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

[Battlecruiser3000ad]

He’s going full Ronnie O’Neal. Most people here don’t think his lawyer will abandon him, but I hold hope that will do the most retarded nigger crack addict thing and eventually represent himself.

Nick isn’t a plane nose diving into the ground, he’s a bunker buster carving through bedrock.

He can always switch lanes to a different Ronnie.

 

[Angry Crustacean]

Would the prosecutor only be offering the maximum sentence? I could see them being lenient by offering a plea deal of however many years till the youngest is 18. What is that, like 11 or 12 years?

I think they would offer that knowing Nick would not take it.

 

[AnOminous]

As for her being accused of lying, she took the job, and part of the job is that she's occasionally going to be called a liar by a defendant/subject of CPS investigation. I'm sure she can handle it.

If she gets swatted or something, don't labor under any delusions it won't be brought to the attention of the court or even mentioned in front of the jury. At best it's another KA-CHING for whoever ends up representing him. Frank White has some paydays in his future to be sure.

 

[Potato CPA]

I was curious if the self-professed Simp for The U.S. Constitution & valiant defender of Nick's violated rights had any comment upon the recent news. Robert Barnes has not made any statements on "X", but the last post he made on the matter was this, very appropriately for the horrible developments we have gotten:
View attachment 6106500
(archive)

Yeah Barnes seems to be deliberately misleading here. He is "technically" correct but with context, still wrong.

1. People need to remember the search warrant was for the drugs, 1st and foremost. The suspected child neglect is only supporting evidence for the suspected drug use.
   
   
2. Consider Abuse vs Neglect, and then think of being the mandatory reporter talking to the cops. Words matter, and in the legal sense Neglect & Abuse are different things. So Barne's saying "zero evidence of abuse" well whoopedy-fuckin'-doo. Kids still were NEGLECTED, and the reporters did attest to evidence of neglect.
   
   
3. No basis for imminent danger - that doesn't have bearing on the DRUG USE search warrant. It would be a question asked to determine if the children need rescued like ASAP. So it's not a big deal here if the reporters didn't think there was any imminent danger. On the contrary - this supports & strengthens the reason they waited a week, and destroys Barnes & Co.'s other arguments that the situation couldn't have been that bad if they waited a whole week to do the raid. Well so which is it Barnes - you can't have it both ways. You can't say waiting a week was bad, and then claim supporting evidence for why they could have waited a week (no IMMINENT Danger,) is also bad.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

I hope Nick goes the "Gov conspiracy to shut down critic" route and tries to somehow tie in Gonzalez v. Trevino 602 U. S. ____ (2024). That would be such a funny and stupid shitshow

 

[Kosher Salt]

No shit, that's the quiet part you leave unsaid.

"he said it by not saying it"

I must have missed the magic decoder ring that helps you read Nick's mind, because when he doesn't say something, I can't tell whether it's because he secretly meant for us to do the thing he didn't say. Was that the 5000 Locals subscriber gift that he promised?

 

[Harm]

I must have missed the magic decoder ring that helps you read Nick's mind

I can't teach you subtext or reading between the lines. Ask your case manager for help*.

*I'm implying you're a mentally deficient idiot. This one's free.

 

[Mikoyan]

No basis for imminent danger

I truly believe his words on this issue in particular but really all the things you bring up are setting out his lolbert beliefs as fact. No basis for imminent danger matters because imminent danger is the only standard for search and seizure, other than free men upon the land searching and seizing government property because THEY VIOLATED THE NAP FIRST GODDAMNIT.

 

[RodgerDodger]

He did not "potentially send his spergs after a cps worker". He named her, he claimed that she lied, but he never told anyone to harass her. Nobody has any plausible reason to think they need to harass her, and nobody should.

As for her being accused of lying, she took the job, and part of the job is that she's occasionally going to be called a liar by a defendant/subject of CPS investigation. I'm sure she can handle it.

I'm kind of amazed that CPS has not already filed for a Restraining Order against Baldo? They tend to react extremely harshly to going after case workers like that.

 

[mindlessobserver]

I guess we now know what Kayla's charge of "knowingly permit physical/sex abuse" is about.

That would be pretty grim if Kayla actually fed her own kid cocain as a medication for acting out. Especially since the reason the kid was acting out was almost certainly an external issue to the environment she was living in.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

No shit, that's the quiet part you leave unsaid. He didn't tell people what to do with that information, but the utility in naming her as the sole person lying to deprive him of his five children is to paint her as the villain and him as the victim.

I'm surprised he restrained himself from spelling out her name slowly so everyone gets their searches right. Y'know, for comedic effect.

"he said it by not saying it"

I must have missed the magic decoder ring that helps you read Nick's mind, because when he doesn't say something,

Since @Kosher Salt made dozens upon dozens of posts sweeping for Nick in his civil lawsuit thread, they should know that when Rekieta called out Montagraph's lawyer David Schneider he would often specify the name of Schneider's law firm and location in Willmar, MN.

(It's not embedding properly; 9:08 of the below clip or click here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4tkG5xqKAs&t=548)

The obvious reason to do that would be to advertise to his dents which law firm to blanket in fake reviews, which is exactly what happened. Nick knew his dents are not intelligent enough to actually find the law firm of some guy, even if they have his name and the county where he practiced, so he gave them additional information.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

"he said it by not saying it"

It's weird how nobody on KF applies that logic to ourselves. Talking shit/releasing info about person who fucked you over is bad only when someone else does it.

 

[Catgirl Tyranid]

It's weird how nobody on KF applies that logic to ourselves. Talking shit/releasing info about person who fucked you over is bad only when someone else does it.

We do though. If it smells like a personal army request, a bunch of people will tell the poster to pound sand.

 

[Harm]

It obviously applies to Kiwi Farms. Posting people's doxes in a thread filled with gossip and reasons to hate them enables people without accounts or people with a grudge against them to feel emboldened to mess with those people.

It's clearly harmful in and of itself to disseminate that personally identifiable information about these people. However, that's the site's rules. We can post dox, we can gossip about the person, but we can't plot the harassment.

 

[AnOminous]

It's weird how nobody on KF applies that logic to ourselves. Talking shit/releasing info about person who fucked you over is bad only when someone else does it.

Betraying a confidence is an entirely different thing than releasing publicly available information. Just because we might find it amusing that someone spills his guts in a way that embarrasses a lolcow doesn't make the person who did it admirable. I have never betrayed a confidence on here.

I'm kind of amazed that CPS has not already filed for a Restraining Order against Baldo? They tend to react extremely harshly to going after case workers like that.

They might but I think it would be unconstitutional in the absence of something more than simply talking shit about her. That doesn't mean it won't happen and it's potentially an ethics violation under Minnesota's rules subject to bar discipline, but I'd leave it up to them to try that if they think it's a thing.

If she does get swatted by some absolute fucking tard like Still-Born, I would expect it ends up as part of the record, though.

It obviously applies to Kiwi Farms. Posting people's doxes in a thread filled with gossip and reasons to hate them enables people without accounts or people with a grudge against them to feel emboldened to mess with those people.

"Hey this guy claims to live in a mansion but here's the shithole where he actually lives!" "Hey this guy claims to be a working man of the people but look at this fucking mansion where he actually lives!" <--- legit

"Hey look at this public record of him abusing kids!" <--- legit

"This guy is a huge asshole for other reasons too! Look at this stupid shit he videotaped himself doing and posted online!" <--- legit

"Go to his house and kill him!" <--- a crime

The fact that redditors will go do dumb things if given information is no reason not to give information. Actually encouraging that bullshit is.

 

[repentance]

That would be pretty grim if Kayla actually fed her own kid cocain as a medication for acting out. Especially since the reason the kid was acting out was almost certainly an external issue to the environment she was living in.

That particular charge implies that Kayla knew that someone else was physically endangering a child and did nothing to stop it rather than physically endangering the child herself.

The hair test is also impossible to overcome on lab objections or technical objections because they can just do the test over again. The positive test on the kid creates an iron link between the probable cause, the warrant and the pile of cocaine found in the house that I can't see any way to break.

Nick should absolutely be seeking another test with part of the sample sent to the state's lab and part of it sent to an independent lab of his choosing.

 

[Watching Rekieta]

That would be pretty grim if Kayla actually fed her own kid cocain as a medication for acting out. Especially since the reason the kid was acting out was almost certainly an external issue to the environment she was living in.

Kid kept complaining about being hungry. Coke cured that.

 

[AnOminous]

Nick should absolutely be seeking another test with part of the sample sent to the state's lab and part of it sent to an independent lab of his choosing.

So there can be two tests proving his guilt? I agree. He should definitely do that. I wonder why he isn't.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

We do though. If it smells like a personal army request, a bunch of people will tell the poster to pound sand.

You know full well that I wasn't talking about PA requests. Anyway, I take it that CPS doc was leaked so we all would harass Nick then? I mean the poster clearly didn't like him, and according to some might have committed a crime in the leak. How about when I released the search warrant and ICR and went on a MATI rant about how much Nick's actions passed me off? Was that a secret dogwhistle? What about threads about former KF members?

My point ultimately is that Nick has a mountain of tucked up shit he did, and it's absurd to twist the logic we use on ourselves just to have one more thing to be mad about. His fucking child is more cocaine than human, but gosh, he was meansie to some gov chick.

Nick's audience is literate. If they wanted to harass her, they would anyway irrespective of what Nick didnt say.

However, that's the site's rules. We can post dox, we can gossip about the person, but we can't plot the harassment.

Ask anyone here if we are responsible for any harassment someone else does. The answer is always no. The answer always uses the logic outlined above. Which is true, btw, we are not responsible for any harassment anyone else does.

So there can be two tests proving his guilt? I agree. He should definitely do that. I wonder why he isn't.

Well, if the cps doc is false as he claims to Null, why not?...oh...right, he knows it's true.

Kid kept complaining about being hungry. Coke cured that.

Modern problems, modern solutions and all that.

The fact that redditors will go do dumb things if given information is no reason not to give information. Actually encouraging that bullshit is.

Agreed.

 

[Gas Grass Or Ass]

No you don't understand, livestreaming is meant to hold the government accountable, not to hold Nick accountable. This shouldn't be streamed because it will be the worst moments in Nick's career as he is getting fucked by the government who is making up shit about him.


If that doesn't make sense, I recommend upping your dosage of cocaine

Infinity % of the people who trial watch are doing it because it's a real life soap opera. Depp v. Heard had really huge numbers of watchers because they got to see two celebrities' dirty laundry aired out on live television/on the Internet. Yeah, it does have the added (and extremely important) effect of keeping gov't accountable like with that judge in a recent case who had an ex parte undisclosed conversation with the defendant which is bound to force a recusal. But you can't tell me that the majority of people who would watch Nick's trial stream are sitting there to analyze evidentiary rules. They're there with popcorn wanting some shit to go down.