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

[WTBOnlineFather]

Especially since it doesn't seem that the women in the house were dumping any drugs in the 30 seconds or whatever it took for the cops to break open the door.

Well, if they were, just one more baggie would've done it lol.

 

[Swole McPole]

I disagree on the basis that Minnesota defines physical abuse as beating up the kid, or threatening to do so. See ""Physical abuse" means any physical injury, mental injury under subdivision 13, or threatened injury under subdivision 23, inflicted by a person responsible for the child's care on a child other than by accidental means, or any physical or mental injury that cannot reasonably be explained by the child's history of injuries, or any aversive or deprivation procedures, or regulated interventions, that have not been authorized under section 125A.0942 or 245.825."

Could this just be a reference to Nick and/or Kayla getting high all the time? I think it's unquestionably emotionally abusive for small children to have to worry about their parents as a consequence of their drug use. Even if you aren't the one that's using, could leaving the children in the care and custody of a parent who's completely wasted while you like in your pit and watch Star Trek repeats count as abuse here?

 

[Useful_Mistake]

He has a lawyer now.

No lawyer has entered on his behalf as far as the court docket reveals.

Could this just be a reference to Nick and/or Kayla getting high all the time? I think it's unquestionably emotionally abusive for small children to have to worry about their parents as a consequence of their drug use.

If that was the case, Nick would have been charged with that too, and this is just a weak argument for a section about beating or poisoning your kids that I don't think it would stand up at all

Legal question, Nick and Kayla each have a single count of child neglect/endangerment. Can this potentially be upgraded to multiple counts? One for each of the 5 children they neglected/endangered?

Maybe if they wanted to. But then they'd have to prove each individual count as to each individual child. Might be easier to just prove 1 count generally about all of them.

 

[Nate Higgers]

O

Onions is a lowiq shitstirrer. I don't think there's anyone he likes. Redbar without the cancer

Not just that but he’s buddy-buddy with Diddler Daxipad Herrera and Vito the Pedo. He was confronted about inviting Vito to his gay “comedy festival” for faggots and he just said “WHAAAAAT? I haven’t seen AAANY ebidance that Vito is a pedophile! He said he’s a pedophile on Twitter?! I. DONT. CAYURRR! Unless I see him actually arrested for touching a child then HES NOT A PEDOPHILE!”

Thread tax: I know judges are required to be unbiased and impartial. With Nick and Kayla’s criminal case being heard by the same judge as in Nick’s civil defamation case, does one impact the other? I know they’re two different kinds of courts (civil v. criminal), but I just find that an interesting twist.

 

[Swole McPole]

If that was the case, Nick would have been charged with that too, and this is just a weak argument for a section about beating or poisoning your kids that I don't think it would stand up at all

If the different charges aren't a reference to Kayla just standing around and doing nothing while Nick brought drugs into the house/organized drug consumption orgies in the presence of the children, then doesn't it have to mean that Nick is alleged to have been beating them, diddling them or emotionally abusing them somehow?

Despite the fact that I know he's a piece of shit, I suppose I was looking for ways for him to be less terrible than he might turn out as him actually being.

 

[FedPostalService]

Yeah at that point, with the warrant, you're just getting a broken door. Especially with Nick's front door set up, that's a lot of cost you have to eat, for a door that will be broken with a ram. I get Nick doesn't know or care about money, but it was just a dumb move.

Isn’t the making them break the door down a smart move? There is categorically no chance that consent was granted to the police to enter that property. If there is some weird issue with that warrant then isn’t that then an illegal search?

I’d happy let the police in and offer them all cups of tea and coffee but I also have nothing illegal in my house.

If I did I’d go full no comment and let them smash their way in.

 

[Active User]

Isn’t the making them break the door down a smart move? There is categorically no chance that consent was granted to the police to enter that property. If there is some weird issue with that warrant then isn’t that then an illegal search?

I’d happy let the police in and offer them all cups of tea and coffee but I also have nothing illegal in my house.

If I did I’d go full no comment and let them smash their way in.

From a purely legal perspective, yeah. If he didn't live with anyone else I'd imagine people wouldn't harp on this as much. The issue is more weighing the chance of it injuring or traumatizing a kid in some way against the rather oblique chance that they mess with their bodycams to erase a statement like "I comply with your order under duress and do not consent to any searches or seizures, the password is whatever" while also having some legit issue with the warrant that makes the entire thing totally unusable. You're extremely unlikely to gain anything from it in either scenario but if you're fine with buying a new door you may as well if it's just your house, but it's a lot more likely to upset or even hurt your very young children when they're at home.

 

[FedPostalService]

From a purely legal perspective, yeah. If he didn't live with anyone else I'd imagine people wouldn't harp on this as much. The issue is more weighing the chance of it injuring or traumatizing a kid in some way against the rather oblique chance that they mess with their bodycams to erase a statement like "I comply with your order under duress and do not consent to any searches or seizures, the password is whatever" while also having some legit issue with the warrant that makes the entire thing totally unusable. You're extremely unlikely to gain anything from it in either scenario but if you're fine with buying a new door you may as well if it's just your house, but it's a lot more likely to upset or even hurt your very young children when they're at home.

If he cared about those kids he wouldn’t be a fucking junky. That door going in was unironically the start of a less traumatic future for them,

 

[DiabeticSydePhil]

The thing is presumably there was a period of time between 'Mr Rekieta can we come in, we have a warrant' and 'we are breaking your door down' where Nick could have reevaluated the severity of the situation and didn't do so.

Also, could it be that the mandatory report was actually related to Kayla somehow as she's the one with the child neglect charges? Ie, that's the charge the warrant was originally for and THEN they found the drugs.

Or would a break your door down tier warrant always be for something like drugs. It seems a little extreme for 'hey this couple are neglecting their kids'.

 

[Active User]

They'll break the door down if you refuse a warrant for anything, because if they have a warrant that means they are getting into your house. It's no knocks/starting with the violent breaching that's reserved for more extreme cases (in theory). Most people just comply with search warrants.

 

[DiabeticSydePhil]

They'll break the door down if you refuse a warrant for anything, because if they have a warrant that means they are getting into your house. It's no knocks/starting with the violent breaching that's reserved for more extreme cases (in theory). Most people just comply with search warrants.

That makes sense, but getting a warrant would mean more than a 'hey I think these guys got drugs' from the pastor, right? The report was made before his coke stream, so I wonder if he'd had some blow up with the pastor Wednesday that left the guy deciding he needed to make a report and Nick feeling the ODD need to do even more drugs.

 

[FedPostalService]

The thing is presumably there was a period of time between 'Mr Rekieta can we come in, we have a warrant' and 'we are breaking your door down' where Nick could have reevaluated the severity of the situation and didn't do so.

Also, could it be that the mandatory report was actually related to Kayla somehow as she's the one with the child neglect charges? Ie, that's the charge the warrant was originally for and THEN they found the drugs.

Or would a break your door down tier warrant always be for something like drugs. It seems a little extreme for 'hey this couple are neglecting their kids'.

I thought the neglect charges were Nick’s neglect being having a house full of drugs and Kayla’s charge being she allowed it to happen and didn’t get the kids out of there but I’m a non-practicing non-lawyer so I’m more than likely talking out of my arse.

 

[Bloodfeast Island Man]

I didn't think about the streaming studio being in a walk-in safe. Is that they were referencing in the warrant about finding drugs in the safe? I was thinking originally like a floor safe or something. Makes more sense the more I think about it now.

The door idea was just me thinking about a technicality. I doubt a man who looks at a warrant and throws it on the ground in a huff isn't thinking that far ahead in time. I'm gonna wait for more info before worrying about how the door was broke down and who was around when it was done.

(I'm hoping Law and Crime gets the body cam footage.)

 

[General Disarray]

So I was checking out the cases and shit to try and figure out if Nick was released with conditions. There is no pretrial release form that has been uploaded to the case. This is what the second page looks like:



As you can see, he would answer YES to all three of these additional questions.

Minnesota has a least restrictive clause for release; see here:



And here is a guide to completing the form:



The form and instructions can be found here (PDF will open automatically):

https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/Pretrial-Release/Minnesota-Pretrial-Release-Evaluation-Form-and-Assessment-Tool-(MNPAT).pdf

https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/Pretrial-Release/MNPAT-Judicial-BenchCard.pdf

Hope this helps some lawfags in the thread.

 

[Musashi's Son]

More case events from the court site:

 

[Brian Oblivion]

That makes sense, but getting a warrant would mean more than a 'hey I think these guys got drugs' from the pastor, right? The report was made before his coke stream, so I wonder if he'd had some blow up with the pastor Wednesday that left the guy deciding he needed to make a report and Nick feeling the ODD need to do even more drugs.

Hard to know exactly but I would assume that the Pastor had some knowledge (possibly via Nick's kids) as to where the drugs were generally kept. Judges are generally more inclined to grant a warrant to search specific locations rather than one giving the cops carte blanche to tear the whole house apart so I'm assuming they likely had more than just general suspicions of drug use going on.

 

[East_Clintwood]

Is that they were referencing in the warrant about finding drugs in the safe?

No, they specifically referred to safes in the master bedroom and master bathroom.

 

[Lubby Smith]

Isn’t the making them break the door down a smart move?

No.

Refusing to open the door for cops with a search warrant isn't smart or strategic (unless you're destroying evidence). If anything, it's detrimental.

The warrant gives police lawful authority to enter. Consent is an exception to the warrant requirement and is unnecessary when a warrant has issued, hence busting down the door if the resident wants to be a dick.

I'm extremely confident that there's no case (in the last 100+ years at least) where a court said "the police had a warrant to search the residence, but because the defendant wouldn't open the door, the police weren't allowed to execute it. Evidence suppressed."

Ask to see the warrant, let them in, shut your mouth, film what they're up to if you can, and fight it in court later.

I said it could be detrimental because if this went to trial, the jury would hear about it, and innocent men don't make the cops smash down the door. (Not that I think there's any chance this goes to trial.)

Also, if the cops want to be dicks they could charge you with obstruction, and front doors are quite expensive to replace.

Bottom line, this isn't a "I'm too smart to help the law convict me" situation. This is ghetto crack dealer, not mob boss, behavior that no practicing lawyer would advise.

 

[feral cat #6385]

Refusing to open the door for cops with a search warrant isn't smart or strategic (unless you're destroying evidence). If anything, it's detrimental.

Well I'm sure the cops appreciated getting the chance to break out their toys to batter down the door. His children on the other hand were probably traumatized. Father of the year material.

And given that Nick has a problem getting contractors to come to his house he might be waiting a while for a new door and all the critters will have free roam inside his house.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Sad is the day that I pray they only mentally injured their children.

They could've also given some of the drugs/ alcohol for one of the older children? I don't know how old is the older one. So I don't know if it is a reasonable possibility.

I could believe that. Kayla the crack whore or one of her bulls gets pissed a kid is begging for food. She throws some cocaine/drugs at the kid in anger and the kid inhales enough/swallows enough they get sick. This may or not be the same story where Nick cancelled a stream because "someone close to him" needed to be watched all night.

Well I'm sure the cops appreciated getting the chance to break out their toys to batter down the door. His children on the other hand were probably traumatized. Father of the year material.

And given that Nick has a problem getting contractors to come to his house he might be waiting a while for a new door and all the critters will have free roam inside his house.

Finally shall the skunks and raccoons take their revenge on the Rail King.