State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Rekieta, Kayla Rekieta, April Imholte

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

Will Nicholas Rekieta take the plea deal offered to him?


  • Total voters
    1,268
  • Poll closed .
They do mention tubes and vials, which tend to weight more than baggies for sure. I don't know how they process it in the US.

However, if it was multiple vials and tubes, would it not be also attached with intent to distribute charge? Even if it does not stick, that's reasonable suspicion. I know they do this where I am. If you get caught with 25gs in a block, it's different than getting caught with 50 baggies, although the weight is the same. And they don't really care if that's the way it came up and you had no choice. It's reasonable suspicion.
Depends. If he had a bunch of unused baggies/vials/tubes along with that scale he had, then absolutely. But from what I gather of the charging docs, it seems all of the baggies and vials were already in used condition, and not of sufficient quantity to be a slam dunk on intent to distribute.
 
Yes, and it says it maxes out at 27 years and 500k if she really wants to. It might be appealable, but Rackets doesn't have that kind of cash at this point. He's dealing with Monty on one end, this case on another, a potential 2x 50k bail if both are found drinking- he is beyond overextended financially.

The judge can do whatever she wants and he can't stop it. Did you even listen to the court hearing? The man was still slurring his words 12 hours from his last drink. He. Is. Fucked.
You're assuming that Judges are petty little shits like Shitlips and Acerthorn instead of professional attorneys who were used to opposing counsel talking shit about them. Judges actually do care about their ethical obligations and while they have significant discretion, they don't have free reign to be petty tyrants.

Remember, these are crimes of drug possession. It's a non-violent drug crime, and the current policy in regard to those is to try and rehabilitate instead of punish. It's why you have federal programs like DTAP (https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedprograms/89#2-0) and why Minnesota has treatment courts (https://www.mncourts.gov/Help-Topics/DrugCourts.aspx).

I wouldn't be surprised if both of them are sent to Treatment Court and treated with kid gloves.
 
You're assuming that Judges are petty little shits like Shitlips and Acerthorn instead of professional attorneys who were used to opposing counsel talking shit about them. Judges actually do care about their ethical obligations and while they have significant discretion, they don't have free reign to be petty tyrants.
I'd say that about most judges but frankly Fischer seemed to have taken it out on a client of Nick's by maxing her out on a sentence, literally maxing it out because she plea-bargained and had a lawyer. This was incredibly unprofessional and demonstrative of bias. I would not view a recusal motion by Nick as that crazy. She obviously hates his guts.

Unfortunately, so does any possible replacement for her in all likelihood. For some reason, anyone with personal dealings with Rekieta seems to hate his guts.
 
You're assuming that Judges are petty little shits like Shitlips and Acerthorn instead of professional attorneys who were used to opposing counsel talking shit about them. Judges actually do care about their ethical obligations and while they have significant discretion, they don't have free reign to be petty tyrants.

Remember, these are crimes of drug possession. It's a non-violent drug crime, and the current policy in regard to those is to try and rehabilitate instead of punish. It's why you have federal programs like DTAP (https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedprograms/89#2-0) and why Minnesota has treatment courts (https://www.mncourts.gov/Help-Topics/DrugCourts.aspx).

I wouldn't be surprised if both of them are sent to Treatment Court and treated with kid gloves.
She has repeatedly ruled against Nick in the Montegraph case despite having the better lawyer. She doesn't like him. And she doesn't need to break any rules to hit him with the max. He abused his own children, did fuck tons of coke- no jury on the plant is gonna say he's innocent. She has the legal justification and a grudge to go hard on him.
 
The field test showed 26.67 grams including the packaging, without the packaging it's most likely under 25. He could probably argue that point once it's been sent to the lab and weighed again.

I'd say he was playing with fire keeping amounts even close to the threshold, but really, there's a good chance that they had even more not long ago and just happened to have snorted enough to bring them under the limit.
So he might be either extremely lucky or extremely shrewd.
Screenshots_2024-05-24-18-25-27.png
 
Depends. If he had a bunch of unused baggies/vials/tubes along with that scale he had, then absolutely. But from what I gather of the charging docs, it seems all of the baggies and vials were already in used condition, and not of sufficient quantity to be a slam dunk on intent to distribute.
But are they weighted with the drugs inside? This seems a bit weird to me. If true, a single vial could be 90% of the weight if they just collect the empty ones to suck on during tough times.

The scale in itself is not proof of much I think. Unless you are homeless, if you're a drug addict, you have a scale. It's not exactly like you can trust people at their word, and it's not that expensive unless you want to carry a fucking suitcase. Which, considering Nick seemingly is trying to play kingpin, I would not even be surprised by at this point. I am bit in shock. It seemed obvious, but just too obvious.

I was really skeptical about him having coke on his nose during the stream. Because that should not really happen. Most addicts are very aware and self conscious about their addiction. Alcoholics will hide their breath, heroine addicts won't show track marks, coke addicts will absolutely check their nose after taking a line. Most of the time, it's not even about what you have left on you, because you typically would use a pipe of some kind. It's about the flakes that may have stayed in your nostrils and could fall later on if they don't melt.

This man had given up at a level I would argue is rock bottom. He just did not care anymore. Not even about keeping apparences. There are prostitutes with more self respect than this.
 
That doesn't mean anything. A better lawyer doesn't mean you get off the hook regardless of how guilty you are, and Nick was pretty guilty of calling Monty a pedo.
Pattern recognition. She's encountered him in the past as well and has ruled against his clients. She doesn't like him. How many examples do you need to see that Nick is about to get blasted to hell and back?
 
She has the legal justification and a grudge to go hard on him.
If she has discretion, but abuses that discretion, that's grounds for review. If I were representing Nick, I'd be sure to affidavit her to create an appealable issue if she radically departs from the typical sentencing for a first offense.
 
If she has discretion, but abuses that discretion, that's grounds for review. If I were representing Nick, I'd be sure to affidavit her to create an appealable issue if she radically departs from the typical sentencing for a first offense.
I guess that goes back to another point: Nick's money situation. In the hearing, he did NOT want to pay 50k bail. The Depp money is gone. He could ask for a review, sure, with what cash? There is a non zero chance he is almost broke.
 
Kayla Rekieta: A wife. Used to be hot, then she did enough drugs to look like a ghoul from fallout series. Known for convincing (allegedly) her husband into opening their relationship, which effectively ruined everything. Has an army of simps willing to defend her from every bad decision she has ever made. These people are affectionately called the "cunt guards"
Thoughts on the Prosecutor trying to turn Kayla against Nick? At the very least I expect the prosecutor to not allow Nick to defend her in court or at least to make the court to not allow it.

I know because of Marriage rules Kayla can't testify against Nick.
Couldn't they bring in a judge from outside the county?
Why should the Judge recuse herself? If she is capable of sitting as judge in the Montograph case she can do so here. Nick being extremely disrespectful is not her fault and is not something Nick should get a pass for.
If she has discretion, but abuses that discretion, that's grounds for review. If I were representing Nick, I'd be sure to affidavit her to create an appealable issue if she radically departs from the typical sentencing for a first offense.
This is an actually interesting reason to maybe want to recuse. But I question if this has any chance of resulting in a successful appeal. If someone acts like Nick did I think it is perfectly fair to give them a harsher sentence. If they are not capable of being respectful of the legal process especially if they are a lawyer then maybe they really do deserve a harsher sentence.

But are they weighted with the drugs inside? This seems a bit weird to me. If true, a single vial could be 90% of the weight if they just collect the empty ones to suck on during tough times.
The cops could have zeroed the scale and this wouldn't matter. We zeroed it all the time for measurements in Chemistry class. And if we did it I bet they know to do so as well.
 
Local practicing attorneys indicate that the conditional/unconditional bond thing is either-or. If he posted money the only additional terms are appear at court, stay in touch with your lawyer, and remain law abiding (lol).

I'm virtually certain they will be offered probation, but I kind of wonder if Nick will fuck it up trying to get the search warrant suppressed.
 
I know because of Marriage rules Kayla can't testify against Nick.
There's a theoretical route where she could here:
A husband cannot be examined for or against his wife without her consent, nor a wife for or against her husband without his consent, nor can either, during the marriage or afterwards, without the consent of the other, be examined as to any communication made by one to the other during the marriage. This exception does not apply to a civil action or proceeding by one against the other, nor to a criminal action or proceeding for a crime committed by one against the other or against a child of either or against a child under the care of either spouse, nor to a criminal action or proceeding in which one is charged with homicide or an attempt to commit homicide and the date of the marriage of the defendant is subsequent to the date of the offense, nor to an action or proceeding for nonsupport, neglect, dependency, or termination of parental rights.
Bolded the relevant section for emphasis.
 
Guys, I don't think DAs are putting weights on charging documents that include the container weights. That would be so easily appealable the DAs head would spin. The weights in the filings are most likely facts found by the crime lab after the evidence was processed. I know cops are stupid, but c'mon guys.
 
Guys, I don't think DAs are putting weights on charging documents that include the container weights. That would be so easily appealable the DAs head would spin. The weights in the filings are most likely facts found by the crime lab after the evidence was processed. I know cops are stupid, but c'mon guys.
Lol very :optimistic:

The crime lab won't see it for weeks at least. All reported amounts are in bags on some field scale.
 
If she has discretion, but abuses that discretion, that's grounds for review.
Lmao. Good luck.
@Useful_Mistake Can you include that both the Rekieta's preliminary hearing is on August 20th, 2:45 pm CST on the main post so everyone can mark their calendars?
Sure
Thoughts on the Prosecutor trying to turn Kayla against Nick?
I have no thoughts on the matter until we have confirmation that Nick really is that retarded, For now I agree with Null, this was temporary just to leave prison.
 
Back