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.

[Strix454]

What exactly would Aaron be called to testify about?

The greed of the children and the fact that they were feasting on spaghettios COOKED BY AARON when they were lying about being hungry. Aaron will also break down and confess on the stand that HE was supposed to be driving the kids and doing their laundry. That Aaron's refusal to become Nick's live-in manservant caused Nick all kids of stresses and allowed the children to run wild.

Aaron can also be compelled to testify how the little snitches were conspiring against Nick in his own house. How they conspired with the police to manipulate the people at the church to turn Nick in for things that were not true.

 

[TheLostMarxBrotherFucko]

Then learn to read instead of shitting up threads asking people to spoonfeed you info fucking nigger.

Are you just a jealous faggot? Here let me leave so you can post more tepid and vapid commentary. Maybe If you would spam gamer words less people could keep up there sperg.

 

[iniuit basketball pro 420]

ETHAN RALPH SAID I COULD NEGLECT MAH KEEIDS!

 

[Mousey0328]

That's just dumb. He did toasts for people going as far back as 2019, yet he didn't really begin to come completely unglued until around 2022.

I don't dispute a lot of the superchats people sent him were cringe, but blaming them for Nick neglecting his children is almost as dumb as blaming the 16 year old.

Nick did this to Nick. He might have had some bad outside influence like Daxipad, but it's mostly on Nick.

I really believe the coke only came involved because they drinking got so out of hand. Those Super Chats were what threw the drinking to fullblown alcoholic.

Nobody is responsible for Nick, but they certainly didn't help.

 

[SusanHassle]

Nick's decision to go live and refuse to discuss the criminal charges poses a problem because all of his behavior will be scrutinized in family court. The criteria for keeping children away from their parents are much lower and more subjective than those for criminal charges.

For instance, in a stream this thread is clamoring for Nick to do, Nick might resort to attacking Aaron’s character, downplaying the issue as a one-time event that resulted in arrests after one singular night of partying.

Meanwhile, all five children will likely have been interviewed, possibly independently. Anything Nick says will be compared to their statements. Although I’m unsure of the standards in Minnesota for examining children’s devices, this could be considered. The 16-year-old has likely texted with friends about the situation.

In most states, these interviews are conducted carefully, with the children represented by their own court-appointed lawyer and a guardian ad litem present. Questions might include, "What did you typically eat at home?" or "Who made the food?" For the older kids, questions about Nick's black eye and family violence might arise, or "How did your dad act when driving you around?"

In summary, the guardian ad litem will review Nick's stream (any of them - if they do their diligence they will investigate whether the kids were home for the hot tub stream, for example), compare it to the statements provided by the pastor in the warrant, and consider the information gathered from the children. They will then write a recommendation for the family court.

This is from the MN Guardian Ad Litem Board.


As others have said, Nick is FUCKED. I would be surprised if those kids are returned anytime soon.

 

[Captain Manning]

I really believe the coke only came involved because they drinking got so out of hand. Those Super Chats were what threw the drinking to fullblown alcoholic.

Back in 2019, Nick would get a superchat asking for a toast to somebody's dead pet jumping spider (or whatever), and then he would take a sip of whiskey (or some other adult beverage). Oftentimes, by the end of those shows, he was still coherent and not three sheets to the wind. Which means that shit didn't even make him fully drunk.

He is not the first YouTuber that developed a drinking problem outside of his show. He won't be the last.

And here's a thought: If you really believe what you said, Nick could have said no to superchats at any time. He is in control of his own show.

 

[polar bear]

Questions might include, "What did you typically eat at home?" or "Who made the food?" For the older kids, questions about Nick's black eye and family violence might arise, or "How did your dad act when driving you around?"

What if it's gonna be sth like:
"How often did Mr and Mrs Imholte visit your home? Did they sit with your parents in the living room, or did they go somewhere else? Were you comfortable when they were around?"
I don't know if such questions would be somewhat traumatising, so maybe they won't ask, but that would leave a big elephant in the room. I can't even laugh at it, cause the possibility of kids feeling like they need to stay in their bedrooms, put headphones on and pretend it's not happening - all because their parents are disgusting coomers - is fucking depressing.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

what if it was actually the 16 year old son who bought the drugs for his parents?

Are you saying @Exfurminatus Now is Nick's son?

The houses only have yard in-between. They could have traded wives, at any moment. It actually probably would have been a smarter thing to do. Yet, they couldn't do that because the drugs.

Hell, Nick was too stupid to use the extra house as the drug storage place. It wouldn't have been hard to walk across the yard once a day and get the daily supply.

Then he'd spend too long checking on Lady Rackets and worse, have to deal with the skunks and raccoons out for vengeance.

 

[Null]

someone found this old picture from Drexel of Rekieta's desk. Apparently what's behind his desk is a huge mystery.

 

[Fapcop]

That might be the one thing he could talk about given his involvement in The SpaghettiOs Incident.

Yes but not really. We’ve built it up quite a bit, but a defense attorney would demolish that argument. “So your friend was busy doing something, and you heated up a can of spaghetti O’s… In other words, there was food in the house that a 16 year old could heat up, yes?”

Aarons whole history with them makes him a very bad witness. On top of all the other issues. (Like not being an expert, not seeing any actual neglect.)

 

[Mousey0328]

Back in 2019, Nick would get a superchat asking for a toast to somebody's dead pet jumping spider (or whatever), and then he would take a sip of whiskey (or some other adult beverage). Oftentimes, by the end of those shows, he was still coherent and not three sheets to the wind. Which means that shit didn't even make him fully drunk.

He is not the first YouTuber that developed a drinking problem outside of his show. He won't be the last.

And here's a thought: If you really believe what you said, Nick could have said no to superchats at any time. He is in control of his own show.

I AM NOT TAKING BLAME FROM NICK.

Thank you for proving that in 2019 he could handle the limited amount. The Super Chats during the trials is what I'm talking about. You know the day in and day out streaming. The streams where he was taking Super Chats shots ALL DAMN DAY!

Nick absolutely had control over his show. Hindsight is 20/20. I don't think he realized he was in trouble, in the moment. He had intertwined alcohol into his internet personality so much, by the time he realized. Nick CHOSE to go on with the tailspin.

 

[Fapcop]

he could testify about the amount of drugs in the house, how/where they were stored, and if they were accessible to the kids

They already have the police seizure, so they don’t need Aaron for that. And he’s a defense attorney’s dream as a witness.

 

[Drama Trauma]

Mr Rekieta seems "very confident" in his innocence and his remaining supporters are going with the 'It's a set up by the police/Aaron/the pastor/sister-in-law(?)/children' narrative.
Is there any possibility that it was really just a set up? Even if the police lied, why would they plant 'evidence' in their house while they have bodycams on?
Why would the police officers made up the cluttered house, dirty dishes, clothes, when it is not true according to Nick?
What if we finally see the bodycam footage and it will be not like what we expect?
Although all the evidence we know seems to suggest Nick and Kayla were a neglecting parents and they abused different kinds of drugs (besides of alcohol).
Is it common in the US that the police lie about in their report just to frame someone? Or plant fake evidence?

 

[The Internet Dick]

Aaron also claimed Kayla told him that she wanted the four of them to raise their children communally as a polycule. He was concerned that other people would find such an arrangement bizarre, not least his ex-wife.

He quotes Kayla as saying: "I want us to be a family and raise all of our children together."

Aaron, while not the brightest bulb in the shed, is/was right about this one. Polycules are a trendy [current year] progressive construct viewed by many on the Right as an attack on traditional family structure. I can think of no better way to utterly alienate the vast majority of residents in that small Minnesota community or--for that matter--his and Rekieta's respective conservative-leaning audiences. Introducing polyamory into the picture would've been social and financial suicide.

Well, okay, they've already done that--or at least the Rekietas did. Think of Kayla's polycule plan as a possible form of the disaster coming their way. It didn't take its final shape until the Rekieta kids started talking.

 

[WelperHelper99]

someone found this old picture from Drexel of Rekieta's desk. Apparently what's behind his desk is a huge mystery.

View attachment 6056535

He has a EVGA 3090. Look I get streaming is intensive, but a 3070 super is perfectly capable of streaming. What are you trying to run Nick, Crysis?

 

[DuranceVile]

someone found this old picture from Drexel of Rekieta's desk. Apparently what's behind his desk is a huge mystery.

View attachment 6056535

"My house being a filthy wreck is NAWT Treeeeeeeew"

 

[AltisticRight]

He has a EVGA 3090. Look I get streaming is intensive, but a 3070 super is perfectly capable of streaming. What are you trying to run Nick, Crysis?

He bought it from a scalper too.
Look at the general state of that room, I'm not even going to bitch about his cable management, at least have a vacuum cleaner handy to clean the floor. It looks gross.

 

[Fapcop]

I AM NOT TAKING BLAME FROM NICK.

Thank you for proving that in 2019 he could handle the limited amount. The Super Chats during the trials is what I'm talking about. You know the day in and day out streaming. The streams where he was taking Super Chats shots ALL DAMN DAY!

Nick absolutely had control over his show. Hindsight is 20/20. I don't think he realized he was in trouble, in the moment. He had intertwined alcohol into his internet personality so much, by the time he realized. Nick CHOSE to go on with the tailspin.

I think this whole line of reasoning is a little silly. Nevermind the fact that Nick could have done shots of ice tea. (Whether in whisky bottles or not.)

But as an audience member, it’s not an unreasonable expectation to have, to believe that the streamer is on top of things. As in: He doesn’t have to drive the kids anywhere 4 hours after the show, that there is a babysitter in place, etc.

I mean COME ON… The faggot sending 20$ for a toast for his cat, needs to consider the impact on Nicks kids?! Really?!

Do I have to consider the impact on fellow kiwis families, before I reply and initiate a long slap fight? Or make an April thirst post so hawt and salacious that my fellow farmers need to take a day off to fap?!

 

[DumbDude43]

Mr Rekieta seems "very confident" in his innocence and his remaining supporters are going with the 'It's a set up by the police/Aaron/the pastor/sister-in-law(?)/children' narrative.
Is there any possibility that it was really just a set up? Even if the police lied, why would they plant 'evidence' in their house while they have bodycams on?
Why would the police officers made up the cluttered house, dirty dishes, clothes, when it is not true according to Nick?
What if we finally see the bodycam footage and it will be not like that we expect?
Although all the evidence we know seems to suggest Nick and Kayla were a neglecting parents and they abused different kinds of drugs (besides of alcohol).
It is common in the US that the police lie about in their report just to frame someone? Or plant fake evidence?

cops planting a pile of coke in his house is very outlandish.
it's technically not impossible, but very implausible. the risk for the cops themselves would be gigantic, because if that level of misconduct comes to light they're going to prison for ten times longer than what rekieta is facing for the posession charge.
so, what would be the motivation? why would someone bribe a big chunk of the local police force just to dunk on nick? who would even have the money and the connections to be able to do such a thing? i don't see it.

 

[Mousey0328]

Nick's decision to go live and refuse to discuss the criminal charges poses a problem because all of his behavior will be scrutinized in family court. The criteria for keeping children away from their parents are much lower and more subjective than those for criminal charges.

For instance, in a stream this thread is clamoring for Nick to do, Nick might resort to attacking Aaron’s character, downplaying the issue as a one-time event that resulted in arrests after one singular night of partying.

Meanwhile, all five children will likely have been interviewed, possibly independently. Anything Nick says will be compared to their statements. Although I’m unsure of the standards in Minnesota for examining children’s devices, this could be considered. The 16-year-old has likely texted with friends about the situation.

In most states, these interviews are conducted carefully, with the children represented by their own court-appointed lawyer and a guardian ad litem present. Questions might include, "What did you typically eat at home?" or "Who made the food?" For the older kids, questions about Nick's black eye and family violence might arise, or "How did your dad act when driving you around?"

In summary, the guardian ad litem will review Nick's stream (any of them - if they do their diligence they will investigate whether the kids were home for the hot tub stream, for example), compare it to the statements provided by the pastor in the warrant, and consider the information gathered from the children. They will then write a recommendation for the family court.

This is from the MN Guardian Ad Litem Board.

View attachment 6056488
As others have said, Nick is FUCKED. I would be surprised if those kids are returned anytime soon.

All 5 kids were absolutely interviewed individually. Those kids also are mandated into therapy. A lot of the therapy will be individualized, also.

My experience is that Guardian ad litem doesn't do very much independent investigation other than speaking directly to the children, caregivers, and CPS related individuals. Then, the GAL and GAL attorney gives court the children's wishes, and their thoughts on what is in the interest of the children.

Nick is looking at about a year without the kids if he follows his case plan 100%.