondon.com
✉ director@swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Policy


No comments:

The Commission Was Informed. It Chose to Sleep.


⟡ SWANK Petition ⟡

An Archive of Breach, Bureaucracy, and Barefaced Harassment
15 July 2020

When the State Refuses to Read Its Own Laws

I. The Harassment Was Sanctioned, but Not Legal

From June 2017 to July 2020, the Department of Social Development (DSD) in Grand Turk launched not a safeguarding mission—but a persecution campaign.

It began with one legally documented decision: a mother homeschooling her children with formal approval.
Approval was granted by Mark Garland on 26 June 2017.

The DSD disregarded this.
They ignored educational law.
They ignored public health law.
They ignored human rights law.

They did not ignore me.
They hunted me.

II. The Abuses Were Not Abstract. They Were Documented.

🩸 Sexual abuse by a government doctor, committed in front of nine adult witnesses, and greenlit by DSD. I objected. They retaliated. My children suffered the unspeakable.

🧬 Outdated and harmful medical practices were imposed, including coercive attempts to retract my sons’ foreskin—directly contradicting NHS medical guidance. This is not “care.” This is cruelty.

📚 Homeschooling was pathologised despite my consistent documentation of curricula, educational activities, and my own Master’s degree.

🏠 Home invasions: fence-breaking, illegal entry, shouting through windows, and coercive hospitalisation—all without legal authority or court orders.

🦠 COVID-19 violations: Social workers trespassed during lockdown, risking the life of a mother with eosinophilic asthma, a clinically vulnerable condition. No masks. No sense. No accountability.

III. Violations of the Constitution & Conscience

The following constitutional rights under the Turks and Caicos Islands Constitution Order 2011 were plainly violated:

  • Right to Private and Family Life

  • Right to Protection from Inhuman Treatment

  • Right to Education

  • Right to Lawful Administrative Action

  • Right to Freedom of Expression

  • Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion

  • Protection from Discrimination

They mocked my beliefs.
They harassed my family.
They humiliated my children.
They endangered my life.
They ignored every complaint.

They fabricated unwritten laws—and punished me for not following them.

IV. What They Ignored—and Why It Matters

  • They ignored my legal homeschool approval.

  • They ignored my medical vulnerability.

  • They ignored the constitutional framework they claimed to uphold.

  • They ignored the psychological damage they inflicted.

When I finally filed a formal petition to the Human Rights Commission, they responded with silence.

Silence is not neutrality.
Silence is complicity.


© SWANK Archive. All Patterns Reserved.
Unauthorised reproduction, surveillance, or paper-pushing reinterpretation of the truth is prohibited.

Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
www.swanklondon.com
✉ director@swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Policy


No comments:

I Had to Write the Constitution Back to the People Who Forgot It

 📜 SWANK Dispatch: When Human Rights Must Be Petitioned to Protect Children from the State

🗓️ 15 July 2020

Filed Under: human rights petition, social work abuse, illegal medical examination, lawful homeschooling, systemic trauma, constitutional breach, public health endangerment, procedural failure, retaliation for complaints

“You have not treated us fairly. You have not protected our lives.
You have broken the law, and called it care.”
— A Mother Who Petitioned the Human Rights Commission with a Timeline Longer Than the Pandemic

In this ten-page letter to the Human Rights Commission, Polly Chromatic lays bare 3.5 years of sustained abuse by the Department of Social Development, escalating from unwanted visits to medical assault — all under the guise of safeguarding. With statutes cited, timelines presented, and health risks documented, this is not a complaint.
It is an indictment.

🧾 I. The Legal Core

Section 17(6) of the Children (Care and Protection) Ordinance, 2015
States that parents must receive a written report of any investigation.

Status: Not once. Not ever.

Emergency Powers (COVID-19) Regulations, 2020
Restricted entry into private residences except under clear emergency or essential worker capacity, with ID.

Status: Breached on 26 March 2020.

Education Ordinance, 2009
Recognises homeschool as a valid educational path with Ministerial approval.

Status: Approval granted — then ignored by every other department.

⚠️ II. Documented Harms

  • Sexual assault of her sons during forced hospital exams in front of 9 adults (2017)

  • Repeated home invasions, including fence removal (2019)

  • Property defacement, neighbour violence, and threats

  • Medical instructions from a doctor contradicting UK NHS guidance

  • Emotional abuse, gaslighting, and repeated interruptions of homeschooling

All while suffering from severe eosinophilic asthma — a condition that makes every uninvited visit a potential death sentence.

📅 III. The Timeline of Lawbreaking

  • 2016–2020: Dozens of interventions, no reports

  • 2017: Approval to homeschool granted by Mark Garland

  • 2017–2020: Truancy threats continue regardless

  • 2020: COVID violations escalate with visits during lockdown

“They questioned my compost toilet.
They never questioned whether their actions were lawful.”

🧠 IV. Fundamental Rights Violated

  • 🛑 Right to Life

  • 🛑 Protection from Inhuman Treatment

  • 🛑 Right to Private and Family Life

  • 🛑 Protection of Religion, Conscience, and Health Standards

  • 🛑 Right to Education

  • 🛑 Protection from Discrimination

  • 🛑 Lawful Administrative Action

This isn’t accidental.
This is a pattern of procedural contempt.


No comments:

When the Harassers Quote Policy, We Quote Law.


⟡ We Quoted the Law. They Ignored It. So We Wrote to the Attorney General. ⟡

Filed: 15 July 2020
Reference: SWANK/TCI/2020-AG-KNOWLES-LEGAL-INQUIRY
📎 Download PDF — 2020-07-15_SWANK_TCI_AG_RhondaleeKnowles_SocialDevHarassment_LegalAdviceRequest.pdf

I. This Is What We Do When Bureaucracy Pretends It Can’t Read

This letter was sent to Rhondalee Braithwaite-Knowles, Attorney General of the Turks and Caicos Islands, in response to three years of:

  • Procedural harassment

  • Disregard of lawful home education

  • Failure to acknowledge disability

  • Repeated safeguarding theatre with no evidentiary base

It was not a complaint. It was a summons to reason — framed not in desperation, but in jurisdictional symmetry.

We cited their statutes.
We clarified their duties.
We annotated their silence.

II. What the Letter Actually Demands

This document:

  • Invokes specific TCI ordinances

  • Questions the lawful basis of Social Development’s interference

  • Demands clarification of the Department’s jurisdictional reach

  • Establishes a record of prior compliance with every legal requirement

It is not rhetorical.
It is pre-litigious, and exquisitely so.

It asks:

What is the lawful basis for your surveillance when no statutory breach has occurred?

And it dares them to reply.

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because when local officers overreach, we go to Cabinet-level counsel.
Because silence is no longer a shield when it’s filed in writing.
Because after three years of unsolicited visits, demands, and distortions — we asked the AG to confirm what the law actually says.

Let the record show:

  • The letter was sent

  • The children were documented

  • The law was quoted

  • The surveillance — was acknowledged by omission

This is not an “inquiry.”
It is a velvet ceasefire offer backed by law.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not consider maternal self-sufficiency a risk.
We do not believe that home education negates citizenship.
We do not accept that child welfare permits procedural trespass.

Let the record show:

We asked for legal clarity.
They gave us unlawful proximity.
So we escalated — to the top.

This isn’t advocacy.
This is documented refusal by legal dispatch.




No comments:

Documented Obsessions