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.

[Salgado]

4th set.

 

[TV's Adam West]

Mommy and Daddy are fighting again!

Stop it Nick!

 

[Joggin Noggin]

I have literally no idea what this is supposed to mean lol. Can someone explain?

Josh said that Nick is a liar. Crackhead is attempting to say he doesn't lie. Of course, the irony is that this is just another lie by a cokefiend

 

[Rodeo Roadrunner]

I have literally no idea what this is supposed to mean lol. Can someone explain?

He is saying that he doesn't lie (he lies all the time btw).

 

[Swiss46]

I have literally no idea what this is supposed to mean lol. Can someone explain?

He's trying to poetically say he doesn't lie. The subtext is that he's a faggot.

 

[florida_cat_enjoyer]

Josh said that Nick is a liar. Crackhead is attempting to say he doesn't lie. Of course, the irony is that this is just another lie by a cokefiend

He is saying that he doesn't lie (he lies all the time btw).

Thank you! It makes sense now.

 

[Schpoots]

>gets kids back
>fucking dies

 

[Salgado]

Last set.

 

[MNPublicRecords]

Nick just can't resist trying to gaslight during the emergency protective hearing. He makes a speech attempting to put material and conclusions into the country report on the children that are not there. Worse of all for Nick, he seems to be clearly acting here as if he knows one of the children is going to test positive for cocaine or has already tested positive for cocaine.

“Also, I would like to indicate that the that the petition drafted by the county itself indicates that the children were in no knowledge of any drugs being in the home and are not aware of any use, and any testing of the children that would result in drug use according to the children would be because of secondary exposure from some other source”

----
edit - on second thought, I'm not totally sure if Nick is saying this before or after the test result for the child came back. If it was before, its horrific.

He's talking like he is pre-empting the case where some of the tests come back positive. Why talk like more than one kid could come back positive if only one did.

If he is proven to have said this before the test on the child came back, he and wife are total fucking monsters. Even appearing to have knowledge that kid is going to have a positive test for using cocaine means you KNEW your child was doing cocaine before the arrest. Which seems to imply that the cocaine usage was not accidental or unintended.

Let me ask you, why would he say that? The document dates to the 28th of May. When did the tests take place?
Before or after the 28th?

The police raid was on May 23. The hearing we just got the transcript of was on May 28. According to the Child Protection Order of June 7, the children were "subject to hair follicle drug testing" "after being placed out of the house", no date given.

So if the testing happened before May 28, there were only Thursday the 23rd and Friday the 24th to collect samples, get them tested, write up the results, and inform the parties. The 25th and 26th were the weekend, the 27th was Memorial Day. Maybe the lab works over the weekend, but even then they would have been surprisingly quick.

No government agency moves that quickly.
Yeah. This skeleton freak knew it would return positive results. What a fucking menace. Face the wall.

I don't know which is worse. All the nonsense where he as much as tells everyone that he expects a drug test for one of the children to come back positive

To my knowledge, there is no information on when the test took place. But from the context, it appears that the results were not available at the time of the hearing.
...
The document from June 7 specifically mentions the existence of the then-eight-year-old's positive drug test but the transcript from May 28 makes no reference of that at all. At that time the county's biggest concern with visitation supervised by the foster parents was that the grandparents may not recognize signs of drug use.

It stands to reason that if they had reason to believe one of the children had or would test positive way above the threshold for hard drugs, one would imagine it would have been mentioned in the hearing as a concern.

Interesting new matter of public record attached. Your pessimistic interpretation of the May 28th transcript's total silence on hair follicle test results would appear to be on to something, as it was not until the June 6th hearing that the guardian ad litem (GAL) said "we just got the child's hair follicle test back." Maybe there's some non-zero chance that what they "just got back" was somehow referring to something almost two weeks old, but one could be forgiven for instead inferring that Nick's ill-advised diatribe on May 28th simply reflected his expectation that positive test results were coming up in the near future. But didn't he assure his audience in the Coomalot interview that "when we heard this result, we were fucking dumbstruck, we were baffled...that's an impossible result"? How will he try to reconcile these apparent contradictions?

Predictably, the guardian ad litem also elaborated on the same usual frustration, echoed in the case plans from later in June, that the parents' persistent "inhibition to be really transparent and open" about key topics like "how did the drugs get into the home, and how do we prevent them from coming back into the home, and then how did that child test positive for cocaine" had led to an "impasse" in the guardian ad litem's efforts to develop a case plan trajectory passing through incremental benchmarks like "unsupervised visits" and "trial home visits" on the way toward unconditional reunification "before the Minnesota timeframes expire." Instead of building that successful working relationship, we've since seen the attached July 12th motion posted here previously trying to get this same guardian ad litem fired for the cardinal sin of obtaining the parents' May 30th hair follicle test results so very relevant to doing her job. Anyone wonder if antagonizing her like that got in the way of the kids coming back even sooner than now?

Warning: some may get MATI when seeing Barber's added corroboration about the poor little pug's alleged perpetual imprisonment in the bathroom that has been discussed here before. If only there were enough other witnesses to add an animal cruelty count to the complaint. FREE SUNNY!

Wasn't Aaron willing to testify about all this? He was sure full of piss and vinegar about coke bullets and bathroom blow.

He's on the official witness list in the criminal case. I do not know if he was in play for the CPS shit.

Aaron did say that he got a message from Dan Sletta. I'd be interested to see if that CPS list included Aaron, ns the call was to talk him out of testifying about thr drugs so that they could 'handle it in thr family'.

It all depends if Aaron was willing (or even asked) to testify in the family court case or the criminal. He seemed vindictive enough on his show, but he could also feel bad for the children and/or Kayla and have reneged.

This thread sure moves fast if you both missed the attached CHIPS witness list that's been here since July 3rd. Being that the state already declared its intent to call Aaron as a witness at trial and his testimony would only ever have been a vast wellspring of direct personal knowledge of extensive drug use, Nick's claim to (i.e. through) Coomalot that the state could present "zero evidence" at trial about any drug use would not appear scrupulously honest even if his May 30th hair follicle test and the child's had both been excluded from the record on one or another procedural technicality. Unfortunately for him, an evidentiary ruling that a judge must pretend that known exhibits don't exist would have zero relevance in the court of public opinion.

 

[GoudaChris]

Little piss pants Nicky seething at the farms/Null. What a bitch. Get your life in order you fuckin loser

 

[Total Annihilation]

Totally not the coke and messiness of the house.

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

I am ashamed; I must update my previous statement.

Clearly, important new matter of pubic record: my balls snitch

the fucking hell is going on

 

[Markass the Worst]

I love how leaking DMs is supposed to be some sort of big bombshell, but this really isn't. We literally already knew everything leaked in these DMs, the only new thing we know now is that Balldo has lied even more.

 

[AnimeSucksCopeAndSneed]

@Salgado

Thank you for being more competent than me.

 

[florida_cat_enjoyer]

What poetic and perfect timing for a MNPublicRecords drop!

 

[CindyChafe]

 

[Looseleaf Paper]

I love how leaking DMs is supposed to be some sort of big bombshell, but this really isn't. We literally already knew everything leaked in these DMs, the only new thing we know now is that Balldo has lied even more.

I don't know what you mean, I think it's pretty serious that Null said Nick DARED him to do something when instead he rather just ASKED. I honestly don't think I can look at Null the same way ever again. How could he misconstrue such important information. It's heart breaking.

 

[Happy Little War Painter]

"Nick you are a liar and I am not falling for it"

"Nope!"

Good one Rackets, pour another drink.

 

[dustnight]

Why did you lie JOSH??!

 

[Third World Aristocrat]

LMAO. Yeah Rekieta. You are totally rehabilitating your image leaking those DMs! Leak more!