20FL010940C

EX21 - 2026-04-14 - Third DA Visitation Violation Filing

6 min read

Exhibit #21 — Third DA Visitation Violation Filing (VV-0043929)

Description

DA Visitation Violation Report Case Number VV-0043929, filed by Charley with the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office on or about April 14, 2026, under penalty of perjury. It is the third of three DA visitation violation reports filed by Charley to date, and corresponds to the same underlying incident documented in EX10 - 2026-04-14 - Tenth refusal — Jack kept home from school.

The report identifies:

The custody-arrangement section, sworn under penalty of perjury, records:

“Parties share joint legal and physical custody per week-on/week-off schedule. Exchange occurs Fridays at school start time (7:45 AM). Per the custody schedule ordered by the court, effective August 5, 2022 (Stipulated Judgment entered June 17, 2022). 4/14/2026 falls within Respondent Charles Nibley’s (father’s) parenting week.”

The report records a contemporaneous 10-day refusal tally at the time of filing:

“She has refused 10 custody days in total: (March 27, March 28, March 29, March 30, March 31, April 1, April 2, April 4, April 13, and now April 14)”

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

“On 4/14/26 during Father’s custodial week, Father arrived at ESS at Rolling Hills Elementary at 3:00 PM to pick up son Jack. ESS staff said Jack was absent. Staff member Ashlyn O’Kane called mother Jennifer Nibley by phone in Father’s presence; also present were Samantha Fickentsher and JeVaye Sanders. Jennifer confirmed Jack was home with her. Father texted Jennifer at 3:08 PM; she replied ‘Jack is home with me.’ No prior notice given. No court order has modified the custody schedule.”

Strategic Relevance

This exhibit is the strongest single-event refusal documentation in the record because the refusal was witnessed by three independent third parties.

The 4/14 incident has a uniquely robust evidentiary footprint:

  1. Three named ESS witnesses. Ashlyn O’Kane, Samantha Fickentsher, and JeVaye Sanders — all employed by Poway Unified School District at Rolling Hills Elementary — were physically present when Charley arrived to attempt the pickup. This is unlike most refusals in the record, which are documented only through bilateral text messages between the parents.

  2. A third-party-witnessed phone admission. ESS staff member Ashlyn O’Kane placed an outbound call to Jennifer in Charley’s presence and the presence of two other staff. Jennifer admitted on that call that Jack was home with her. Three percipient witnesses can attest to that admission.

  3. A contemporaneous text confirmation of the same admission. Jennifer’s 3:08 PM reply — “Jack is home with me” — was captured in the parties’ text thread and is documented separately in EX10 - 2026-04-14 - Tenth refusal — Jack kept home from school. The text and the witnessed phone admission corroborate each other.

  4. Sworn government filing. Like EX08 and EX20, this is a formal submission to a government agency under penalty of perjury — different evidentiary character than self-prepared declarations.

The contemporaneous 10-day refusal tally is itself strategically valuable.

The list of refused custody days — sworn on 4/14/2026 — is a contemporaneous count, not a litigation-prepared retrospective. The dates listed correspond to Charley’s custodial weeks under the operative ¶¶24-25 schedule (3/27–4/2 = first refused week post-Aurora; 4/13 and 4/14 = first two refused days of the second refused week) plus 4/4 (the refused Easter-weekend offer to grandparents). The count establishes:

  • That Charley was tracking refused days in real time, not reconstructing them later
  • That the withholding pattern was continuous from 3/27 forward without any release of the children to Charley’s care
  • That the “tenth refusal” framing in EX10 is supported by Charley’s contemporaneous tally and not a post-hoc characterization

The pattern of three DA filings by Charley in 19 days is itself a fact.

VV-0043769 (3/27), VV-0043923 (4/13), and VV-0043929 (4/14) — three sworn government filings in 19 days — reflect three formal escalations with a state agency. A trier of fact assessing the FC §3040 - Order of Custody Preference best-interests question of which parent has demonstrated capacity to comply with court orders, or assessing FC §3027.5 - Restoration of Parenting Time restoration relief, will weigh this differently than three text complaints. The DA’s office has on file three separate sworn submissions, each requiring Charley to attest under penalty of perjury, each documenting a specific refused custody day.

Strategic uses:

  • Confirm exact filing/submission date with DA’s office (timestamp of submission)
  • Identify ESS staff full contact details / job titles for potential subpoena
  • Consider whether a fourth DA report should be filed for any subsequent refusals (4/15, 4/16, etc.) to maintain the documentary pattern
  • When all three DA reports are needed for a specific filing, consider obtaining certified copies via subpoena to: District Attorney’s Office, 330 W. Broadway, Suite 1220, San Diego, CA 92101

Cross-references

Graph View

Backlinks