Jack Avery blocks Gabbie Gonzalez’s sudden request to see their daughter

Jack Avery has formally opposed his ex‑partner Gabbie Gonzalez’s latest bid to gain visitation and video‑call access to their seven‑year‑old daughter, Lavender.

The request comes amid a criminal protective order that bars any contact, a measure that Avery says was put in place after authorities alleged Gonzalez plotted to have him killed. With the custody case slated for trial on October 20‑21, Avery insists there is no emergency that warrants changing the current arrangement.

The lawsuit’s filings show that Gonzalez, a TikTok influencer and former member of the group “Why Don’t We,” has sought to restore ties with Lavender. Avery argues that the protective order remains necessary to safeguard his child and maintain stability.

He stresses that Lavender is thriving under his care, attending school, playing with friends, and participating in extracurricular activities.

## Background & Context

Gonzalez was arrested four months ago on charges related to a murder‑for‑hire plot targeting Avery. Prosecutors allege she conspired with her father, Francisco Gonzalez, and an unnamed accomplice to have him killed. She has pleaded not guilty to the accusations.

Court documents indicate that a judge denied her request for parenting time in July, .

The protective order was issued after allegations surfaced that Gonzalez had spoken negatively about Avery around Lavender. Two women—Avery’s former girlfriend Alexis Abner and former foster mother Shelly Woodcox—filed declarations with the court.

Shelly reported that Lavender initially blamed Avery for her mother’s arrest, refusing to speak with him and claiming it was “his fault.” Abner said she personally heard Gonzalez make disparaging remarks about Avery in front of Lavender and expressed concern that renewed contact could confuse or distress the child.

## What People Are Saying

Avery maintains that there is no immediate danger to Lavender and that the existing protective order adequately protects her. He urges the judge to deny Gonzalez’s request, asserting that any change could disrupt Lavender’s routine and well‑being. “Lavender is happy, healthy, and thriving in my care,” Avery told court officials.

“We are finally at peace after living in fear since learning about the alleged plot.”

Shelly Woodcox echoed these concerns, saying that allowing Gonzalez to interact with Lavender now would violate the protective order and potentially destabilize her daughter’s emotional health.

She highlighted her observation of Lavender’s earlier refusal to communicate with Avery, framing it as evidence that the child associates her mother’s arrest with Avery.

Alexis Abner added that she heard Gonzalez criticize Avery in front of Lavender, and she worries that re‑establishing contact could re‑introduce confusing narratives for the child. Both women support Avery’s stance against granting visitation until the upcoming trial resolves the underlying custody dispute.