“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 homeschool harassment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label homeschool harassment. Show all posts

Chromatic v The Education Department That Never Wrote Down Its Own Policy – On the Tragedy of Being More Prepared Than the State


🎓 “Please Provide Me the Law, Since You Seem to Have Misplaced It.”

⟡ A Formal Letter to the Department of Education After Years of Harassment Over Lawful Homeschooling

IN THE MATTER OF: The Right to Educate, the Abuse of Authority, and the Extraordinary Harm Caused by Not Reading the Policy Before Making a Threat

⟡ METADATA

Filed: 5 August 2020
Reference Code: SWANK-TCI-EDUCATION-HOMESCHOOLING-DENIAL
Court File Name: 2020-08-05_Court_Letter_TCI_EducationDept_HomeschoolingDenial_AbuseSummary
Summary: This letter, sent to Edgar Howell (Director of Education, Turks and Caicos), is a formal, cutting response to three years of escalating threats, false truancy accusations, and unlawful safeguarding actions — despite full compliance with a legal homeschool arrangement approved since 2017. The letter recounts sexual abuse by hospital staff, illegal property entries, fabricated vaccination concerns, and the failure of multiple departments to read the actual legislation. It ends, with composed sarcasm, by asking for the very policy they claim was never followed — even though it was never provided.

I. What Happened

In June 2017, Polly Chromatic (then known as Noelle Bonneannée) met in person with Deputy Director Mark Garland and submitted her curriculum, degrees, and intent to homeschool. This was done with the full understanding that Garland was the correct authority. She continued submitting documentation yearly.

Despite this, she was:

  • Accused of truancy in public by a truancy officer yelling at her in a grocery store

  • Repeatedly visited by social workers without reports or legal reason

  • Forced to submit her children to invasive hospital “examinations” — including genital inspection

  • Subjected to warrantless entry, even during COVID lockdown, in violation of emergency laws

  • Blamed for not speaking to “the right person” despite having never been told who that was

  • Threatened again in 2020, three years after full compliance, with having her children taken

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That no policy was ever provided, even after direct request

  • That the Department of Education and Department of Social Development coordinated unlawful threats

  • That social workers fabricated medical concerns (non-vaccination) and used them as pretext for repeated trauma

  • That the Complaints Commission acted not as a mediator, but a fresh source of coercion

  • That officials repeatedly shifted blame rather than acknowledge a departmental failure to document or communicate correctly

  • That the family’s trauma is not incidental — it is the direct result of bureaucratic laziness and safeguarding theatre

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because this letter proves that even in the face of institutional incompetence, the mother followed every rule. Because asking for “the policy” after three years of harassment is not a formality — it’s a slap in the face. Because “talked to the wrong person” is not a legal defence. Because no one should have to endure forced sexualised exams of their children while the department argues over who was CC’d. Because safeguarding without records is not oversight — it’s an excuse to trespass.

IV. Violations

  • Failure to provide written homeschool policy or legal process

  • Accusation of truancy despite full compliance

  • Sexual assault of minors in clinical setting without lawful grounds

  • Warrantless entry during a national pandemic

  • Threats of removal based on bureaucratic blame-shifting

  • Retaliatory conduct under the guise of safeguarding

  • Procedural negligence at the Department of Education, Social Development, and the Complaints Commission

V. SWANK’s Position

We log this document as a formal indictment of every public official who forgot how laws work. SWANK London Ltd. affirms:

  • That providing documentation in 2017 should not result in threats in 2020

  • That truancy cannot be claimed when no policy was ever disclosed

  • That trauma inflicted during “examinations” cannot be undone with apologies

  • That when a mother is asked to be both the educator and the administrator, the state has failed

  • And that the most dangerous thing about safeguarding misuse is not the action — it’s the delusion of authority without law

⟡ 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:

Chromatic v The Department That Read Her Trauma Like a To-Do List – On the Weaponisation of Acknowledgment Without Action


“Thank You for Acknowledging the Timeline. Your Resignation Will Suffice.”

⟡ An Email Acknowledgment That Managed to Say Nothing While Admitting Everything

IN THE MATTER OF: The art of the polite fob-off, safeguarding gaslighting, and the gall of asking for trust after years of trauma

⟡ METADATA

Filed: 21 July 2020
Reference Code: SWANK-TCI-ACKNOWLEDGMENT-EMPTY
Court File Name: 2020-07-21_Records_AshleyAdamsAcknowledgesComplaintAndTimeline
Summary: After 3.5 years of illegal investigations, forced hospital visits, statutory breaches, surveillance-level visits, and refusal to provide required reports, Polly Chromatic submitted a legally grounded 12-page timeline and complaint. Ashley Adams-Forbes responded with a polite email: vague praise, non-answers, a week-long delay, and an emotionally manipulative suggestion that Polly didn’t need to “prove herself” — after three years of being required to do exactly that. This email is a masterclass in professional deflection and safeguarding delusion.

I. What Happened

After submitting a trauma-documented, statute-cited timeline and asking very reasonable questions like “What is the purpose of this investigation?”, Polly Chromatic received this tidy email in return. It offered no substantive reply, no answers to her questions, and no mention of the statutory breaches outlined. Instead, the Deputy Director apologised for not responding sooner, thanked her for the clarification, and requested a week’s time to reply — a reply that never came in the form of meaningful action.

II. What the Email Confirms

  • That the Department received and read a comprehensive complaint and timeline

  • That it recognised its delay in responding

  • That it failed to address any of the key statutory breaches, including:

    • §17(6) of the Children Ordinance 2015 (case report requirement)

    • Emergency COVID-19 laws violated during visits

    • Homeschool protection under the Education Ordinance

  • That it attempted to dismiss the record as unnecessary over-proving — despite having asked for exactly that in prior emails

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because when an institution responds to trauma with performative empathy, someone must document the duplicity. Because “thank you for proving your trauma in excessive detail” is not a compliment — it’s an indictment. Because a week of silence after 3.5 years of harassment is not resolution — it’s bureaucratic amnesia. And because no public official should ever tell a traumatised mother that she needn’t prove herself after requiring her to email her credentials, CV, income, and medical records for years.

IV. Violations

  • Negligent case oversight

  • Emotional gaslighting disguised as empathy

  • Refusal to produce case outcome reports

  • Deflection of legal responsibility

  • Failure to provide clear investigation purpose or closure

  • Violation of education rights and homeschooling protections

  • Disability-based harassment and retaliation

V. SWANK’s Position

We log this as an example of the government’s strategy of smile-drenched sabotage. SWANK London Ltd. affirms:

  • That acknowledgment without remedy is still abuse

  • That professional-sounding emails are not a substitute for lawful behaviour

  • That telling a mother she doesn’t have to prove herself — after demanding her CV — is insulting

  • That a 12-page complaint does not require “a week to draft a letter” — it requires an immediate apology and institutional reform

  • That this response is best placed in a file titled “How to Say Nothing After 3 Years of Everything”

⟡ 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:

Chromatic v The State That Forgot Its Own Policy – On the Absurdity of Having to Hire a Lawyer to Prove You Were Obeying the Law


“Is There a Homeschooling Policy — or Just a Game of Institutional Telephone?”

⟡ An Email to Legal Counsel After Three Years of Complying with the Wrong Person’s Instructions

IN THE MATTER OF: Truancy lies, safeguarding retaliation, unlawful entry, and the constitutional right to not be shouted at in a grocery store

⟡ METADATA

Filed: 6 August 2020
Reference Code: SWANK-TCI-HOMESCHOOL-LEGALCONSULT
Court File Name: 2020-08-06_Records_LaraMaroofHomeschoolingDispute
Summary: This email documents a mother’s attempt to secure legal help after three years of harassment for “noncompliance” — despite having followed the exact directions she was given by the Department of Education. It outlines harassment by the truancy officer, invasive safeguarding visits based on fabrications, and repeated demands to comply with procedures that were never written down. It is the moment Polly Chromatic stopped playing nice with a state that couldn’t remember who told her what — and began formally preparing to sue.

I. What Happened

Polly Chromatic (then legally Noelle Bonneannée) wrote to Lara Maroof after being:

  • Approved to homeschool in 2017 by Mark Garland, Deputy Director of Education

  • Harassed by Mr. Kennedy, a truancy officer, who screamed at her in a supermarket and came to her home

  • Forced into multiple hospital visits for fabricated vaccination “concerns”

  • Witness to her sons being sexually examined in front of nine adults — including her and her mother

  • Repeatedly subjected to property invasion, including fence dismantling and COVID lockdown trespass

  • Told by the Complaints Commission that she had spoken to “the wrong person” for three years

  • Accused again of truancy — despite following all instructions from the Department of Education

  • Denied access to any written policy or standardised form for homeschooling compliance

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That Mark Garland explicitly approved the homeschool plan and received all documents requested

  • That despite this, Polly was threatened by the Complaints Commission with child removal

  • That officials cited Edgar Howell’s instructions, yet Polly had never been contacted by him

  • That each department contradicted the last, creating a never-ending paper chase for “compliance”

  • That Polly was not simply accused of truancy — she was shamed, interrogated, and retraumatised for an education plan she was invited to pursue

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because this is not homeschooling — this is harassment. Because an education department that forgets who approved your plan is not a department, it’s a liability. Because “we changed the policy” is not a lawful reason to dismantle someone’s fence. Because shouting “TRUANT” in a grocery store is not oversight — it’s defamation. And because this email proves what every legal advocate eventually proves: compliance does not protect you when the state can’t remember what it asked for.

IV. Violations

  • Failure to provide written policy despite repeated requests

  • Contradictory legal guidance between departments

  • Retaliation for following homeschool procedures

  • Trespass during COVID-19 lockdown

  • Fabricated truancy threat despite lawful compliance

  • Medical abuse of minors in clinical setting

  • Defamation and intimidation by public officials

V. SWANK’s Position

We log this correspondence as a polite declaration of war. SWANK London Ltd. affirms:

  • That any mother who follows the instructions of a deputy director is in compliance

  • That removing children for “noncompliance” when no standard exists is unlawful

  • That abuse under the guise of safeguarding is still abuse

  • That institutional forgetfulness is not a procedural justification — it’s a civil claim

  • And that this email is not just a plea for help — it is the beginning of legal reckoning

⟡ 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:

Chromatic v Tyranny in Disguise – On the Unforgivable Weaponisation of Safeguarding Against an Educated Mother


 “My Children Deserve Better Than This Government”

⟡ A 10-Page Petition Detailing Safeguarding Abuse, State Harassment, Medical Assault, and Constitutional Erosion

IN THE MATTER OF: Systemic incompetence, sexualised medical violence, lawful homeschooling, and the state’s deep confusion about how laws work

⟡ METADATA

Filed: 15 July 2020
Reference Code: SWANK-TCI-HRC-FINALPETITION
Court File Name: 2020-07-15_Records_HRCComplaintSocialDevelopmentAbuseAndRightsViolations
Summary: This final, exhaustive petition to the Human Rights Commission outlines 3.5 years of harassment by the Department of Social Development. It details unlawful investigations, medical abuse of children, constitutional breaches, homeschooling sabotage, disability discrimination, trespass during COVID lockdown, and the state’s absolute inability to articulate the legal basis of its interference. It is statutorily referenced, medically supported, and completely devastating.

I. What Happened

After obtaining full legal approval to homeschool her children, Polly Chromatic (then Noelle Bonneannée) endured a multi-year campaign of safeguarding “concern” that involved:

  • Sexual assault of her sons on hospital exam tables in front of 9 adults

  • Illegal trespass on private property during the COVID lockdown

  • Unlawful demands to forcibly retract her children’s foreskin

  • Yelling through her windows

  • Entering her home without notice

  • Ignoring her formal complaints and medical documentation

  • Refusing to close an investigation or provide the mandatory written report

Despite following every procedure, submitting every curriculum, and responding to every demand, she and her children remained targeted. This petition exposes every part of that misconduct.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That TCI’s Children Ordinance 2015 §17(6) mandates that parents receive investigation reports — which never occurred

  • That the Emergency Powers (COVID-19) Regulations were violated by social workers entering private property during lockdown

  • That the Department of Social Development caused emotional and psychological abuse through medical misconduct and invasive, erratic visits

  • That constitutional rights were violated in no fewer than 11 categories, including:

    • Right to family life

    • Protection from inhuman treatment

    • Right to education

    • Freedom of conscience and belief

    • Freedom from discrimination

    • Protection of property and private life

  • That the state failed to follow its own laws, ignored documentation, and repeatedly disrupted the wellbeing of a thriving, legally protected homeschool family

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because when safeguarding becomes sexual abuse, someone must file it. Because the law exists to protect children — not to harass their mothers. Because composting toilets are not child endangerment. Because quoting §17(6) for the sixth time in six months is not “excessive” — it’s survival. And because this petition proves, with chilling clarity, that the government of Turks and Caicos was not protecting a family — it was dismantling one.

IV. Violations

  • Statutory breach of Children Ordinance 2015 §17(6)

  • Violation of Education Ordinance 2009

  • Violation of Emergency Powers (COVID-19) Regulations

  • Unlawful trespass

  • Sexual assault of children by medical staff

  • Disability discrimination (eosinophilic asthma)

  • Procedural harassment and emotional trauma

  • 11 direct constitutional rights violations

  • Misuse of safeguarding to enforce cultural conformity

V. SWANK’s Position

We log this petition as a constitutional masterpiece. SWANK London Ltd. affirms:

  • That this case is not about protection — it is about persecution

  • That forcing foreskin retraction is not “cultural difference” — it is abuse

  • That social workers yelling through windows during a pandemic are not acting in anyone’s best interest

  • That quoting 10 laws in 10 pages is not excess — it is defence

  • That this document belongs in a law school textbook titled “What Happens When the State Forgets Its Place”

⟡ 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:

Chromatic v The Banality of Harm – On the Legal Cost of Homeschooling in a State That Fears Intelligence


🕊️ When the State Forgets the Law, the Mother Files a Petition

⟡ A Human Rights Complaint Concerning Safeguarding Abuse, Medical Assault, and the Criminalisation of Lawful Homeschooling

IN THE MATTER OF: Harassment Masquerading as Oversight, Circumcision Coercion, and the Deep Stupidity of Ignoring a Woman with Degrees

⟡ METADATA

Filed: 15 July 2020
Reference Code: SWANK-TCI-HRC-HOMESCHOOL-HARASSMENT
Court File Name: 2020-07-15_Court_Petition_HRC_TCI_Homeschooling_Harassment_DisabilityAbuse
Summary: Submitted to the Turks and Caicos Human Rights Commission, this petition chronicles 3.5 years of illegal surveillance, state trespass, child abuse by medical professionals, circumcision coercion, harassment of a lawful homeschool family, and direct violations of constitutional rights. It cites TCI legislation, COVID emergency law, NHS medical guidance, and a full timeline of state intrusion — while remaining calm, clinical, and lethal.

I. What Happened

After obtaining full legal approval to homeschool her children, Polly Chromatic (then known as Noelle Bonneannée) endured 3.5 years of state surveillance, unlawful entry, police-assisted removals, and abuse disguised as medical "safeguarding." Her children were subjected to sexualised examinations in front of multiple adults. Her home was repeatedly entered without warrant. Her son’s foreskin became the subject of unsolicited state advice. Social workers shouted through her windows, ignored medical documentation, and trespassed during COVID lockdowns.

This petition is not just a complaint — it is a constitutional record of state misconduct so detailed it should be printed on vellum and sealed in a climate-controlled vault.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That the Department of Social Development repeatedly acted outside the bounds of the Children Ordinance 2015

  • That social workers violated COVID Emergency Powers by entering private property without cause

  • That the family experienced medical and emotional abuse as a direct result of safeguarding misapplication

  • That homeschooling was lawfully approved but continuously treated as deviant

  • That constitutional rights under the Turks and Caicos Bill of Rights were repeatedly violated, including:

    • Protection from inhuman treatment

    • Protection of private and family life

    • Protection of education rights

    • Freedom of conscience and religion

    • Protection from discrimination

  • That the family’s environmental and health-conscious lifestyle was treated as suspicious rather than responsible

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because this is what a human rights petition should look like — unimpeachable, irrefutable, and embarrassing for the state. Because “safeguarding” should not be a loophole for authoritarian interference. Because social workers who confuse composting with child abuse need to be held legally and intellectually accountable. Because when your child is sexually examined without consent during a pandemic, your next move should absolutely be a 10-page legal document filed with a Commission. And because this family deserves not only justice — but precedent.

IV. Violations

  • Breach of Children (Care and Protection) Ordinance, 2015

  • Violation of Emergency Powers (COVID-19) Regulations

  • Breach of Education Ordinance, 2009

  • Multiple constitutional violations under the TCI Bill of Rights

  • Medical abuse and coercion

  • Procedural harassment, trespass, and unlawful investigation

  • Failure to provide lawful written outcome reports despite statutory mandate

V. SWANK’s Position

We log this petition as a master record of principled resistance. SWANK London Ltd. affirms:

  • That no government department has the right to reframe lawful parenting as deviance

  • That trauma inflicted by a doctor with state authority is not “routine” — it is criminal

  • That when safeguarding becomes indistinguishable from surveillance, it ceases to be protection

  • That quoting ten laws in ten pages is not overkill — it’s a shield

  • And that this family — despite repeated abuse — remained lawful, educated, dignified, and correct

⟡ 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:

Chromatic v Gossip – On the Weaponisation of Neighbourhood Pettiness and the State’s Willing Participation


🚧 The Fence Was Not the Problem — Your Job Performance Was

⟡ A Formal Complaint Regarding False Reports, Pandemic Recklessness, and the Spectacular Failure to Discern a Well-Run Home from Gossip

IN THE MATTER OF: Investigations That Won’t End, Reports That Shouldn’t Have Begun, and the Invisible Line Between Safeguarding and Harassment

⟡ METADATA

Filed: 13 July 2020
Reference Code: SWANK-TCI-FALSE-REPORTS-COVID-RISK
Court File Name: 2020-07-13_Records_AshleyAdamsComplaintFalseReportsAndCOVIDRisk
Summary: A formal, incisive, and morally immaculate letter to the Department of Social Development, requesting that someone finally do their job with logic, medical literacy, and a basic sense of proportion. Written during the COVID-19 pandemic, this document calls out: false allegations, pandemic violations, sexist communication routes, neighbour-instigated state harm, and the exhausting absurdity of being punished for homeschooling brilliantly.

I. What Happened

After a year-long "investigation" sparked by a tantrum-prone fence-builder and a hostile Airbnb host named Jenny, Polly Chromatic (then using her legal name) was still being monitored without plan, outcome, or lawful process. Despite having no safeguarding concerns of merit, officials continued to drop in, interrupt homeschooling, and — in one outrageous instance — trespassed on her property during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite her medical condition and clear objection. This letter lays it all out: calmly, precisely, and without one wasted word.

II. What the Complaint Establishes

  • That the initiating reports were fabricated and retaliatory, based on petty neighbour feuds

  • That the children were (and are) fully vaccinated, lawfully educated, and thriving

  • That the department failed to issue any written outcome or plan over a full year of “investigation”

  • That gendered disrespect occurred, with professionals avoiding direct dialogue with the mother in favour of speaking to her husband

  • That pandemic-era safety protocols were flagrantly ignored, putting the mother at serious medical risk

  • That the family’s peaceful, routine-centred homeschooling was repeatedly disrupted with no justification

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because this letter is the paper equivalent of a velvet restraining order against nonsense. Because one should not need to explain to a government department that gossip isn’t evidence, asthma isn’t optional, and children waving to neighbours is not a cause for alarm. Because if a social worker cannot distinguish abuse from compost, routine from risk, or privacy from pathology — they have no business being in the field.

IV. Violations

  • Procedural abuse: failure to close or clarify an open “case” after 12 months

  • Disability discrimination: entering the home of a clinically vulnerable person during COVID against consent

  • Gender bias: repeatedly bypassing the mother in official communication

  • Safeguarding theatre: treating a functioning home as suspicious because it lacked conventional aesthetics

  • Emotional harm: persistent disruption of children’s educational routine based on nothing but rumour

V. SWANK’s Position

We log this complaint as a master record of bureaucratic trespass and maternal restraint. SWANK London Ltd. affirms:

  • That safeguarding is not a replacement for common sense

  • That a mother with four vaccinated children and a compost bin is not the crisis here

  • That repeatedly entering the home of someone with severe asthma during a pandemic is both dangerous and demented

  • And that if your system allows one neighbour to trigger 12 months of state interference with no findings, then your system is the safeguarding concern

⟡ 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:

When Law is Ignored and Mothers Are Not


⟡ SWANK Dispatch to the Human Rights Commission ⟡

A Documented Plea from the Architect of Her Own Sovereignty
15 July 2020

The Education They Feared Was Mine

I. The Official Petition They Chose to Dismiss

A mother—Polly Chromatic, lawfully authorised to homeschool by the Department of Education on 26 June 2017—was not persecuted for wrongdoing. She was persecuted for independence.

For three and a half years, she and her children were harassed under the grotesque guise of child “protection” by the Turks and Caicos Department of Social Development (DSD).

Their real grievance?
She refused to relinquish her children to the custody of unqualified, intrusive agents of the state.

And what did the state do in response?

  • Sanctioned sexual assault on her sons in a public exam room while she vocally objected.

  • Pushed harmful genital practices, in defiance of NHS medical standards and global human rights norms.

  • Illegally entered her property—seven times—with no warrant, no cause, and no consequence.

  • Violated lockdown protocols, endangering her life as a medically vulnerable person with eosinophilic asthma.

  • Demanded repeated “proof” of legitimacy—educational credentials, financial records, curriculum—submissions which were repeatedly ignored.

II. The Legal Framework They Pretended Not to Know

The following legislation was disregarded with bureaucratic arrogance:

  • Children (Care and Protection) Ordinance 2015: Mandates delivery of investigation reports to parents. None were ever given.

  • Education Ordinance 2009: Clearly permits homeschooling when authorised. Her approval was on record.

  • Emergency Powers (COVID-19) Regulations 2020: Barred non-urgent property entry. They entered anyway—no masks, no distancing, no justification.

Polly’s severe eosinophilic asthma, a medically documented condition, was treated not with caution, but contempt.

III. The Rights They Trampled Without Hesitation

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

  • Right to Life – Her condition was ignored, her exposure maximised.

  • Freedom of Conscience and Religion – Her environmental and health practices were mocked.

  • Right to Education – Homeschooling was treated as deviance, not lawful choice.

  • Protection from Discrimination – Based on cultural, medical, and educational identity.

  • Right to Private and Family Life – Her home became a revolving door for harassment.

  • Protection from Inhuman Treatment – The state humiliated, endangered, and punished.

  • Lawful Administrative Action – No hearings. No reports. No process. Just intrusion.

IV. The Timeline of Surveillance, Submission, and Refusal

📅 November 2016 – July 2020:

  • Repeated curriculum submissions and academic documentation

  • Verified credentials: BA, MA

  • Police reports filed and discarded

  • Warrantless property invasions

  • State-enabled hospital violations

  • COVID-19 threats to health and life

  • A constellation of unanswered, archived, and ignored correspondence

All documented.
All dismissed.
All damning.


© SWANK Archive. All Patterns Reserved.
This petition is not forgotten. It is refiled eternally in the court of memory.

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: