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

[Thomas Talus]

Laywers are snakes etc.

"Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." Matthew 10:16

You would be amazed at what kinds of trouble people get themselves into because they didn't consult those snakes.

 

[indomitable snowman]

But yeah, the “it was April’s drugs” strategy is not looking plausible for Nick.

Dumb question, but don't they all share responsibility of the drugs in the eyes of the law. What's to stop them from all being charged with the same thing for the 26g.

 

[Canard]

Dumb question, but don't they all share responsibility of the drugs in the eyes of the law. What's to stop them from all being charged with the same thing for the 26g.

Not being her house could solve some issues on this and likely was reason she was released so early. But her credit cards being associated with drugs make it messy for her. Could at some point she will try to throw Rekietas under the bus by telling they were stolen or taken without permission... Those cards could come back and bite either side... Really bad look to have not your credit cards in your bedroom. They were not listed as tested positive for cocaine so there is no absolute link to her and it.

 

[AnOminous]

Dumb question, but don't they all share responsibility of the drugs in the eyes of the law. What's to stop them from all being charged with the same thing for the 26g.

Not really. The owner of the house presumptively owns what's in it. Unless they searched April and found it on her, it's presumptively his (and Kayla's), unless either of them can prove they didn't have knowledge (including constructive knowledge) that it was there. Just being in a house with drugs in it isn't illegal.

 

[Watching Rekieta]

Basically if the facts are against you (lots of drugs, neglected kids) then you pound the law. In this case, attack the warrant and try to say it was invalid, which will domino into saying any evidence gathered because of a bad warrant is inadmissable.

So the evidence objectively exists, but the court is forced to pretend it doesn't. Same thing happened to Vic Mignogna.

And I might sound like a fag, but wouldn't call that a mere technicality. You can't violate someone's rights, if for no other reason that if you do, they walk.

None of those arguments will be ripe for trial. The warrant had lots of supporting characters so even attacking 1 or 2 won't knock it down

He probably won't get to appeal an evidentiary ruling until after conviction. But it may be moot.

I suspect he will be offered a plea deal: Deferred adjudication on less than 25g of cocaine. Standard conditions of probation, rehab and drug testing. Felony goes away if he completes the terms. Presumptive sentence is 20 mos. The alternative is to face conviction of 25+g of cocaine and 48 mos. In best case/worst case scenarios, the plea is equal or better. Even if he fails to complete, prison is less than conviction. The catch is that he waives all appeals if he plea bargains.

I think Barnes knows this so he pompously touts how many rights were violated. He says Rekieta will win all challenges knowing that the plea deals are too good to pass up and he won't be proven retarded. Still, if Baldo takes Barnes advice we'll get to see the bodycam footage and watch Barnes wave to Nick on the way to prison.

 

[Watching Rekieta]

Not being her house could solve some issues on this and likely was reason she was released so early. But her credit cards being associated with drugs make it messy for her. Could at some point she will try to throw Rekietas under the bus by telling they were stolen or taken without permission... Those cards could come back and bite either side... Really bad look to have not your credit cards in your bedroom. They were not listed as tested positive for cocaine so there is no absolute link to her and it.

They could probably charge her. I suspect the prosecutor is looking at the reason for the warrant and it's welfare of the kids. Nailing her with drugs doesn't do anything for the kids. She's only tangentially related. Keeping the charges to owners/residents of house and parents makes the reason for prosecution cleaner. April would likely want to separate her case and partition the amounts of drugs. By dropping her, they keep it to a single case/trial focused on protecting the welfare of the kids. The Rekietas will be tried together.

 

[marvlouslie]

Nick is fucked. Drugs you can come back from. That has a potential redemption arc to pull from and struggle out of. Child neglect though? Oof. Yeah, no. He's not getting away from this.

 

[hesaback]

Still no bond for Kayla?

 

[A Cardboard Box]

Still no bond for Kayla?

She's on a PR bond, which means she's subject to piss tests and all that.

 

[hesaback]

Thanks. Such a shame when friends and lovers fall out.

 

[AnOminous]

Still no bond for Kayla?

She didn't have to put it up. She probably just accepted the conditions and didn't have to pay because unlike Nick she isn't willing or able to pay $5K for the right to be a drunk-ass loser.

She is released, though, according to the docket text and her absence in the list of inmates she used to be on.

Interim conditions for REKIETA, KAYLA CHRISTINE
Judicial Officer: Hanson, Rodney
Make all future court appearances
Complete booking
Remain law-abiding
Make and maintain contact with attorney
Keep court/attorney informed of current address
Post Bail or Bond with No Conditions
$50,000.0050,000.00 U S dollars
Release with Conditions
$0.000.00 U S dollars
Do not leave Minnesota without written court approval
Do not use or possess alcohol or drugs except as prescribed
Random testing
Contact with probation
Do not use or possess firearms, ammunition or explosives

I'm pretty sure these have been posted in the thread already. Note that it says "random testing." I'm not sure if the interim thing is already over, though, and something else now applies.

341 is Nick, 342 is Kayla. Their "Interim Conditions" are the same text, but Nick's indicated he's put up a bond. So Kayla is under strict conditions which are probably incompatible with them being under the same roof.

 

[hesaback]

She didn't have to put it up. She probably just accepted the conditions and didn't have to pay because unlike Nick she isn't willing or able to pay $5K for the right to be a drunk-ass loser.

She is released, though, according to the docket text and her absence in the list of inmates she used to be on.



I'm pretty sure these have been posted in the thread already. Note that it says "random testing." I'm not sure if the interim thing is already over, though, and something else now applies.

341 is Nick, 342 is Kayla. Their "Interim Conditions" are the same text, but Nick's indicated he's put up a bond. So Kayla is under strict conditions which are probably incompatible with them being under the same roof.

Thanks. That makes sense. The last week has been glorious. The decline and fall of
the Roman nose.

 

[Swole McPole]

Rekieta has said that his next stream will come from a different studio and people have hypothesized that that is probably because he's staying with his parents in Florida.

Kayla's parents took custody of the children when they were arrested. I'm assuming that they'll still have custody. Here in the UK, there'd be some kind of emergency court order that specified the grandparents have temporary custody. I'd assume things work the same way in the USA.

Under those circumstances, would Kayla be able to go and stay with her parents so that she still had daily contact with her children?

Pretty sure Kayla's parents wouldn't welcome Nick's presence in their house at the moment -- which must be pretty tight with five kids just having moved in. But if Kayla had gone to her parents home, I'd expect Nick to do the same thing and go back to mummy and daddy. This man-child hasn't had to fend for himself since college. I imagine he'd be at a loss if he was Home Alone.

 

[Dr Naomi Hunter]

Kayla's parents took custody of the children when they were arrested. I'm assuming that they'll still have custody. Here in the UK, there'd be some kind of emergency court order that specified the grandparents have temporary custody. I'd assume things work the same way in the USA.

Under those circumstances, would Kayla be able to go and stay with her parents so that she still had daily contact with her children?

Surely if she were up against the charges she was arrested for, CPS wouldn’t allow her to still live with her children even if their grandparents had custody?

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

She didn't have to put it up. She probably just accepted the conditions and didn't have to pay because unlike Nick she isn't willing or able to pay $5K for the right to be a drunk-ass loser.

If you’re pretty sure you won’t violate conditions of a PRR bond you should take it - because even if you do, you just go to jail (maybe) and aren’t out $5k or $50k.

You pay when you have to or you can’t follow the conditions.

 

[AnnLurker]

You know, considering Barnes is involved with most of these dickheads.... I wonder if he gave some coke to David Freiheit? Seems like right wing political law streamers are collapsing and Frei absolutely looks drugged up to the 9s just like Nick.

​

 

[MakeAnimeGA]

I think Barnes knows this so he pompously touts how many rights were violated. He says Rekieta will win all challenges knowing that the plea deals are too good to pass up and he won't be proven retarded. Still, if Baldo takes Barnes advice we'll get to see the bodycam footage and watch Barnes wave to Nick on the way to prison.

Just a theory, but I believe I read that Nick had reached out to Vic to try and butter him up after the arrest. I wouldn't doubt he did the same thing to Barns. I wouldn't be surprised if Nick is paying Barns for some PR work.

 

[he who has thus come/gone]

Unless they searched April and found it on her, it's presumptively his (and Kayla's), unless either of them can prove they didn't have knowledge (including constructive knowledge) that it was there.

Her credit cards being with the cocaine would go to constructive possession. But Nick trying to protect her (instead of his actual wife) by saying she was just a house guest isn't going to help with that.

 

[Dr Naomi Hunter]

I wouldn't be surprised if Nick is paying Barns for some PR work.

Neither would I. He seems more worried about the court of public opinion rather than the criminal court that could send him to prison.

If he had any concern for the latter he would stop sperging in DMs, Locals and Twitter about “setting the record straight”.

 

[Swole McPole]

Surely if she were up against the charges she was arrested for, CPS wouldn’t allow her to still live with her children even if their grandparents had custody?

I don't know. That's really why I was asking. It's possible that they could take the view that while she was being monitored by her parents, she didn't pose a significant risk? And the children might actually benefit from not being deprived of their mother?

I imagine though, that they could only reach such a decision after fairly extensive monitoring and evaluation on the part of CPS.