Trashfire MNPublicRecords CHIPS file on Rekieta's 9-year-old testing positive for cocaine - All parties are assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
...there could easily be over a dozen people who can get their hands on documents like this.
True, but those dozen people know they could lose their jobs and face criminal penalties if they were to be caught, all for the sake of muddying an already complicated and potentially controversial criminal proceeding.

When confronted by documentation like this, I ask myself if--with the tools and experience I possess--I could forge such a document whole cloth or alter it in such a way to achieve a desired outcome. The answer to this one is sure I could, down to the supposed digital signature.

We need to see another document from the same office that we know to be valid for purposes of side-by-side comparison. It only takes a small but telling discrepancy in font, formatting, or common usage to expose a fraud. Back in the day, user Buckhead at the Free Republic site noticed the use of MS Word's Times New Roman font on an Air Force pilot rating document that had supposedly been typewritten, a clumsily executed forgery that eventually led to Dan Rather's disgrace and dismissal and George W. Bush's election.

I personally think Null's subject matter expert's 60% estimate is off the mark. This feels like an op to me, but an op by whom is anyone's guess.
 
Last edited:
If you're going to do it, be there as soon as the doors unlock because that shit will be locked down 5 minutes after the clerk checks their email.
Presumably even if this document is locked the file number can be verified as an active case possibly with the people involved listed. I'm not sure we've seen the CPS(CHIPS) file number before.
 
i'm not sure why everyone is so upset with nick

clearly the 9 year old wanted to start his coke addiction early just like his daddie
1718766434559.png


What's curious to me is that its only one of the kids. And not one of the older ones.
 
It's a complete coin toss if it'll be available for viewing Thursday morning but I'll give it a college try and post what I found in this thread Thursday morning unless it's resolved earlier.
I forgot about it being a holiday tomorrow. If this thing is real, I guarantee you it'll be locked down tomorrow even if they're closed. So you may as well save your gas.
 
i thought the 16 year old wouldn't be in foster care because he's legally an adult in MN?

Also its "mountains of madness" tier for someone named Sweep to sweep it up

I do have a theory about the 9 year old being a coke head and that maybe Nick decided "hey wouldn't it be funny if" and probably used Drew Barrymore as an example of 9 year olds doing cocaine and it not being weird.
So if this is real the document was filed on 6/7/24
thats just the file date, they could have done their report as soon as the arrests happened, it takes awhile with how much of a backlog social workers have to get through to find the time to write up based on your notes and how long it takes the labs to process your drug tests
. But obviously both are trivial to fake.
the problem is we're getting to a near Pascal Wager level of absurdity, either its real or someone who's had experience writing these types of reports decided to go through the process of writing up a fake one and getting names of all the kids and enough people involved in the court system for it to be plausible while also faking the meta data and also was enough of a Rekieta A-log to have remembered the name of Nick's favorite and their corresponding age.

Beyond that there's so much Nick could use as a way to delegitimize all of this if any speck of it isn't true. from literally the lawyers on his case or the people in charge at the court, especially the judge. You'd literally be commiting massive fraud and thats not even accounting for the fact that what they still did was illegal.
 
Seriously though, assuming it's not a false positive, I think there's a reasonable explanation beyond the fact that they were feeding their 9 year old cocaine.

My first thought was that the kid might have been present in the room when mum and dad were smoking crack. That'd leave deposits on the hair.

Is hair testing kids a normal thing in the USA? Hair testing is an expensive and slow procedure. I'd have expected them to urine test the kids first, and then hair test them if a positive result showed up.
Drug tests don't detect the substance being tested for, they detect the metabolites your body breaks the substance down into. A follicle test doesn't say "Hey there's cocaine on this hair!" it says "Hey this person's body ingested cocaine, broke it down and excreted these tell-tale by-products through the hair."

I believe they can do both. If they find the drug in the absence of metabolites, that's an indication of external contamination rather than consumption.

 
Last edited:
I think it is entirely possible that this document is real, except for the part about the daughter testing positive for cocaine.
The way I see it, whether it's true or false, he doesn't have his kids back. And even if there's never any confirmation, you can infer what happened if they're still in foster care a year from now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back