Singer Jack Avery Faces Off in Court With Influencer Ex Accused of Dark Web Plot to Kill Him

Singer Jack Avery, known for his role in the boy band Why Don’t We, appeared in a Los Angeles courtroom this week alongside Gabriela Gonzalez, a TikTok influencer and his former partner, in a case involving a dark web murder-for-hire scheme. Gonzalez, along with her father Francisco Gonzalez and another ex-boyfriend, Kai Cordrey, is accused of conspiring to eliminate Avery, allegedly viewing him as an obstacle in their ongoing custody battle over their seven-year-old daughter.

The court proceedings unveiled a complex web of allegations, with prosecutors asserting that between late 2020 and mid-2021, Gonzalez repeatedly expressed a desire to have Avery killed. According to legal filings, she enlisted Cordrey’s help to hire a hit man via the dark web, utilizing Bitcoin payments to facilitate the transaction. The complaint details that Francisco Gonzalez provided $10,000 to Cordrey in April 2021 to secure a contract killer, with the purported scheme involving communications with a dark web account named “LizardKing69.”

Testimony from Cody Clayburn, another former partner of Gonzalez, illuminated the tense dynamics surrounding the case. Clayburn recounted how he first became aware of the plot after an FBI raid in November 2022 at his Hawaii residence, where he lived with Gonzalez. Following the raid, Gonzalez allegedly admitted to him that Cordrey had been obsessed with her and involved in a plan to harm Avery, mentioning cryptocurrency payments and expressing fear of incarceration if authorities accessed her phone.

The hearing marked the first time Avery and Gonzalez faced each other in court since her arrest in May 2023, when all three defendants pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy to commit murder, attempted murder, and solicitation of murder. Avery is seeking an extension of his domestic violence restraining order against Gonzalez, which also restricts her contact with their daughter pending the outcome of the criminal case.

Court testimony further revealed a fraught history of child custody disputes, with allegations that Gonzalez’s family disparaged Avery in front of the child and manipulated circumstances to limit his visitation rights. Clayburn described episodes in which Gonzalez allegedly interfered with Avery’s communication with their daughter and engaged in deceptive practices around COVID-19 testing. His mother, Paige Clayburn, corroborated some of these claims, testifying about instances where Gonzalez attempted to obstruct video calls between Avery and the child.

The custody conflict intensified as Gonzalez reportedly arranged to foster another child while continuing to care for Avery’s daughter, leading to involvement by child welfare officials in Hawaii. Clayburn testified that Gonzalez left the state with the child without informing him, prompting authorities to reassign custody. These details underscore the contentious nature of the family dispute intertwined with the criminal allegations.

Defense attorneys have challenged the prosecution’s narrative, highlighting a lack of direct evidence linking Gonzalez to the operational aspects of the murder-for-hire plot. They emphasized that much of the incriminating information stems from statements made by Cordrey, a co-defendant whose motives may include shifting blame. Francisco Gonzalez’s legal representation has criticized the prosecution’s portrayal of the case as exaggerated and misleading, asserting the importance of a fair trial.

In contrast, prosecutors argue that the accused escalated their conflict from legal battles over custody to orchestrating a violent scheme to permanently remove Avery. They point to recorded communications, cryptocurrency transactions, and undercover FBI involvement as evidence of the conspiracy. The case remains active, with ongoing hearings examining not only the criminal charges but also the sensitive issue of parental rights and child welfare.

As proceedings continue, the court must balance the gravity of the allegations with the best interests of the child caught in the center of this dispute. The outcome of this high-profile case will have significant implications for all parties involved, highlighting the intersection of family conflict, criminal justice, and the challenges faced by public figures in the digital age.