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.
AltisticRight said:
Yeah, as I've said in a previous post, >5000pg/mg in an 8-year-old, or 9, whatever, was the highest I have ever seen.
There is one major issue with this line of reasoning. Children are protected, to gather any information, data, surveying and so on regarding children is not just difficult, we can usually say it's impossible to reach an adequate sample size (~20 is a good start) due to the insurmountable red tape required. This money and effort is better directed at combating cancer and more common children-related issues. The lack of results could just be a lack of funds &/or interest to do such a study.
Prolonged environmental exposure is not well explored either. We know how cocaine will interact with hair and how to deal with it, but what about prolonged exposure spanning months if not years, in quite a filthy environment? @Dyn did link a rather interesting study too.
Then there's the obvious question. Who would allow this in the first place? Well, Balldo would. Who else? It's sick and grim.
That's assuming my "best case scenario" which involves a 9-year-old in the bed with 4 adults was true. I...
Was she the one that gave Aaron a plushie?
. Well ,.. sef

Kill yourself Balldo.
Click to expand...
I agree with all your points. It's kind of fortunate that we don't have many published material on this.
But it only shows how out of line this situation is. When I'm talking about the Case Report realm, I'm only being hypothetical.
I imagine if this was a consequence of a passive exposure, this finding would be even more publish grade material than if it was from active use. It would be an interesting data for a latter systematic review/ meta-analysis.

EDIT: But this is just my researcher brain talking. My human brain is uphauled by all of this. It can't be understated: kill yourself Rekieta!
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: From The Uncanny Valley, often puzzled, squirt reynolds and 10 others
Party Hat Wurmple said:
I'd also like to assert that according to Aaron, Nick has a non functioning penis and can only watch. How does one diddle without a Pp? Also, Aaron asserted everyone was zonked out of their minds. He was the only sober one. Nobody else had their wits about them. He was completely alone. Aaron also asserted he was the one who fed the kids every now and again. Aaron also asserted he was the responsible one, and yet some kid was tweaking on his watch.

You know, I'm just saying if a diddle kit did test positive, Aaron has exclusive access to the kids, completely unsupervised, and was fully about his wits at all times. On top of it, he has a motive for revenge against Nick for destroying his marriage. It also doesn't help that he looks like Jared Fogle and polycules have a tendency to end up this way.
Click to expand...
You have 50 posts in the other thread screaming that this is all Kayla's fault because she's such a giant whore, and now you have come here to say that a positive drug test for one of the kids is proof that Aaron rapes babies. You seem to be doing all you can to whittle culpability away from Nick and it's disgusting.
Nick is an adult, he has agency, and it was his house and his kids. If you are somehow right with no evidence that Aaron is a mega child molester, he was only able to do it because Nick gave him access to all of his children first.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: gangster computer god, Blackhole, Vetinari and 87 others
Before we jump to any conclusions, remember that the only evidence we have that Nick's daughter was on cocaine is a drug test that showed that she was ten times above the cutoff for a false positive. And the fact that there was an ounce of cocaine in Nick's room. And the cocaine paraphernalia. And his former friends saying Nick left a container of cocaine in the couch and a kid found it.

Other than those things, there is nothing pointing to this really happening.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: gangster computer god, Vetinari, PrincessHomura and 92 others
I am still seeing people talk about "this could be a false positive." No. If she had a 300 or a 200, that could be a false positive. 500 pg/mg is rarely a false positive, because the test is designed that way. This test is about 90% correct because of its false negative rate - druggies that get missed for classification, not the other way around. Also, the test identifies a concentration, and at 5000 pg/mg, there's virtually no way that this girl has not taken cocaine. It could be that the "correct" concentration is somewhat lower than 5000 pg/mg, but it's never going to be less than about ~3000 given the result and the chemistry of this test. It could also be as high as ~8000.

The only way this test is a false positive is if her sample was swapped for a junkie's, which is very rare. If Nick wants to theorize that's what happened, they can easily send off another hair to another lab to prove this one wrong.

The one thing that makes me think that this could be something other than "the child got into the stash" is that Kayla has a charge for child endangerment related to allowing sexual or physical abuse. It's a lot more likely that this means that Nick hit one of the kids in a fit of tard rage, but I suppose it could be possible that this means that Nick gave a child coke. We will know more when we have evidence, though.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Feels
Reactions: Kosher Salt, From The Uncanny Valley, often puzzled and 20 others
$5.3 Million Dollars said:
Andrei Chikatilo comes to mind, he'd sexually assault women and children, but penetration never actually entered into it.
Click to expand...
Oh there was penetration.
Chikatilo used knives because he couldn't get it up.
Its not comparable to Balldos situation in anyway.
I fucking despise Balldo.
I'd sleep like a baby after throwing the switch on him for what he has done, we don't need to be coming up with schizo theories about him doping his kids with a stimulant to molest them, the fact his kid tested positive is enough for him to deserve a pyre as it is.
Talking about him molesting her without any evidence makes us look like lunatics and makes it easier for him to just say we're crazy.
Nick is bad enough without trying to say he's a child molester.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Vetinari, AmateurComedicTaxidermist, IamnottheNSA and 29 others
No matter what reason her hair tested positive for cocaine it's not good, and this little girl will be left with additional trauma on top of all the other trauma from this bullshit situation that all the children have been forced to live through.

Another worry I have is the older kids having some sort of survivor's guilt from discovering this. What if they had no idea she tested positive? Finding that out I could see, especially the older one having this sense of guilt for not doing more to protect his little sister.

Obviously this is just speculation, but I just want these kids to get the help they need and deserve.

Fuck Nick. Fuck Kayla.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Vetinari, From The Uncanny Valley, often puzzled and 19 others
Pizza Munch said:
Passing a hair test is a prerequisite for employment at my job.
Click to expand...
Mine two. That was over 20 years ago for me. From what I remember I had to go to a special lab. They take 3 or 4 different samples of hair from various places on your scalp. Put the samples in a little envelope and the results come back in a week or so. If the person doesn't have hair on their head or its too short they take armpit hair.

At points we've used temps to hire. Some of temps upon receiving an offer for hire would self identify as using. If it was something minor like pot we would push out the offer out 90 days and tell them not to use until after the test. Most of the time it worked out. One time in particular the individual's test came back with hard drugs and we had to dismiss them.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Vetinari, From The Uncanny Valley, 6thRanger and 9 others
Procrastinhater said:
Talking about him molesting her without any evidence makes us look like lunatics and makes it easier for him to just say we're crazy.
Click to expand...
you know washers already compiled a whole bunch of that to try do discredit the breaking of the claims here. I don´t even know the ethos here and it´s pretty clear there are washers doing a bunch of the schizo posting or trying to fuck up the thread like 6million and Fapcop.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: From The Uncanny Valley, Light blue notebook, Vibralldo and 5 others
RodgerDodger said:
As weird as it sounds, the cops might want to test the dog. Because I could see Nick thinking it hilarious to give the dog some coke.
Click to expand...
Shaving that dog would improve its looks (although it might make its eyes explode out of its face on stalks), I encourage Mr. Rekieta Esq. to make sure he's taken All Necessary Precautions. 🐱
 
  • Feels
Reactions: From The Uncanny Valley and Procrastinhater
Redhook said:
There wasn’t any crack or crack pipes in the house and Nick wouldn’t be caught smoking a drug that poor people use. He prides himself on getting the purest cocaine available in MN.
Click to expand...
There was a glass pipe found in his house that tested positive for cocaine.
Read the report.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Vetinari, Pedophobe, From The Uncanny Valley and 11 others
Dont know if it was posted here already but allegedly body hair has a much bigger time frame to detect drug use, so maybe Rackets could ask for a new test to confirm or deny the initial report (I think the validity of a new hair test would be skewed because it has already been a month since the first one and it would be probably longer till his request is granted):

Body hair vs. Head Hair?

Although similar, there are a few differences. Here are the facts:

  • 1.5 inches of hair is needed for the standard 90 day drug test. If head hair it too short, body hair can be used.
  • Although there is no released research or tests, it is suspected that the body hair test can be detected much further back, as far back as a year.
  • The results will not and can not detect the specific day of drug use.
  • While urine tests can detect only one recent use, hair follicle tests can detect use over time.

https://www.fastestlabs.com/blog/drug-alcohol-dna-testing/hair-drug-test-myths-facts/
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Hoss Delgado and Procrastinhater
Desktop User2 said:
Dont know if it was posted here already but allegedly body hair has a much bigger time frame to detect drug use, so maybe Rackets could ask for a new test to confirm or deny the initial report (I think the validity of a new hair test would be skewed because it has already been a month since the first one and it would be probably longer till his request is granted):

Body hair vs. Head Hair?

Although similar, there are a few differences. Here are the facts:

  • 1.5 inches of hair is needed for the standard 90 day drug test. If head hair it too short, body hair can be used.
  • Although there is no released research or tests, it is suspected that the body hair test can be detected much further back, as far back as a year.
  • The results will not and can not detect the specific day of drug use.
  • While urine tests can detect only one recent use, hair follicle tests can detect use over time.

https://www.fastestlabs.com/blog/drug-alcohol-dna-testing/hair-drug-test-myths-facts/
Click to expand...
Do 8 year old girls have body hair?
 
  • Islamic Content
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: KateHikes14, John Andrews Stan, From The Uncanny Valley and 9 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back