special panel's report has disputed DeAvila-Silebi is charged with violating the judicial code of conduct by calling the police on a weekend and having a child transferred from one parent to another, and by her conduct in the investigation that followed.According to documents, the incident, in which DeAvila-Silebi allegedly assisted in having a child move the custody of the mother, occurred on May 9, 2015. DeAvila-Silebi called the Fort Lee Police Department and after explaining she was assigned to both Bergen and Passaic counties and was on emergent duty, arranged for the police to pick up the child. DeAvila-Silebi later told authorities she received a call on her cellphone from someone purporting to be an attorney detailing a court order related to a child custody agreement, but that the call turned out to come from an unidentified male using a phone belonging to the mother of the child, documents said.But the panel found that DeAvila-Sibeli's explanation was not true. DeAvila-Sibeli, according to the report, initially denied having a relationship with the mother, who had been a Superior Court judicial clerk. The special panel also found that, despite the judge's claims to the contrary, DeAvila-Silebi had been having ongoing conversations with the mother and exchanged at least 24 text messages with her.The special panel said DeAvila-Sibeli lied throughout the investigatory proceedings, "revising or embellishing it as necessary whenever she became aware of contrary evidence."The record appears to be replete with misstatements on the judge's part, the special panel said."It is also clear beyond a reasonable doubt that respondent was not on emergent duty on May 9, 2015. Although respondent's personal cell phone number was available to prosecutors, defense counsel and court staff ... there is no evidence that any attorney or court personnel ever called respondent on an emergent Family Part matter, or that respondent ever dealt with a child custody/parenting time dispute before in her judicial tenure," the report said."Moreover, respondent's conduct was inconsistent with the procedures outlined in the Emergent Duty Manual for the Family Part," it added.The Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct charged DeAvila-Silebi with engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, failing to conform to the high standards of conduct expected of judges, impugning the integrity of the judiciary, failing to avoid the appearance of impropriety and lending the prestige of her office to the benefit of another.DeAvila-Silebi was first nominated to the bench in 2008 and granted tenure in 2015.