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.
How in the world would that work? Crackets stealthfully gluing a clump of his hair to his kid while being in cuffs? These weren't voluntarily mailing hair samples to the county for testing. He hasn't seen his kids since being arrested and CPS took the samples
You know what, I don't know how such a mix-up could happen, but from what I can tell, Nick is a reasonable guy. I'm sure there's a perfectly rational reason that his 9-year-old daughter was found with cocaine metabolites consistent with regular cocaine abuse. That would imply that Nick is a drug fiend who gave his child cocaine.
Does Nick really seem like the kind of guy to give cocaine to his own child and lie about it?
He claims the test is faulty, is testing a metabolite which exists outside of the body, and also that the levels of cocaine they are suggesting she had in her would indicate that she should be dead.
I'm not a biologist but - which reactions happen outside of the body exactly?
 
So how long do these hair follicle tests take? Because they were arrested and released within about 24 hours with the 3 charges each, I'm thinking the child abuse/endangerment charges are just from having drugs and guns near the children. This document was labeled for sometime in June, is it possible they get another charge added now that it's proven that the 9 year old tested positive?
Sorry if it's been asked already, I tried to skim for it but haven't seen anything. I'm linking my question from the Rekieta thread in case anyone here would know.
 
Amide anaesthetics won't ping a false positive for cocaine. There aren't any medications that will. The most plausible scenario where the kid wasn't using cocaine is that the lab techs just completely shat their pants and and mixed up her paperwork with a crackhead's somehow.
I'm going to choose not to believe this as i can't really stomach a 9 year old cocaine user so imma just jam my fingers in my ear and go LALALALALA.
 
He would have to pay for probation and if he is ordered to go to rehab and/or put on house arrest/home monitoring. If he does get put on house arrest, the ankle bracelets also check for alcohol. Since technically he works from home, he would only be able to leave the house for scheduled valid doctors appointments and a 3 hour block each week to run errands.
Would the ankle bracelet also be able to detect when he's speeding as a freebie for the cops?
 
He messages me out of the blue to say two things:
Is it really out of the blue? We have a leaked court document, the contents of which are being disputed.

It seems very Nick to contact you to say his piece because he knows you’ll report it.

Not that doing so is in any way a good idea. But Nick can’t seem to shut up.
 
Last edited:
So his kid testing positive made me think of a moment I remembered from Aaron's appearance on Kino Casino.


Starting at 2:48:50:
PPP: "...did Nick share coke with anyone other than you and April?"
*Aaron takes a long pause, during which he nervously bites his tongue and lips, stress sighs, and looks down as he begins to answer*
Aaron: "Not that I ever saw... not that I ever saw. I can't say yes, can't say no, but not that I ever experienced or saw."

I did find this very odd live, and wondered why he looked so nervous while answering a question that wouldn't incriminate or embarrass him. Was there something he knew about, but couldn't mention?
 
He messages me out of the blue to say two things:
1. To thank me for locking his thread.
Lol. You locked it for a few minutes to create this one so the leak could actually be discussed separately, and not add a zillion more pages to the main thread. Did he not grasp that? Did he really think you were finally putting on the Balldo?

:story:

2. To deny that his child tested positive for cocaine.
Yeah, that's about what I figured. Thank you.

Fucking insane. Still trying to gaslight. Even to people who have told him to fuck off.

His thread isn't locked; was he being sarcastic?
See above. It was locked briefly so that people would file over to this thread to discuss the leak. It wasn't damage control. It was traffic control.
 
Did he really think you were finally putting on the Balldo?
The only thing worse than a narcissist is a stupid narcissist. Whether it be wetbrain or traditional retardation, he's a really dumb motherfucker at this stage.

It wasn't damage control. It was traffic control.
Yeah, I've seen the same method used in other "person" subforums like the DSP subforum to avoid pertinent discussion becoming lost forever in the general thread.
 
However, suppose you have a test that is 99% accurate for both negative and positive results. Sounds good, right? Imagine, though, the test, say it's for a kind of cancer that on average 1% of the test recipients have. If you take a sample, you're going to miss the cancer 1% of the time. However, you're also going to get a false positive 1% of the time. So if you get on average nearly two positives, the odds are almost 50% that each of them is wrong.
Absolutely right, but the key to the logic here is the prior probability of a positive result before the test. with a rare cancer, you know from population stats that the prior probability of having the cancer is low.

In most cases i would say that the prior probability that the 9 year old is on cocaine is very low, like a rare cancer. however if said nine year old's dad just got busted with weight last week, well im not sure the prior is that low anymore. As you said its unfortunately probably accurate.
 
"THEY'RE TRYING TO FRAME ME...YOU GOTTA BELIEVE ME!!"

maxresdefault.jpg
 
You can't just pay CPS to not take a drug test though so if they demand drug testing his paying to not be tested for the current court case won't matter if he wants his kids back.
Well, for one, Nick obviously doesn't care, but yes, it's true CPS can insist on that as a condition and deny custody if he (or anyone else in the household) doesn't. It's almost a moot point since they're not going to be getting them back anyway for what is probably a long time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back