“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 family court retaliation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family court retaliation. Show all posts

Chromatic v The Kingdom – On the Refusal to Accommodate, and the Filing Heard in Two Capitals


When the Archive Asks Geneva a Question

Re: Procedural Retaliation, Disabling Harassment, and the Velvet Rebuttal That Went to the United Nations

Metadata

  • Filed: 9 July 2025

  • Reference Code: SWANK-INTL-0711-UNSRPD

  • Document Title: 2025-07-9_Submission_UNSRPD_DisabilityRetaliation_RemovalOfAccommodations

  • Summary: A formal complaint has been submitted to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, detailing systemic refusal of accommodations and retaliatory child removal by U.K. authorities against Polly Chromatic.

I. What Happened

Polly Chromatic, a disabled U.S. citizen mother of four, formally submitted a complaint to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The complaint outlines a precise chronology of:

  • Denied written communication despite diagnosed vocal and respiratory disabilities

  • False accusations of mental illness when written accommodation was lawfully requested

  • Cancellation of vital asthma care

  • Disruption of medical routines and home education for four disabled U.S. citizen children

  • Retaliatory use of an Emergency Protection Order following the filing of a civil claim and a criminal referral

Two of the children were born in the Turks and Caicos Islands. All four are dual U.S.-U.K. citizens and documented with U.S. passports.

II. Why SWANK Logged It

Because this isn’t a safeguarding case.
It’s a disability discrimination case weaponised through child removal.

Westminster Children’s Services used:

  • Respiratory impairment as a justification for escalating surveillance

  • Voice limitations as a reason to reject communication

  • Civil litigation and lawful filings as a basis for seizure

It was not support. It was punishment.
And it has now been entered into the United Nations disability archive.

III. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That the U.K. failed to uphold reasonable accommodations under domestic and international law

  • That safeguarding mechanisms were used to retaliate against a disabled parent who filed claims

  • That the removal of Regal, Prerogative, Heir, and Kingdom constitutes a breach of:

    • Article 5 (Non-discrimination)

    • Article 9 (Accessibility)

    • Article 16 (Freedom from abuse)

    • Article 23 (Respect for family)

    • Article 25 (Health) of the CRPD

And that the velvet archive is watching. And filing. And sending copies to Geneva.

IV. SWANK’s Position

This submission marks the moment when the case of a disabled mother and her four unlawfully removed children left the borough and entered the international record.

SWANK London Ltd. does not simply blog grievances.
It crafts legal dispatches that cross oceans.

The mother was not chaotic — she was correct.
The communication wasn’t disorganised — it was denied.
And the retaliation is no longer local — it is now documented in Geneva.

⟡ 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: