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.
He's not sorry. He doesn't care. He was only pretending to care and being an upstanding guy for the cameras and his audience. Aaron's schtick is about saving his own hide and getting views. He doesn't give a fuck about those kids. He doesn't care about what's right or wrong. He'll probably be back to doing this stuff once the heat dies down.
Aaron was there, knew everything, did everything, and was fine with everything until people started to notice and look into who the Spaghetti-O Man really was.
He’s extremely culpable, he knows that, and is desperately trying to turn this around.
 
They were keeping their 9 year old daughter home from school, most likely to hide her deteriorating condition from the teachers and the church who organized their schooling, with that in mind they likely didn't want to take her to a medical professional or a therapist in fear that they'd be found out, so they probably resorted to treating her themselves as best they could.
Camelot spoke about how much Nick talked up the medicinal properties of Cocaine and Aaron confirmed it. They would have seen their child die to hide their drug use and that's what would have happened if the Hero Pastor hadn't stepped in.
You seem to be close to the situation if you know they were keeping their daughter home from school. Is there anything else you think the class should know about?
 
Charges for what?

Aaron doesn’t have a duty of care to Nick’s kids. If he knew and said nothing, it’s shitty but not illegal.
Wrong.

Section 152.137 of the Minnesota Penal Statute states:

Subd. 2.Prohibited conduct.​


(a) No person may knowingly engage in any of the following activities in the presence of a child or vulnerable adult; in the residence of a child or a vulnerable adult; in a building, structure, conveyance, or outdoor location where a child or vulnerable adult might reasonably be expected to be present; in a room offered to the public for overnight accommodation; or in any multiple unit residential building:


(1) manufacturing or attempting to manufacture methamphetamine;

(2) storing any chemical substance;

(3) storing any methamphetamine waste products; or

(4) storing any methamphetamine paraphernalia.

(b) No person may knowingly cause or permit a child or vulnerable adult to inhale, be exposed to, have contact with, or ingest methamphetamine, a chemical substance, or methamphetamine paraphernalia.
 
We do not need to go there. Yet. And I hope we never do. Even the most benign explanation for this still makes everyone involved monsters. There's no need to go hog wild.
I mean the issue is that this is Nick Retieka we are talking about here. He has systematically made it so that nobody can really give him the benefit of the doubt on anything now. On top of a lot of circumstantial evidence as outlined by other posters above. I think the theories that the child accidentally took some rails or that the parents gave the coke as medicine (these are the 'good' endings, which shows how absolutely fucked this story is) is probably correct, but I think all theories are district possibility and requires serious investigation.

May God bless and help those brave souls who dare investigate this great pit of darkness.
 
did I miss meth arc? I thought it's treated separately because of how much it contaminates everything if you try to produce it. Was Nick making meth?
When Rackets got arrested he was charged with possessing more than 25g of cocaine or methamphetamine. The child testing positive for cocaine indicates that the stash was of cocaine, not methamphetamine. I have no idea where that poster was going with the statute related to making meth around kids.

Edit: lmao imagine rackets trying to make meth. Motherfucker can't even boil an egg.
 
I agree in the sense that having your 9 year old full of cocaine is almost as bad as molesting said child........But holy shiot are we really entertaining the idea that he is sexually abusing his children??? I aint no jannie BTW, i think the nigger should burn either way
To put it bluntly, when you find those levels and those types of drugs in a child that young, with what was going on in that house? Yeah the investigators have to give it some really serious thought. Because 9 times out of 10 when you find those types of drugs in young kids CSA is happening.

8 year olds don't develop 3 day/week moderate cocaine habits on their own. Somebody needs to be introducing them to Mommy and Daddy's Magical Princess Sparkle Dust. Now in this case I'm 50/50 whether it was Nick and Kayla thinking they'd found the perfect cure for ADHD, or, given the shear levels of sexual deviant and depravity going on in that house, someone pushing some other boundaries.

And yes even thinking it is disturbing and disgusting. But here we are. 5000 ppg(?) Of Cocaine in a 9 year old. I would say "thank God she's not old enough to drive while high on cocaine" but this is Nick so you never know. Granted it probably can't be worse than Nick driving.
 
When Rackets got arrested he was charged with possessing more than 25g of cocaine or methamphetamine. The child testing positive for cocaine indicates that the stash was of cocaine, not methamphetamine. I have no idea where that poster was going with the statute related to making meth around kids.

Edit: lmao imagine rackets trying to make meth. Motherfucker can't even boil an egg.
There is no question it was cocaine...
Sorry if this posted. Minnesota gave me the complaints
View attachment 6018303
 
did I miss meth arc? I thought it's treated separately because of how much it contaminates everything if you try to produce it. Was Nick making meth?
I don't doubt that Nick was planning to go all Breaking Bad at some point. Possibly in the second house? Because once you see the pattern of Nick, you can't unsee him thinking that would be a great idea.

But any actual attempts by Nick to make meth would likely burn the building down. Boiling an egg would be a challenge to Nick. If he could do actual chemistry he wouldn't be a lawyer.
 
I wonder if this is enough proof for his balldonians or if they'll keep convincing themselves he's such a swell guy & defending him
I knew his simps were dumb but damn, he needs to visually see nicks kids ingesting cocaine
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240619-231213~2.png
    Screenshot_20240619-231213~2.png
    419.9 KB · Views: 16
Wouldn't his current neglect charge already be the criminal charge? In fact, Nick and Kayla both only received a single neglect charge and not five of them, which you'd expect given they have five children. It seems to me that those endangerment charges would have multiplied by now, but they out it out as a blanket and kept it only once because of the 9 year old? Or additional charges could get added.
I believe the misdemeanors each are facing were based solely on the guns/drugs existing, before the test results had come back. That could lead to jacking it up to felonies. It's up to prosecutorial discretion. So far as I know, the misdemeanors are based on presumption of an unsafe environment simply because of these facts. An actual apparently heavy exposure to drugs is going to be considered actual harm.

Think of it as sort of the difference between drunk driving and vehicular homicide by a drunk driver. The first is somewhat inchoate, in that it is a crime even if nobody was directly harmed. The harm to society is diffuse and based solely on creating a more dangerous environment. The second is specific and has an identifiable victim.

Arguably, both are equally culpable morally, but the latter is vastly more culpable legally, even though, again arguably, both perps have committed a morally equal act but one just got lucky and didn't cause the harm intended to be prevented by the law.
 
Wrong.

Section 152.137 of the Minnesota Penal Statute states:

Subd. 2.Prohibited conduct.​


(a) No person may knowingly engage in any of the following activities in the presence of a child or vulnerable adult; in the residence of a child or a vulnerable adult; in a building, structure, conveyance, or outdoor location where a child or vulnerable adult might reasonably be expected to be present; in a room offered to the public for overnight accommodation; or in any multiple unit residential building:


(1) manufacturing or attempting to manufacture methamphetamine;

(2) storing any chemical substance;

(3) storing any methamphetamine waste products; or

(4) storing any methamphetamine paraphernalia.

(b) No person may knowingly cause or permit a child or vulnerable adult to inhale, be exposed to, have contact with, or ingest methamphetamine, a chemical substance, or methamphetamine paraphernalia.
I think whether this applies or not depends if 'any chemical substance' here is contingent on the wider context of methamphetamine or not. It could be read both ways.
 
Can that level of exposure irreversibly fuck up a kid's brain?
It would fuck up mine, even just psychologically.
I accept that I'll never feel as pain-free, happy and full of energy as I was when I was young. That's how life is. I can read about people taking coke and feeling happier - but I don't know if it would work like that on me, so I'm not feeling the need to try. I consider it an unjustifiably risky thing to do.

But, if I would be on drugs that made me happier when I was a little kid - this connection would be always be there. Whenever I would feel sad or mad or lazy or unmotivated - I would think - hey, I know how to make myself feel better. I know I used to take something that changed my behavior and demeanor in a good way. I can snort something that will make me feel like I am in control again.
And that's gotta be a fucking heavy burden of awareness to carry all your life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back