Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta - Polysubstance enthusiast, "Lawtuber" turned Dabbleverse streamer, swinger, "whitebread ass nigga", snuffs animals for fun, visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold who lost his license to practice law. Wife's bod worth $50. The normies even know.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

What would the outcome of the harassment restraining order be?

  • A WIN for the Toe against Patrick Melton.

    Votes: 64 21.8%
  • A WIN for the Toe against Nicholas Rekieta.

    Votes: 4 1.4%
  • A MAJOR WIN for the Toe, it's upheld against both of them.

    Votes: 83 28.2%
  • Huge L, felted, cooked etc, it gets thrown out.

    Votes: 43 14.6%
  • A win for the lawyers (and Kiwi Farms) because it gets postponed again.

    Votes: 100 34.0%

  • Total voters
    294
Why the f would anyone want a Coomalot thread?!?

He’s not funny, he’s not interesting. He’s not a lolcow. He’s barely lolcow-adjacent.

The weirdest thing about him is that he interviews/hosts with titty streamers, which is almost wholesome by KF standards.
Only Coomalot wants a coomalot thread. He craves the attention and notoriety.
The most notable thing he has done is go in circles slowly in amateur racing.
Edit:
Ralph has an animal cunning though. He smelled the stink of the Balldo long before most.
Ralph using his truffle snout to sniff out xannies and degenerates in hopes to make a few dollars checks out
 
Last edited:
How many years in and this faggot is still in the 'trying to figure it out' stage of streaming.
- "When a government worker gets on the stand and lies at a hearing under oath, you don't just get to stand up and say 'nuh-uh'. [...] How do you prove they're lying when you can't testify? But what if the state knows that testifying would be very, very adverse to your interests in your other case? Oh, suddenly, they're not so worried about lying. It's amazing!"
So it was all Aaron/April's cocaine and Nick didn't even know about it despite it being in his safe and his nose and his child, but he can't testify to that or he admits to letting the Imholtes abuse his kids which hurts the neglect case, I'm guessing. But I thought Judge Pussy Liquor planted the coke? How would that implicate Nick in the CPS case?
 

Rekieta Locals Stream Snipe With Chat 09-07-24


- Couldn't do daytime streaming because of all the drug tests and the most important thing in the world, visitations with his kids. But things look promising now. Trial streams with Branca coming this week.

- Says he hasn't been trial streaming because he would have had to step away from the stream for 1-3 hours every day, and he didn't want to do that because he's a perfectionist.

- He can't go five seconds without scratching himself or touching his face.

- Nick isn't having fun. He's just getting through the day until he has his opportunity to fight.

- Nick is spending most of his day working on his case, going through documents, finding ways to cooperate where he CAN in the family case.

- "I can't wait to tell you guys the whole story!"

- "Let's say, hypothetically, the government accuses you of murder. They don't have a body, they don't have a murder weapon, they don't have witnesses [....] they just have a missing person. And the government says 'We need you to prove you didn't murder.... we need you to prove you won't murder again'."

- There's stuff the state doesn't even know yet that he wants to talk about but he can't.

- His tattoo is getting finished this month.

- "When a government worker gets on the stand and lies at a hearing under oath, you don't just get to stand up and say 'nuh-uh'. [...] How do you prove they're lying when you can't testify? But what if the state knows that testifying would be very, very adverse to your interests in your other case? Oh, suddenly, they're not so worried about lying. It's amazing!"

- Nick hasn't lied at all. People just think he's lying because they don't know the story.

- Show was 1h6m, took 20 minutes to get the stream started.
I'm gonna address a few of these.

--------
- Couldn't do daytime streaming because of all the drug tests and the most important thing in the world, visitations with his kids.
Couldn't do daytime streaming because of all the drugs, the most important thing in the world (Fixed this for accuracy)
-------
- "I can't wait to tell you guys the whole story!"
We already know the story for the most part, we knew most of it before Nick was even arrested. Anything legitimate that Nick adds to it can only make the story worse.
-------
- "Let's say, hypothetically, the government accuses you of murder. They don't have a body, they don't have a murder weapon, they don't have witnesses [....] they just have a missing person. And the government says 'We need you to prove you didn't murder.... we need you to prove you won't murder again'."

The government has the Cocaine, the ketamine, the child drug tests, the drug paraphernalia with drugs detected on them, hundreds of hours of streaming footage of substance abuse, you repeatedly telling your audience that you do drugs, several witnesses of you acting like a junkie who neglects your children, a few direct witnesses of you doing drugs at conventions, one witness who was staying over at your house claiming that he did drugs with you. This case is not built on speculative circumstantial evidence, there's tons of direct evidence.
-----
- There's stuff the state doesn't even know yet that he wants to talk about but he can't.
Why not? if it's exculpatory information then how could it possibly hurt him? why save it for a trial? why even have a trial if you can prove your innocence right now?
-----
- How do you prove they're lying when you can't testify?

You CAN testify though, if you're innocent and have clear and convincing exculpatory evidence (as he seems to claim) that you can attest to then why not? you can tell your lawyers to let you testify and there isn't a damn thing they can do about it. Just tell them the true story that you're a good boy who dindu nuffin and if it isn't complete bullshit then it's your best chance at convincing a jury.
-----
- Nick hasn't lied at all. People just think he's lying because they don't know the story.

I don't even need to point to all the lying by omission, lying through sarcasm, irony and self deprecation or lying through deflection that he does, Nick is just a straight up lying liar who lies, about everything.
 
Last edited:
You CAN testify though, if you're innocent and have clear and convincing exculpatory evidence (as he seems to claim) that you can attest to then why not? you can tell your lawyers to let you testify and there isn't a damn thing they can do about it. Just tell them the true story that you're a good boy who dindu nuffin and if it isn't complete bullshit then it's your best chance at convincing a jury.
Not a Nick defender by any means but you should absolutely not: speak to the police, testify on your own behalf, or basically do anything of the sort. The moment you open your mouth is the moment they start compiling things against you and if you fuck up and even say one wrong thing or one iota of your story changes for any reason, they will run you down with it. Nick is doomed because he's already a fuckin liar, but tbh even if I was 100% innocent I still would not speak to the police or get on the stand for myself. Yeah, you definitely can make your lawyers put you up there to testify but its not a good idea. Especially if you are prone to letting your emotions get the best of you or engage in double talk like Nick likes to do. Being "technically" in the right will just piss a jury off and unfortunately for everyone, they pretty much can convict you whether you are actually guilty or not, so you really don't wanna piss them off.
 
Has Nick ever explained why his “heat allergy” is immune to the effects of a literal hot tub?
Because a hot tub is not someone forcing a dress code on him at work or making him touch grass.

I have poked a lot of fun at that inconsistency, but it ends up that the answer is laziness.

Anyone ever seen him falling asleep on a stream from his narcolepsy or hear that he fell asleep while driving his kids all of MN during the day? Guy is so full of shit.

That was what the COCAINE was for, you incel, Scandinavian prude!

To be fair, Nick maintains a healthy relationship with his wife and his girlfriend.

Separately, sure! Nick took that old advice about wives and mistress', but failed to keep them separate. Sure with all the driving he had to do, he could have hade any number of rendezvous at seedy motels!

Rekieta Locals Stream Snipe With Chat 09-07-24


- Couldn't do daytime streaming because of all the drug tests and the most important thing in the world, visitations with his kids. But things look promising now. Trial streams with Branca coming this week.

- Says he hasn't been trial streaming because he would have had to step away from the stream for 1-3 hours every day, and he didn't want to do that because he's a perfectionist.

- He can't go five seconds without scratching himself or touching his face.

- Nick isn't having fun. He's just getting through the day until he has his opportunity to fight.

- Nick is spending most of his day working on his case, going through documents, finding ways to cooperate where he CAN in the family case.

- "I can't wait to tell you guys the whole story!"

- "Let's say, hypothetically, the government accuses you of murder. They don't have a body, they don't have a murder weapon, they don't have witnesses [....] they just have a missing person. And the government says 'We need you to prove you didn't murder.... we need you to prove you won't murder again'."

- There's stuff the state doesn't even know yet that he wants to talk about but he can't.

- His tattoo is getting finished this month.

- "When a government worker gets on the stand and lies at a hearing under oath, you don't just get to stand up and say 'nuh-uh'. [...] How do you prove they're lying when you can't testify? But what if the state knows that testifying would be very, very adverse to your interests in your other case? Oh, suddenly, they're not so worried about lying. It's amazing!"

- Nick hasn't lied at all. People just think he's lying because they don't know the story.

- Show was 1h6m, took 20 minutes to get the stream started.

Adding a few points to this:

- Nick makes a passive-aggressive joke early wen someone calls out his juice drink choice. He says that he doesn't have much choice in drinks.

- Nick is trying to get to 3 days a week streaming (mostly daytime was my interprestation) starting with the Baldwin Trial. Branca will be on, but he will have to step away in the middle for a visit with kids. He is not sure if he will end the stream or not during that. He has plans!

- Consistent schedules are hard because he is being drug tested, visiting his kids, and doing other things for the State.

- Nick had a rant about hating LawTube and the plan to simulstream. He said that streaming with them would be as bad as his current legal situation. He will stream with 'good lawyers' and he hopes the rest make a million dollars.

- He ranted at the LOCALS staff about the technical issues. The app looks better but works worse. He has been holding back but speaking his truth now. He used to like them.

Isn't this almost verbatim what he was saying about motegraph?
I clearly remember nick saying something to the effect of "montegraph can't prove he's not a pedo"

Nick, prove you AREN'T a child abuser! I haven't seen any evidence that you ARE NOT, and you refuse to provide it. *Smugly eat a single Dorito*

I hadn't seen confirmation of this before (although I think it was very widely assumed), but near the end of the stream he stated that the kids were staying with family.

He wouldn't say more than that, but definitely not a random foster situation as the "CPS custody" wording in the leaked docs caused some to think.

He said this on his stream with Coomalot and Ralph. YellowFlash also sad so, and the court documents and policies seems to support that. I believe it.

Not a Nick defender by any means but you should absolutely not: speak to the police, testify on your own behalf, or basically do anything of the sort. The moment you open your mouth is the moment they start compiling things against you and if you fuck up and even say one wrong thing or one iota of your story changes for any reason, they will run you down with it. Nick is doomed because he's already a fuckin liar, but tbh even if I was 100% innocent I still would not speak to the police or get on the stand for myself. Yeah, you definitely can make your lawyers put you up there to testify but its not a good idea. Especially if you are prone to letting your emotions get the best of you or engage in double talk like Nick likes to do. Being "technically" in the right will just piss a jury off and unfortunately for everyone, they pretty much can convict you whether you are actually guilty or not, so you really don't wanna piss them off.

Exactly the thing Nick DID do! The legal genius!
 
Not a Nick defender by any means but you should absolutely not: speak to the police, testify on your own behalf, or basically do anything of the sort
You’re right about never talking with the police, but testifying on your own behalf is more a case by case basis thing. It’s preferable to avoid it in criminal trials if possible, but it may be necessary for a defense. It also may be something you can’t avoid, like in civil trials.
Not this matters for this case, because as you said, nicks a liar. And he’s lying publicly on the internet, all of which the prosecution can (likely) show in trial if they wanted to.

Something about Crackety Rackets line here is really bothering me though. He’s implying that there’s some testimony he could give in the CPS case to win it, but that it would hinder his criminal case. That just doesn’t make sense to me. In what world would something that proves your not a complete failure as a parent also show you’re guilty of the criminal charges? The only thing I can think of is that he would have to be honest and admit to the drug possession, but that he would be able to explain away his daughter’s drug test with that admission.
Idk, I’ll need to think more about this, but something about this whole line just stinks.
 
You’re right about never talking with the police, but testifying on your own behalf is more a case by case basis thing. It’s preferable to avoid it in criminal trials if possible, but it may be necessary for a defense. It also may be something you can’t avoid, like in civil trials.
Not this matters for this case, because as you said, nicks a liar. And he’s lying publicly on the internet, all of which the prosecution can (likely) show in trial if they wanted to.

Something about Crackety Rackets line here is really bothering me though. He’s implying that there’s some testimony he could give in the CPS case to win it, but that it would hinder his criminal case. That just doesn’t make sense to me. In what world would something that proves your not a complete failure as a parent also show you’re guilty of the criminal charges? The only thing I can think of is that he would have to be honest and admit to the drug possession, but that he would be able to explain away his daughter’s drug test with that admission.
Idk, I’ll need to think more about this, but something about this whole line just stinks.

His secret testimony is either a bald-face lie, or it is something like: 'You said I murdered my kids, but I only beat them!' pedantic nonsense.

I lean toward the former. He will just count on people having short memories, but the Farms will remember.
 
Has Nick ever explained why his “heat allergy” is immune to the effects of a literal hot tub?
Heat? Dude, there's nothing COOLER than a scrawny over-the-hill pervert sitting in a hot tub while his kids have been taken away from him by the state.

Nick Rekieta oozes class and style.
 
Last edited:
- "Let's say, hypothetically, the government accuses you of murder. They don't have a body, they don't have a murder weapon, they don't have witnesses [....] they just have a missing person. And the government says 'We need you to prove you didn't murder.... we need you to prove you won't murder again'."

Lets say hypothetically that the government accuses you of child abuse. They have a test of your child that shows she was a regular user of cocaine. They have 26 grams of cocaine and equipment used to prepare cocaine which was found in your bedroom and your house.

The government then says "you must prove to the standard of raising a reasonable doubt that the cocaine is not yours and that you have no liability or responsibility as a parent for your 9 year old child using cocaine.

If the standard in child neglect or physical abuse cases required that the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the abuser WILL abuse the child again in future (or return the child to the parent), it would allow any abuse to go unchecked legally. All the person would have to do is say "I have no intentions of doing that again" and the child would be given back to them so that the cycle could resume.



- There's stuff the state doesn't even know yet that he wants to talk about but he can't.
Yeah. There are only two things that matter in the case.

1) You have provide some convincing explanation of why 26 grams of coke was what you admit is your bedroom in your house and why that coke had nothing with you.

2) You have to provide a convincing explanation of why your daughter has a large amount of cocaine in her system.

- "When a government worker gets on the stand and lies at a hearing under oath, you don't just get to stand up and say 'nuh-uh'. [...] How do you prove they're lying when you can't testify? But what if the state knows that testifying would be very, very adverse to your interests in your other case? Oh, suddenly, they're not so worried about lying. It's amazing!"

If any witness in a court proceeding is lying under oath and you have proof of that lie, you have your attorney provide that proof for you in any number of ways.

However, going on the stand and simply calling someone a liar without any supporting evidence or facts is NOT a form of proof. That is inevitably simply a way to emotionally influence a jury through an argument. Of course as well, its Nick once again trying to gaslight people with his argument to the effect that only he has the "complete" truth but cannot show the complete truth to us for reasons.
 
His secret testimony is either a bald-face lie, or it is something like: 'You said I murdered my kids, but I only beat them!' pedantic nonsense.

I lean toward the former. He will just count on people having short memories, but the Farms will remember.
"Well, you see, I was already neglecting the kids when we had the nanny, so her quitting is the real crime, and I will be suing her for a million dollars."
 
On his channel, he'll complain about how the government forces dads to take plea deals even when they did nothing wrong.
The "divorced dad moaning" grift-o-sphere is pretty full, from what I understand. But it could still be potentially lucrative for Nick.
The reasons why some drugs are legal and some aren't pair up rather neatly with how irresponsible they cause people to behave.
Alcohol is arguably very damaging to the brain and causes people to behave in very destructive ways, yet it's legal and advertised everywhere.
Mexican food is just slop in the truest sense of the word.
Isn't "white Midwestern" food stuff like
tater tot casserole? Would you like tacos more if they included a can of condensed cream of mushroom soup?
By that rationale Nick and Dick must also want to fuck corpses.
This reminds me of a Valerie Solanas quote that really encapsulates Nick and Dax.
"Eaten up with guilt, shame, fears and insecurities and obtaining, if he's lucky, a barely perceptible physical feeling, the male is, nonetheless, obsessed with screwing; he'll swim a river of snot, wade nostril-deep through a mile of vomit, if he thinks there'll be a friendly pussy awaiting him. He'll screw a woman he despises, any snaggle-toothed hag, and, further, pay for the opportunity. Why? Relieving physical tension isn't the answer, as masturbation suffices for that. It's not ego satisfaction; that doesn't explain screwing corpses and babies."
As he said himself, when talking about the “worst day” in May or June of 2022, he’s trying to play chess with God & thinks he can win.
He should start gambling, Bossman-style.
 
- "Let's say, hypothetically, the government accuses you of murder. They don't have a body, they don't have a murder weapon, they don't have witnesses [....] they just have a missing person. And the government says 'We need you to prove you didn't murder.... we need you to prove you won't murder again'."
He is so fucking dishonest he can't even make they hypo remotely close to what he did......a more accurate version would be "We heard the screaming and then watched you come back on covered in blood. The police then found the body in your house."

- There's stuff the state doesn't even know yet that he wants to talk about but he can't.
They're going to learn about it through reciprocal discovery obligations

- "When a government worker gets on the stand and lies at a hearing under oath, you don't just get to stand up and say 'nuh-uh'. [...] How do you prove they're lying when you can't testify? But what if the state knows that testifying would be very, very adverse to your interests in your other case? Oh, suddenly, they're not so worried about lying. It's amazing!"
Wait, that's his proof.....his own fucking testimony? lololololololol

I thought he'd have some type of documentation or recording of his interactions with CPS.

What a tool.


- Nick hasn't lied at all. People just think he's lying because they don't know the story.
I can't wait to hear his explanation of what actually happened.
 
- "Let's say, hypothetically, the government accuses you of murder. They don't have a body, they don't have a murder weapon, they don't have witnesses [....] they just have a missing person. And the government says 'We need you to prove you didn't murder.... we need you to prove you won't murder again'."
What kind of analogy even is this? The drugs were found in Nick’s house and his own daughter tested positive. It’s more along the lines of a dead body was found in his house and his prints were found on the smoking gun.

They found the coke and the daughter tested positive. I don’t understand how you can try and weasel talk your way out of it other than through severe mental retardation. It seems pretty open and shut.

I’d be inclined to maybe suspect a gubmint conspiracy against Nick if this came out of the blue in 2019. But we could see the visible effects of stimulant abuse for months. This didn’t just come out of nowhere lol.
 
What kind of analogy even is this? The drugs were found in Nick’s house and his own daughter tested positive. It’s more along the lines of a dead body was found in his house and his prints were found on the smoking gun.

They found the coke and the daughter tested positive. I don’t understand how you can try and weasel talk your way out of it other than through severe mental retardation. It seems pretty open and shut.

I’d be inclined to maybe suspect a gubmint conspiracy against Nick if this came out of the blue in 2019. But we could see the visible effects of stimulant abuse for months. This didn’t just come out of nowhere lol.
Nick is Balldo-deep in the cope.
 
Back