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.

[TheClappening]

Nick popped in on Branca's verdict watch.

Manslaughter.

About what I was expecting.

Probably an incorrect reading of the law and facts, but that's a jury for you.

 

[Dambusters' Dog II]

I'd say plonking your ballbag into your wife's pussy using a device that looks at home in a medieval torture exhibit, possibly modeled after the way various animals "knot", is pretty humiliating and emasculating as it is without confirmation of him being a cuck. So, therefore, with Drexel and all that, I'd assume he's a cuck from that but no hard evidence so far.

He is a cuck by preponderance of the evidence, but not beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[Captain Manning]

Manslaughter.

About what I was expecting.

Probably an incorrect reading of the law and facts, but that's a jury for you.

Hell, I thought we were headed towards an acquittal. Past cases have shown that convicting cops in line-of-duty shootings is hard.

I see Branca ain't happy. LOL.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

I see Branca ain't happy. LOL.

I just skipped to see the verdict, but I see this is yet another case where Branca insists that the trial judge got the jury instructions totally wrong.

 

[Captain Manning]

I just skipped to see the verdict, but I see this is yet another case where Branca insists that the trial judge got the jury instructions totally wrong.

I didn't see that part. The part I saw was Branca insisting the jury acting "irrationally." Which I take to mean he's just MATI.

As a legal argument, "no rational jury would have found the defendant guilty" is an extremely high bar to clear after a jury does exactly that. It's why instances of "judgement nothwithstanding the verdict (JNOV)" are so incredibly rare.

 

[TheClappening]

Hell, I thought we were headed towards an acquittal. Past cases have shown that convicting cops in line-of-duty shootings is hard.

I see Branca ain't happy. LOL.

I agree with the panel that this is probably a compromise verdict, with hardline murder jurors and hardline acquittal jurors meeting in the middle. The way the law works, it's either intentional murder, or an acquittal by self defense, since either precludes a reckless homicide.

Looks like the jury will be deciding his sentence, so if he receives an unusually low sentence, or the median between minimum and maximum, we'll know.

 

[AnOminous]

I didn't see that part. The part I saw was Branca insisting the jury acting "irrationally." Which I take to mean he's just MATI.

As a legal argument, "no rational jury would have found the defendant guilty" is an extremely high bar to clear after a jury does exactly that. It's why instances of "judgement nothwithstanding the verdict (JNOV)" are so incredibly rare.

That's an argument to be made in a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The judge can overrule the jury and acquit in such a case (but not the opposite for obvious reasons). I don't know if the defense did that, but they should have, because it gives another ground for appeal, i.e. the judge got the jury instructions wrong, but even if not, the jury was irrational and the judge was incorrect to deny the JNOV.

I was never particularly attached to one side or another of this case but I do think I was right the issue was nowhere near as clear a call as some people seemed to think.

The way the law works, it's either intentional murder, or an acquittal by self defense, since either precludes a reckless homicide.

They can't find him guilty of something that isn't on the jury sheet, so clearly the prosecution made this available to them with a lesser-included offense instruction or something similar (instead of going for broke and giving them only a murder or acquittal option).

 

[TheClappening]

They can't find him guilty of something that isn't on the jury sheet, so clearly the prosecution made this available to them with a lesser-included offense instruction or something similar (instead of going for broke and giving them only a murder or acquittal option).

I'm trying to remember, during Rittenhouse wasn't it practice in WI for the defendant to consent to lesser includeds? You have a lower chance of getting the worst verdict, but also a lower chance of simply being acquitted.

Wonder if that was the case here.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm trying to remember, during Rittenhouse wasn't it practice in WI for the defendant to consent to lesser includeds? You have a lower chance of getting the worst verdict, but also a lower chance of simply being acquitted.

Wonder if that was the case here.

Usually you want that if you're guilty (or just scared). It can turn into brinksmanship. Also the defense can request such an instruction. In either case, the judge can reject it if there's no evidence the defendant is guilty only of the lesser included offense. It's not a purely discretionary decision, so such requests are usually granted.

In any event, manslaughter does not seem "irrational" to me. I do think an intentional murder conviction would be, because there's nothing in the record even suggesting he just decided out of the blue to murder someone, or even that he didn't sincerely believe he was in danger.

However, there's very strong public policy that not every police encounter involving a lawfully armed person should end with someone dead.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

I didn't see that part. The part I saw was Branca insisting the jury acting "irrationally." Which I take to mean he's just MATI.

As a legal argument, "no rational jury would have found the defendant guilty" is an extremely high bar to clear after a jury does exactly that. It's why instances of "judgement nothwithstanding the verdict (JNOV)" are so incredibly rare.

"I could understand if the jury was misled by the mis-instruction on self-defense" is what he said right after the judge polled the jury.

Not sure what the beef was because I haven't been watching.

But I find it hilarious every time one of Branca's takes gets BTFOed by a judge. The best was when he got into a debate with Nate the Lawyer about the Arbery case last year. I recall Branca got super pissy about how Nate didn't know what he was talking about, only for the the judge to basically end up at the same place Nate was. That dispute resulted in Branca acting seething towards Nate for quite some time afterward.

Not saying he isn't an expert, but he often has an attitude that anyone who disagrees with him is 100% wrong and an imbecile which is offputing.

 

[huecoffs02]

"I could understand if the jury was misled by the mis-instruction on self-defense" is what he said right after the judge polled the jury.

Not sure what the beef was because I haven't been watching.

But I find it hilarious every time one of Branca's takes gets BTFOed by a judge. The best was when he got into a debate with Nate the Lawyer about the Arbery case last year. I recall Branca got super pissy about how Nate didn't know what he was talking about, only for the the judge to basically end up at the same place Nate was. That dispute resulted in Branca acting seething towards Nate for quite some time afterward.

Not saying he isn't an expert, but he often has an attitude that anyone who disagrees with him is 100% wrong and an imbecile which is offputing.

That's cause Branca is a MGTOW-like person and they are all retards like that when someone doesn't agree with their bullshit. I still like Branca but he is cringe when he goes full MRA.

 

[AnOminous]

"I could understand if the jury was misled by the mis-instruction on self-defense" is what he said right after the judge polled the jury.

That would make the jury instruction incorrect, but it wouldn't make the jury's decision irrational if they followed it. Two different kinds of error (which he knows).

 

[Balldo's Gate]

That would make the jury instruction incorrect, but it wouldn't make the jury's decision irrational if they followed it. Two different kinds of error (which he knows).

To be clear about the context, Branca's position is that the jury instructions were incorrect and that the jury decision to convict on the lesser included was irrational even given the incorrect instructions. So Branca believes that the jury was irrational and the judge was wrong.

That's cause Branca is a MGTOW-like person and they are all retards like that when someone doesn't agree with their bullshit.

I think it's more that a person who believes that are never wrong is more likely to identify with those kind of opinions. I liked Branca but he is rapidly becoming one of my least favorite members of the Rackets extended universe.

The confidence with which he states his opinions is starting to grate.

I still like Branca but he is cringe when he goes full MRA.

Him going all puppy eyed saying "I don't know why you're taking this so personally...P-p-please don't make me sleep on the couch again..." when called out by his wife for loudly calling women on the internet "cunts" when she had company over is cringe, but it's at least the laughable kind of cringe.

I'll give him a pass on it for as long as he keeps making a fool out of himself.

 

[Wheat Skeleton]

I've always enjoyed Nick's content, and the dude can be a proper entertainer when he wants to be. But Jesus tapdancing Christ, I don't know if he has some exhibition/humiliation fetish or what, but what the fuck actually made him think sharing his ball dildo with the world was a good idea. Has he ever been THIS open with his kinks beforehand? I would've thought he had enough shame and common sense never to mention it.

 

[Poop Shoot]

but what the fuck actually made him think sharing his ball dildo with the world was a good idea.

Money. I just hope it was enough to make up for the respect he lost.

 

[Fat Gay Riker]

I've always enjoyed Nick's content, and the dude can be a proper entertainer when he wants to be. But Jesus tapdancing Christ, I don't know if he has some exhibition/humiliation fetish or what, but what the fuck actually made him think sharing his ball dildo with the world was a good idea. Has he ever been THIS open with his kinks beforehand? I would've thought he had enough shame and common sense never to mention it.

He's also decided being nude as often as possible is the way to live. My guess is the combination of retreat to Hedonism II with Kayla and the amount of drugs he did while there popped his brain a fair bit. Per his latest hot tub stream on Locals, he's noted that he normally does the hot tub streams nude, but not during said daytime one because the kids were home.

 

[Manwithn0n0men]

Don't listen to this man. Shooting police will get you at the least in a ton of trouble.

In Florida a man with a gun popped pigs who came into his house on accident and got let off. He wasn't even legally able to own a gun but it was the pigs fault for going to the wrong house like dumbfucks

 

[Balldo's Gate]

I've always enjoyed Nick's content, and the dude can be a proper entertainer when he wants to be. But Jesus tapdancing Christ, I don't know if he has some exhibition/humiliation fetish or what, but what the fuck actually made him think sharing his ball dildo with the world was a good idea. Has he ever been THIS open with his kinks beforehand? I would've thought he had enough shame and common sense never to mention it.

Not only did he share that he's using a ball dildo, he didn't even have the pride to at least pretend that that he achieved ballgasm.

I bet the plop wasn't even satisfying.

He's also decided being nude as often as possible is the way to live. My guess is the combination of retreat to Hedonism II with Kayla and the amount of drugs he did while there popped his brain a fair bit. Per his latest hot tub stream on Locals, he's noted that he normally does the hot tub streams nude, but not during said daytime one because the kids were home.

 

[AnOminous]

Money. I just hope it was enough to make up for the respect he lost.

It's hard to take someone as seriously if when you look at them you know they have a little cuck cage for their balls.

In Florida a man with a gun popped pigs who came into his house on accident and got let off. He wasn't even legally able to own a gun but it was the pigs fault for going to the wrong house like dumbfucks

The two issues are entirely different. If you mean Andrew Coffee, they did convict him of the felon in possession count.

 

[TheClappening]

The thing with Branca is his whole brand is being an expert on self defense law, and he needs to project an air of confidence when discussing the subject matter he specializes in. He can sometimes be petulant when someone disagrees with, especially when the other person is honest and articulate in their disagreement.

That said, his reading of the law tends to be right, even if juries disagree with him.

I remember during some of his streams, where Nick and Gosney expressed disgust at the popo that popped Daniel Shaver, he was very quiet despite holding the position that everything was Shaver's fault.

The two issues are entirely different. If you mean Andrew Coffee, they did convict him of the felon in possession count.

I don't think it was even the case of a wrong house, either. They had the right house (Coffee's), but they botched their entry so Coffee wakes up suddenly to broken windows and guns in his face and his first action is to start shooting at them, which is a reasonable action.

EDIT:
Apparently it's his birthday. Happy birthday Nick, and hopefully your 41st is better than the last quarter of your 40th. I speak only for myself, but just stop posting your degeneracy and keep your wife from e-thotting. Talk law again. That's all I ask.

BIRTHDAY STREAM

Connect with RekietaLaw and other members of RekietaLaw community

rekietalaw.locals.com

Shared post - BIRTHDAY STREAM

archived 16 Dec 2022 04:32:39 UTC

archive.vn

It's my Birthday and I'll Stream if I Want To - With Some Homies

So, I'm starting this stream at 11PM and at midnight it will be my birthday. I'm inviting a bunch of friends to have a raucous panel show. We're going to drink, laugh, talk, and just generally have a

rumble.com