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.

[Kandinsky]

Going over to someone's house a couple times and making their kids Spaghettio's while the parents are busy being enough to make a person legally liable for that kids well-being for life would be completely fucking retarded.

We have a case of genuine, horrific, child neglect and genuine abuse with a parent potentially giving their 9-year-old cocaine, and people are so clouded by tard rage at aaron for hanging out with nick a few times that they're trying to twist the law worse than any corrupt cop in a bad movie.

The implications of a society where making lunch for some kid or babysitting for one afternoon leads to you being charged if the parents of that kids are neglectful or abusive would be a nightmare, extend that tenuous logic to every other law and everyone in the world is in prison for knowing someone else who broke the law.

RICO charges for saying hi to someone coming up quick.

Some people say Aaron and April intended on moving into the other house on the property. Aside from that, he stated during Steel Toe Morning Show on 06/24/2024 during his AM show at 1:19:56, per his own words he spoke to his daughter, his daughter stated she did not like it there because he was the only adult. Verbatim: "Dad, the two or three times we went to their house you were the only one who was out there with us. Like everyone just went in that back room and stayed there."

Aaron: "like I became Like A Beat cop like I'm like I'm going to go walk the beat and check on the kids and this and that and everyone's like okay sounds good...

Johnny: we got eight little people running around unsupervised maybe one person should I don't know once in a while

Aaron: I could get Kayla to come out with me and like I'd play chess with her 13-year-old son like Charlotte likes chess yeah and one of the Rekieta kids is really good at chess and uh I we would play every once in a while and I would say Kayla come on out we're going to go play chess let's get out of here come on and she would but like yeah Charlotte was always like Dad I don't like it here like you're the only one who comes out and this that and the other thing like the kids were opening their Easter baskets and April could not give a fuck....

THAT IS A CARETAKER. Legally, he was aware of a state of conditions that were dangerous and he not only did nothing, he continued in participating in the fuckery. He proclaims he was providing oversight of the children, all the while participating in drug use. This isn't contended. Aaron has flailed the flag as the white knight. With great power comes great responsibility. So answer for it. Why didn't he do anything, despite being well aware the children were in the middle of a destructive environment?

At this point Aaron is either hyperbolic, or he is an enabler. Either way, it's neglect.

 

[Devout Muslim]

Some people say Aaron and April intended on moving into the other house on the property. Aside from that, he stated during Steel Toe Morning Show on 06/24/2024 during his AM show at 1:19:56, per his own words he spoke to his daughter, his daughter stated she did not like it there because he was the only adult. Verbatim: "Dad, the two or three times we went to their house you were the only one who was out there with us. Like everyone just went in that back room and stayed there."

Aaron: "like I became Like A Beat cop like I'm like I'm going to go walk the beat and check on the kids and this and that and everyone's like okay sounds good...

Johnny: we got eight little people running around unsupervised maybe one person should I don't know once in a while

Aaron: I could get Kayla to come out with me and like I'd play chess with her 13-year-old son like Charlotte likes chess yeah and one of the Rekieta kids is really good at chess and uh I we would play every once in a while and I would say Kayla come on out we're going to go play chess let's get out of here come on and she would but like yeah Charlotte was always like Dad I don't like it here like you're the only one who comes out and this that and the other thing like the kids were opening their Easter baskets and April could not give a fuck....

THAT IS A CARETAKER. Legally, he was aware of a state of conditions that were dangerous and he not only did nothing, he continued in participating in the fuckery. He proclaims he was providing oversight of the children, all the while participating in drug use. This isn't contended. Aaron has flailed the flag as the white knight. With great power comes great responsibility. So answer for it. Why didn't he do anything, despite being well aware the children were in the middle of a destructive environment?

At this point Aaron is either hyperbolic, or he is an enabler. Either way, it's neglect.

OBJECTION!

Too long; didn’t read!

Is there actually legal precent for Aaron being a legal guardian, or it’s just your gut feel?

 

[Desktop User2]

Verbatim: "Dad, the two or three times we went to their house you were the only one who was out there with us.

Love that he, on his own volition, just go around saying he brought his kids for their orgies because he couldn´t even be bothered to hire a nanny... pretty straight A dude.

 

[Kandinsky]

I have a question for the legal types. My experience with lawyers hasn't been in the US of A and also hasn't been profound, I've retained counsel on occasion and followed their advice to the letter.

Wouldn't any competent counsel be telling him to shut the hell up right now, and not give the state anymore information to play with?

He seems to my untutored self to be his own worse enemy.

Is this going to make it harder for him to retain counsel? Is this likely to get him dropped as a client?

Am I correct in my surmise that Nick is a nightmare client?

Yes. EVERY lawyer would be telling him to shut his mouth. But you can’t argue with someone who is oppositional defiant and a narcissist. It’s like telling a moth not to fly toward flame.

I agree my post was long, but I rarely post anything of value, and this was something I had been ruminating about. I felt it necessary to lay out the legal reasoning regarding all present and complicit adults.

You don’t have to be a guardian for the responsibility to fall on your shoulders, according to state statute. Caretakers are liable as well. I provided the code, and you are welcome to read it independently.

And yes. There is a reason to charge Aaron and go after him: for his testimony. Put him in the same boat. He was a willing participant in the conditions in which they were found. If the hair follicle test exceeds past the last date he claims he was in the house and was aware of the conditions, bring him in.

The idea isn’t to ultimately get a conviction on Aaron. It’s to make him a witness in favor of the state.


EDIT @ 7:24 AM CST: changed "bring him him" to "bring him in".
Edit @ 7:51 CST @Devout Muslim - Providing quotes word for word that came from a livestream on YouTube (for which I provided the hyperlink) and posting them in a thread relevant to the pertinent topic isn't autistic, you retard. It is providing accuracy so people don't come back and manipulate the language, as we have seen time and time again with other parties relevant to this matter. All you have to do is know how to press the button that says "full transcript" from the stream, copy, paste, and format for purposes of readability.

 

[Swole McPole]

I respectfully disagree. According to Minnesota Criminal Code, Aaron would be considered a caregiver (see Sec. 609.376 MN Statutes). “Caretaker” means an individual who has responsibility for the care of a child as a result of a family relationship or who has assumed responsibility for all or a portion of the care of a child.

If this were true, there'd be case law in support of it. Again, I'll wager you can't find any -- despite the fact that there must have been thousands, tens of thousands of people in Aaron's position in the past. Many of whom were probably far more egregious than Aaron.

What you have here is a novel legal theory. Prosecutors will only tend to push these things (a la Trump) when they see some kind of political advantage to them doing so. I don't see any advantage to a prosecutor in going after Aaron. Just humiliation when Aaron's lawyers get it kicked out due to there being no case to answer.

I'd really like you to prove me wrong. All it would take is just one case, somewere in that whole jurisdiction. Again, I bet you can't find one.

 

[Konstantin Romanov]

You don’t have to be a guardian for the responsibility to fall on your shoulders, according to state statute. Caretakers are liable as well. I provided the code, and you are welcome to read it independently.

I think you are describing a situation that you want to be true. Understand that I am not defending Aaron when I say that the connection you are drawing of "fed them spaghettios once of his own independent volition" to the Minnesota Statutes definition for the purposes of the section that a caregiver is one who "has assumed responsibility for all or a portion of the care of a child." is extremely tenuous. Judges do not want to make a reach like that if they can avoid it and prosecutors do not want to annoy judges by making them adjudicate weaselly overcharges.

You have now been asked three times if you can cite a case (which you don't seem to understand is what that phrase you have been bandying about "case law" means) in which somebody has been charged with child endangerment because they fed an unrelated child but did not otherwise protect them from a danger of which they had knowledge.

 

[Owlbear]

Holy shit the amount of bad math and chemistry in this thread.

Metabolites and precursors do not necessarily match up 1:1 in weight. The metabolytes may be bigger molecules or smaller molecules. There will be a published ratio but I haven't seen any evidence that anyone read it.

Also, without knowing the child's approximate weight (if you try to figure this out, you might be the pedo in this situation), you aren't going to be able to back out the weight of cocaine she consumed, and even then there will be a significant-sized confidence interval.

If you want to interpret the idea of "pg per mg," the question is "how much of your body's mass is cocaine metabolies?" You would expect that to be a pretty damn small percentage even in a very heavy user. 1 pg/mg means that 1/10^9 of your hair's mass is cocaine metabolites. 5000 pg/mg means that your hair is 5 ppm cocaine metabolites. This is a completely reasonable concentration to test for.

 

[Encoragement]

jeesus christ.. this whole nick saga makes me think how many people I perceive to be good are actually scumbags..

 

[Dyn]

You don’t have to be a guardian for the responsibility to fall on your shoulders, according to state statute. Caretakers are liable as well. I provided the code, and you are welcome to read it independently.

Heating up some spaghetti-o's for your coked up booty-call's kid doesn't establish a legal duty of care over it are you actually stupid lmao.

 

[mailfrawd]

ChatGPT seems to think a 60lb child would only have to ingest a very small amount of cocaine. This is ChatGPT though, so who knows how accurate this response actually is.

Prompt

When drug testing hair for cocaine metabolites, how much cocaine would a 60lb person have to consume to test 5000pg/ml?

Response

<a bunch of math>

...

Therefore, a 60-pound person would need to consume approximately 0.0000005 grams of cocaine to have a hair test result showing 5000 pg/mL of cocaine metabolites. This is an extremely small amount, indicating the sensitivity of hair testing for detecting even very low levels of drug consumption.

This suggests either the 9yo was barely exposed, my prompt is incorrect, and/or ChatGPT is retarded. I'm not going to dismiss any of these possibilities.

 

[Gorbus]

jeesus christ.. this whole nick saga makes me think how many people I perceive to be good are actually scumbags..

There's a good rule of thumb that if what someone uses to sell their product is their body, they're probably artificially enhanced (steroids, plastic surgery etc), even if they're telling you it's natural. They would be foolish not to; it's a competitive market, but it also means it would be foolish for you to take them at their word.

Similarly if what someone uses to sell their product is their morals or their politics, they're probably fucking lying to some degree. If someone's genuine in their morals they a) don't need to yell about it, and b) are going to come to a disagreement with their audience at some point. Do you, as a business, pursue the path that loses you some % of your audience, or do you bite your tongue for the sake of profit? Even streamers who start out honest, and intending to be honest, will run into this dilemma time and time again. But there's a world of difference between someone who tones themself down a bit for the sake of professionalism, and someone who actually believes the diametric opposite of what they say and has only contempt for their audience.

There's a reason the bible warns so many times against lip service and people who make a show of their faith in public. It's been a phenomenon in human nature since time immemorial.

 

[DumbDude43]

ChatGPT seems to think a 60lb child would only have to ingest a very small amount of cocaine. This is ChatGPT though, so who knows how accurate this response actually is.

Prompt

Response

This suggests either the 9yo was barely exposed, my prompt is incorrect, and/or ChatGPT is retarded. I'm not going to dismiss any of these possibilities.

stop asking gpt questions you fucking retard it has literally no fucking understanding of anything, all it does is construct phrases that check a bunch of 'sounds similar-ish to what the prompt asked for' boxes

 

[MeltyTW]

jeesus christ.. this whole nick saga makes me think how many people I perceive to be good are actually scumbags..

You could always tell how weak he was and how his morals were built around the same weak live and let live bs that everything else is. Just made to chug along and get money doing it without any real conviction. The more surprising thing to me is he had the unwarranted arrogance to act on it

 

[Dyn]

ChatGPT seems to think

Yeah it seems to think. It doesn't, though. Use it to pad out resumes and essays and shit you can't be bothered writing yourself, not answer actual questions.

 

[RodgerDodger]

The only way Aaron gets dragged into charges at this point is if he somehow gets placed in the room with the child doing cocaine. If he is in any way involved in that scenario. Otherwise he just gets written off as a sperging asshole, and only gets dragged into things if Nick takes it to trial.

 

[mailfrawd]

Yeah it seems to think. It doesn't, though. Use it to pad out resumes and essays and shit you can't be bothered writing yourself, not answer actual questions.

In general, when solving logic problems it's not terribly bad at it. I've thrown quite a few programmatic queries at it and while it doesn't get everything right, it can be helpful.

But you niggers can't even read the entire message to see at the end that I claimed it's possible that GPT is retarded and doesn't have accurate or reliable references available to make a calculation based on the metabolite to body weight ratios.

 

[AltisticRight]

Metabolites and precursors do not necessarily match up 1:1 in weight.

What do you mean if I sniff 10lbs of cocaine it doesn't turn into 10kg of hair what is a Metabolite is that a Pokemon? Can you explain this in terms of measuring cups and teaspoons from Walmart? How can a number be so small? It shouldn't be relevant if it's so tiny.

ChatGPT seems to think a 60lb child would only have to ingest a very small amount of cocaine. This is ChatGPT though, so who knows how accurate this response actually is.

Prompt

Response

This suggests either the 9yo was barely exposed, my prompt is incorrect, and/or ChatGPT is retarded. I'm not going to dismiss any of these possibilities.

So half a microgram of cocaine to yield 5000pg/mg in a hair test?

Then those that score 100,000 (20x) only consumed 10 micrograms?

Lol lmao even

 

[Catgirl Tyranid]

A very verbose argument.

The Prosecutor knows the state of the house and the state of the children at the moment of the arrest. Nailing Aaron at some time in the past based off a flimsy legal theory with no case law when there's not a bunch of evidence that's been freeze framed by the warrant being served with Nick and the adults arrested would be a massive waste of state resources.

There's too big a chance of failure going after Aaron and the Prosecutor already has Nick and Kayla to rake over the coals so she can claim justice is served.

When exactly did Aaron have Caregiver status? When exactly did the neglect start? How do we prove there was cocaine in the house when Aaron was there acting as care giver? Does warming up a can of SpaghettiOs even count as taking up the mantle as caregiver? The only witnesses we have that could finger Aaron as caregiver is Aaron himself or his ex-quople who all hate his guts because he told them to knock it off with the coke.

There is little incentive to go after Aaron and a very high chance of a failed prosecution. Take off your emotional blinders for a second and realize your pet theory is just a rock with googly eyes on it.

 

[Dyn]

In general, when solving logic problems it's not terribly bad at it. I've thrown quite a few programmatic queries at it and while it doesn't get everything right, it can be helpful.

But you niggers can't even read the entire message to see at the end that I claimed it's possible that GPT is retarded and doesn't have accurate or reliable references available to make a calculation based on the metabolite to body weight ratios.

Okay so the number it gave would mean that 1/100th of the cocaine you took ends up being found in literally every single microgram of your hair. That would mean the human body actually generates more cocaine than it ingests to the tune of at least 100x. It's an absolutely ridiculous answer that's several orders of magnitude off anything remotely plausible.

ChatGTP is retarded and not helpful for this.

 

[Desktop User2]

ChatGPT seems to think a 60lb child would only have to ingest a very small amount of cocaine. This is ChatGPT though, so who knows how accurate this response actually is.

Prompt

Response

This suggests either the 9yo was barely exposed, my prompt is incorrect, and/or ChatGPT is retarded. I'm not going to dismiss any of these possibilities.

30kg child, 5000pg/mg not ml... you would have to have the child density to extrapolate consumption from there LOL. The math if everything is conserved and the coke is evenly distributed around the body and not metabolized at all in the hair is 150mg or 0,15g and people already claimed it is impossible to calculate because that´s not how it works.