20FL010940C

EX20 - 2026-03-27 - First DA Visitation Violation Filing

6 min read

Exhibit #20 — First DA Visitation Violation Filing (VV-0043769)

Description

DA Visitation Violation Report Case Number VV-0043769, filed by Charley with the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office, 330 W. Broadway, Suite 1220, San Diego, CA 92101. The report was completed and submitted under penalty of perjury on or about March 27, 2026, contemporaneous with the underlying refusal. It is the first of three DA visitation violation reports filed by Charley to date in this matter.

The report identifies:

  • Family Court Case: 20FL010940C, San Diego Central Courthouse, current visitation order dated 6/17/2022
  • Custody type: Joint legal custody, joint physical custody
  • Last contact with children at time of filing: Ella — 3/19/2026; Jack — 3/21/2026
  • Other DA filings reported: None at the time of this filing (this is the first)

The narrative section, sworn under penalty of perjury, states:

“On 3/27/2026, my court-ordered parenting week began at 7:45 AM (Case 20FL010940C). I attempted to pick up my son Jack Nibley (DOB 10/13/2016) at school. He was not there. The other parent, Jennifer Gustafson, refused via text to release Jack, stating she was keeping both children based on ‘medical guidance.’ She refused all phone calls. I went to her residence to complete the exchange and she refused to send Jack out and told me to leave. Jack’s location was unconfirmed. SDPD welfare check req.”

The report identifies the operative custody arrangement as a week-on/week-off schedule with Friday 7:45 AM school-start exchanges, and confirms that 3/27/2026 fell within Charley’s custodial week.

Strategic Relevance

This is the foundational refusal of the entire withholding pattern. Without EX20 in the vault, the documented withholding timeline begins on April 13 (EX08, the second DA report). With EX20, the pattern begins on March 27 — sixteen days earlier — at the precise moment Charley’s first post-Aurora-discharge custodial week was supposed to begin.

The 3/27 refusal is strategically significant for the following reasons:

  1. It anchors the timeline. Every subsequent refusal compounds on top of this one. The “10 refused custody days” tally cited in VV-0043929 (Father’s third DA report, filed re: 4/14 refusal) starts on 3/27. Establishing the start date precisely matters for any contempt proceeding under CCP §1218 and for any motion for restoration of parenting time under FC §3027.5.

  2. It contradicts Jennifer’s narrative timeline. Per Jennifer’s signed Opposition to Father’s Ex Parte Request (see EX13 - 2026-04-03 - Jennifer’s sworn allegations of child physical abuse), Aurora notified her at “approximately 1:00 p.m.” on 3/27 that Ella was being discharged. Per Jennifer’s ¶13, she then took both children to “ice cream, boba and go to Barnes and Noble.” Per the DA report (this exhibit), Charley arrived at school for the regular 3:00 PM after-school pickup of Jack. Jennifer had Jack with her on her unilateral excursion and refused to release him for Charley’s court-ordered exchange. The refusal was not a response to a clinical recommendation specific to Jack — it was a unilateral schedule modification Jennifer had already implemented before any clinician spoke about Jack’s care.

  3. It establishes the “medical guidance” representation that has never been substantiated. The DA report records, sworn under penalty of perjury, that Jennifer’s stated basis for refusing the exchange was unspecified “medical guidance.” She refused to identify the source. As of the date of this exhibit, no written safety plan naming Charley, no clinician’s letter restricting Charley’s parenting time, and no document of any kind from any provider has been produced corroborating this representation. The first invocation of “medical guidance” set the template for every subsequent refusal.

  4. It is a sworn government filing. Unlike text messages or contemporaneous notes, the DA report is a formal submission to a government agency, signed under penalty of perjury, dated, and on file. As primary evidence of Charley’s contemporaneous account of the 3/27 events, it carries different evidentiary weight than self-prepared declarations.

  5. The SDPD welfare check is independent corroboration. SDPD welfare check case E26030039602 was requested on 3/27 in connection with this same refusal — Charley sought police verification of Jack’s location after Jennifer refused to confirm where Jack was. The welfare check record is a separate piece of independent third-party documentation. It is contemplated as a potential separate exhibit pending records subpoena.

  6. It establishes contempt foundation. Civil contempt under CCP §1218 requires a valid order, knowledge of the order, ability to comply, and willful failure to comply. The DA report documents all four elements as to the 3/27 refusal: Jennifer was on notice of the operative custody order (she signed the underlying Stipulated Judgment); the Friday 7:45 AM exchange was a routine occurrence she had performed before; she had Jack physically present; and she refused to release him while citing only unsubstantiated grounds.

Strategic uses:

  • 5/1 FCS mediation. When the timeline of the withholding is contested, EX20 establishes the start date as a sworn matter of record.
  • 5/11 minor’s counsel hearing. Sara Davison’s independent investigation will benefit from receiving the full series of DA reports as documentary primary sources, alongside the underlying texts.
  • 6/1 RFO. Foundation for any contempt application, restoration order under FC §3027.5, or §3040 best-interests showing of which parent has demonstrated capacity to comply with court orders.
  • Confirm exact filing/submission date with DA’s office (timestamp of submission)
  • Subpoena SDPD welfare check record E26030039602 from San Diego Police Department
  • Consider building separate incident exhibit for 3/27 events, anchored to the texts of that day, for higher-resolution chronology
  • Consider building EX21 for VV-0043929 (third DA report, 4/14 incident) parallel to this exhibit and EX08

Cross-references

Graph View

Backlinks