Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta - Polysubstance enthusiast, "Lawtuber" turned Dabbleverse streamer, swinger, "whitebread ass nigga", snuffs animals for fun, visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold who lost his license to practice law. Wife's bod worth $50. The normies even know.

What would the outcome of the harassment restraining order be?

  • A WIN for the Toe against Patrick Melton.

    Votes: 62 15.5%

  • A WIN for the Toe against Nicholas Rekieta.

    Votes: 5 1.3%

  • A MAJOR WIN for the Toe, it's upheld against both of them.

    Votes: 101 25.3%

  • Huge L, felted, cooked etc, it gets thrown out.

    Votes: 71 17.8%

  • A win for the lawyers (and Kiwi Farms) because it gets postponed again.

    Votes: 161 40.3%
  • Total voters
    400
Slimy Time said:
You mean why would be people dislike a smugfag lawyer who openly admitted that he wanted to lessen the role of Kyle's lawyers in the trial because he didn't think they were very good, as well as generally being very salty? For as much as these panel of lawyers were "unimpressed" with Kyles lawyers, they got him off, which is what matters.
Click to expand...
Yes. 1) he's a lawyer so you should know coming in he's already all of those things. 2) Kyle's defense team was terrible. I'm glad he got off, incredibly glad he got off, but the judge was a better defense attorney for Kyle than his defense team was. Idk if you watch the trial or not but I'm fairly certain the judge made just as many if not more objections to the prosecution as Kyles lawyers did. The only reason Kyle got off was because the facts of the case were so overwhelmingly in his favor the case shouldn't have been tried in the first place.

Call Barnes w/e you want, he's not wrong at all about Kyle's defense team.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: Jub-Jub, Kosher Salt, Liber Pater and 4 others
Btw slightly off the current topic, but has any of these youtube lawyers done a proper rundown of the Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman trial? I was too young to have an interest in it at the time, but it sounds like another case where the actual events were heavily distorted by the media.
 
Not Even Twice said:
Btw slightly off the current topic, but has any of these youtube lawyers done a proper rundown of the Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman trial? I was too young to have an interest in it at the time, but it sounds like another case where the actual events were heavily distorted by the media.
Click to expand...
Andrew Branca aka The Self Defense guy seemed to have a lot of information on that Trial.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Kosher Salt, FlappyBat and Not Even Twice
Not Even Twice said:
Btw slightly off the current topic, but has any of these youtube lawyers done a proper rundown of the Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman trial? I was too young to have an interest in it at the time, but it sounds like another case where the actual events were heavily distorted by the media.
Click to expand...
That case was much different in that all the public had to go by were wildly varying stories from people who may or may not have been witnesses so the media was able to get away with spinning whatever narrative the network's respective audiences wanted to hear. There was no video that showed clearly everything that happened like this case. Here the media was lying to your face without caring that their lies were on display for all to see.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bush did USS Maine and Least Concern
Slimy Time said:
According to Roberts in that interview they did two mock juries in preparation for this trial. One without Kyle testifying and one with, and it showed that they had to put him on for the reason you said. No Wisconsin jury is going to acquit a murder charge without them putting the defendant on the stand. It was a calculated move that they had to do and it worked very well. For as much as this panel of expert lawyers sat there criticising the defence, that's easy to do when it isn't any of their asses in the spotlight doing the job. If they all had their way and didn't put him up on the stand, he would likely be in prison and we would be hearing about how pozzed this country is.

Apparently Barnes has gone on Fox news to say his piece or something like that.
Click to expand...
Not sure how one plays the mock jury game and emulate the shitshow prosecution.
Not Even Twice said:
Btw slightly off the current topic, but has any of these youtube lawyers done a proper rundown of the Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman trial? I was too young to have an interest in it at the time, but it sounds like another case where the actual events were heavily distorted by the media.
Click to expand...
I get the impression that rackets at least thinks the outcome was correct.
 
Edit: this post was more relevant when I thought they were fellow alumni, but it's still marginally interesting.

Nick's fellow law school alumnus:
Guy Padraic Hamilton-Smith
(archive)

sex offender listing
(archive)

He's tangentially related to that Old Dominion ftom tranny prof who advocates for paedo rights. Allyn Walker is the name.

There is more to dig if anyone cares. I haven't dug enough to see if they were classmates, which would be hilarious.

I jumped off from here.

Correction:
He's affiliated with Nick's alma mater, not an alumnus of it, it seems:
1637525562002.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Old Man Mario
SaidNoOneEver said:
The only person to appear on Rekieta's panel throughout the entire trial who got the "should Kyle testify" analysis right was QuarterPounder. Let that sink in. Hours upon hours of overthinking that issue when it really did just come down to no Wisconsin jury acquitting a murder charge without hearing from the defendant. Lawyers.
Click to expand...
Quarterton now claims his current house is 20 minutes from Kyle and keeps trying to get him over for Thanksgiving. He's offering time to play in his arcade room and they don't have to talk about the trial.

If he's not trying to get an interview it makes Jeremy sound like he's trying to smash that 18 year old bussy.

I'm happy Rackets has the sense to not try and suck off Kyle for an interview.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Least Concern and DelusionTree
Old Man Mario said:
Quarterton now claims his current house is 20 minutes from Kyle and keeps trying to get him over for Thanksgiving. He's offering time to play in his arcade room and they don't have to talk about the trial.

If he's not trying to get an interview it makes Jeremy sound like he's trying to smash that 18 year old bussy.

I'm happy Rackets has the sense to not try and suck off Kyle for an interview.
Click to expand...
I bet Kyle isn't even in Wisconsin anymore.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ditto, Wilhelm Bittrich, Getting tard comed and 2 others
Getting tard comed said:
Call Barnes w/e you want, he's not wrong at all about Kyle's defense team.
Click to expand...
Yes but he was wrong publicly to take an adverse opinion to what was arguably a former client, while he was facing life in prison, using insider information from his participation in the case to grift on it. He didn't technically represent either Rittenhouse, but any information he got was under circumstances where he should have been more circumspect in any public disclosure of information about the case, which was presumably given under circumstances where I'd think most people would think they were owed confidentiality.

There are valid reason a lawyer might seem less active than another, and arguably when the judge is doing your job for you and getting it on the record, you probably should object less, but I do remember a few things where an objection needed to be made to preserve it on appeal, but a jury is probably going to take a lawyer constantly jumping up like a jack-in-the-box to yell "Objection!" like Phoenix Wright less seriously than a judge doing the same thing.

In any event, while no lawyer involved in this case was a real ball of fire or anything, they were good enough, and that's good enough. Money morning quarterbacking can be fun but they couldn't have got a better result.

It was also clearly the right strategic decision to treat it like a criminal case where the prosecution had to prove it and lost if they didn't, rather than some giddy right-wing crusade.
FujiWuji said:
Rekieta and Barnes at Youtube.
Rekieta, when the superchats fell.
Barnes, his arms wide.

View attachment 2740681
Click to expand...
I always find it kind of douchey when someone poses their books with the covers outward to show the titles on TV/video. Even if one of them is by HST.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Blatant hypocrite, Kimchi4breakfast, ditto and 11 others
People clearly have a problem with Barnes beyond his conduct on this case, no matter how tangential it ended up being. Only person I've seen with convincing reasoning is AnOminous. For example saying he's wrong to take what he percieves as an adverse opinion to the defense strategy is perfectly valid. I wouldn't characterize it as "adverse" but at that point we're splitting hairs.


During a stream with Viva Frei at 17:34, Viva openly asks about the criticism lobbed at Barnes. I think people have been misattributing what he's said relating to the case. As someone who heard what he had to say before the trial started and now after, I can say that his positions have changed very little, if at all. And this is as someone who viewed his behavior during and surrounding the debate with Nick Fuentes to be super fucking gay for example. I think he can be a slimeball. But I think it's the wrong case to catch him flat-footed on.

One thing he brought up in that same stream is Richards behavior during a post trial interview was how he didn't say Rittenhouse was not guilty without qualifiers such as under the rule of law. It's another in a long line of decisions that make Richards like he doesn't care about his client. Even if he legit thinks that, you don't say it on fucking CNN. Another thing that he brought up (and has continually brought up through out the case) is David Hancock. All the people who cry about Barnes being only in it for himself sure are real fucking quiet about that guy. Even when there's legit criticism for Barnes, a majority of it on this site seem very disingenuous.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: FlappyBat, Roboute Guilliman, Jonah Hill poster and 5 others
quickthrowaway said:
Another thing that he brought up (and has continually brought up through out the case) is David Hancock. All the people who cry about Barnes being only in it for himself sure are real fucking quiet about that guy. Even when there's legit criticism for Barnes, a majority of it on this site seem very disingenuous.
Click to expand...
The only person I've seen even mention that name is Barnes, or at least he was the first to float it out there for everyone else to mention as if they have insider knowledge. I suspect when we do eventually hear from jurors they'll say the verdict hinged on Kyle's testimony meaning he'd be in prison right now if Barnes strategy had been used.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: GhostButt
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back