“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 legal notification. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legal notification. Show all posts

You Were Told. You Just Thought She’d Stay Quiet.


⟡ They Said They Weren’t Warned. She Sent Them a Timeline. ⟡
If you can't remember your own misconduct, don't worry — she logged it for you.

Filed: 5 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/MULTI/EVIDENCE-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-05-05_SWANK_EvidenceIndex_UpdatedCorrespondenceSummary.pdf
An updated master correspondence summary detailing legal notifications, police reports, disability rights enforcement, safeguarding retaliation, and procedural misconduct sent across institutions — in sequence, in writing, and now, in public.

I. What Happened

Social workers claimed surprise.
Lawyers said “we weren’t aware.”
Institutions feigned ignorance.
So the mother compiled everything.
This index is the official correspondence map: it proves that she notified every actor, repeatedly, across multiple channels, months before escalation.

II. What the Record Establishes

  • That Westminster was made aware of N1 litigation, police reports, and medical restrictions

  • That multiple refusals, exemptions, and legal boundaries were issued in writing

  • That safeguarding escalations occurred after these warnings — not before

  • That formal complaints, claims, and refusal proxies were time-stamped and institutionally ignored

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because paper trails don’t lie — people do.
Because the only thing more dangerous than retaliation is pretending it’s concern.
And because when you say “we didn’t know,” this document becomes your rebuttal.

IV. Violations Identified

  • Disregard for Active Legal Proceedings (N1, Judicial Review)

  • Retaliation Despite Police Reporting and Documented Objection

  • Disability Rights Violations Despite Repeated Medical Evidence

  • Coercive Safeguarding with Full Knowledge of Civil Litigation

  • Institutional Evasion Through Feigned Unawareness

V. SWANK’s Position

There is no more benefit of the doubt.
This isn’t a complaint. It’s a ledger.
It was sent to them — now it’s published for you.
If they ever try to say “this is the first we’re hearing of it,”
point them here and respond:
No, darling — this is the last.

⟡ 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:

The Treatment Was Rude. The Record Is Immaculate.


⟡ SWANK Escalation Log – NHS, WCC & Legal Copy ⟡
“Maybe I Should Call the Police Next Time — or Just Bcc the Archive.”
Filed: 21 November 2024 (Escalated 22 November)
Reference: SWANK/NHS/STMARYS-ESCALATION-BODYCAM-FORWARD-01
📎 Download PDF – 2024-11-21_SWANK_NHS_StMarys_Escalation_Email_Forward_Reid_LegalCopy_BodyCamWarning.pdf
Author: Polly Chromatic

I. They Dismissed Me in A&E. So I Documented It — Then Forwarded It to Everyone They’re Afraid Of.

This email wasn’t an update.
It was an escalation.

Following a degrading visit to St Mary’s A&E, in which a disabled parent was disbelieved and her daughter’s emergency de-escalated by tone, this email:

  • Was sent to every relevant NHS, Council, and safeguarding lead

  • Copied both solicitors — creating a protected legal record

  • Reframed the interaction as not just negligent — but patterned, predictable, and litigable

It opens with restraint.
It closes with contempt.
And in between, it says: try it again, and I’ll wear a camera.

II. What This Escalation Achieves

  • Reasserts the disability adjustment in a multi-agency context

  • Documents the second doctor’s contrast to the first — showing that the system has choice, not excuse

  • Serves legal notification without the phrase “formal complaint”

  • Signals that the patient — and her advocate — will not tolerate silent abuse no matter how routine the NHS pretends it is

Let the record show:

The oxygen monitor was ignored.
The written adjustment was breached.
The patient was a child.
And the record grew longer by the hour.

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because forwarding the email was the real escalation.
Because when you say, “Maybe I should call the police,” and Bcc the archive instead — you’re documenting what courts call foreseeability.

We filed this because:

  • It formalised what the NHS tried to forget

  • It included every name they hoped you wouldn’t copy

  • And it made the lack of reply even more damning

Let the record show:

The first doctor ignored the child.
The second doctor knew better.
The mother responded in writing.
And SWANK sealed the escalation with typographic precision.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept that the standard of care is dictated by personality.
We do not accept that disbelief is a clinical method.
We do not accept that parents must request cameras to be treated like humans.

Let the record show:

They were warned.
They were copied.
They were read.
And SWANK — documented every recipient.

This wasn’t a flare-up.
It was a data point in a very elegant trend line — and the archive is plotting every one.

⟡ 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:

Documented Obsessions