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: 63 18.1%
  • A WIN for the Toe against Nicholas Rekieta.

    Votes: 4 1.1%
  • A MAJOR WIN for the Toe, it's upheld against both of them.

    Votes: 92 26.4%
  • Huge L, felted, cooked etc, it gets thrown out.

    Votes: 54 15.5%
  • A win for the lawyers (and Kiwi Farms) because it gets postponed again.

    Votes: 135 38.8%

  • Total voters
    348
KADN just published a story including a statement by Null. It’s full of gems, including “live-in nanny,” April Imholte (now Anderson).


The first journalist in history to give KF a fair shake and it was a guy that does sports and weather on a local Louisiana Fox affiliate. He's going places.
 
I unironically hope no autistic faggots show up to disrupt the trial like they did at that zoom hearing

Going to the court and making a retarded spectacle of yourself by yelling "hey, balldo!" only helps Nick
Actively disrupt the proceedings and the BEST that will happen is you get hauled out of court. More likely it's in cuffs, though.
 
Real quick, people: I went back to read the OP to figure out the "voluntary member" joke (still don't get it), and I saw that the OP was posted in 2019 by that decent bloke Himedall, who joined in 2021. Can someone explain that to me? Should I be trying to initiate gay sex with him in order to get the hook-up on his time travel capabilities?
 
Real quick, people: I went back to read the OP to figure out the "voluntary member" joke (still don't get it), and I saw that the OP was posted in 2019 by that decent bloke Himedall, who joined in 2021. Can someone explain that to me? Should I be trying to initiate gay sex with him in order to get the hook-up on his time travel capabilities?
himedall just recently rewrote the OP with great effort
the voluntary member thing happened yesterday after a pedophile retard called himself a volunteer member of KF in a request to the court
 
To all Kiwi court reporters
I WANT DETAILED COURT REPORTS
I will bring a notebook, I specifically mean WHAT kiwis are looking for. A subtle facial expression as a result of a line of questioning, a concerted effort to distract from a line of questioning, specific strategies his defensive team may try to distract an appointed jury with. I am NOT a court reporter, I can only legally record everything I can keep up with in a written form, and I'm not somebody who can write and pay attention at 100% capacity concurrently. If there's something specific that anyone is looking for, I need to know I should be paying attention for it while doing my mandatory and willful reporting. Otherwise, I'm assuming my friends on the site just want a general attitude, state of being, and responses to the pertinent questions.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but the only reason for individuals to go to the hearing would be to get a transript early, ie before the court reporter transcript is released. I don't think there is a need for an entire transcript to happen early, as an entire transcript will be available to the public anyway. If people were going to go and take notes, I would think the things to note down would be things that the court reporter wouldn't note, like:
  • Is Nick wearing the hot topic belt? Is he wearing his leather jacket?
  • Does he have a red neck? Is he sniffing like he did a line of coke?
  • Does Kayla look like a pilled-out zombie?
  • Does Nick keep whispering/gesturing with his attorney, as if he is trying to micro-manage his defense and tell his attorney exactly what to do?
I am assuming you can take notes like that, those are things that would be the funniest to me.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but the only reason for individuals to go to the hearing would be to get a transript early, ie before the court reporter transcript is released.
Scribbling on a legal pad is not going to get you a "transcript" and that isn't remotely the point.
 
Not every judge does, but some judges do. If Rekieta's judge does, it hurts the credibility of those arguing that the public should be entitled to attend and fully observe proceedings. And even if the judge doesn't say anything, a bunch of spergs in t-shirts showing up will occupy another 2 pages of Rekieta's next attempt to block the publication of the actual trial.


It's not, and any person who has actually practiced before a judge in a courtroom will tell you to not dress like a retard under normal circumstances where nobody is watching. You may disagree that a suit and tie are proper for these circumstances—and slacks, dress shoes, and a dress shirt will probably be fine in all honesty—but if you want to be totally inscrutable and be certain that you're not causing any problems for the judge, Josh, or anyone who wants to observe the trial in the future, then you should put in the effort to appear serious. In American legal practice outside of the West Coast and certain areas like tech, startups, etc.—and before a conservative judge in a conservative area—serious attire means a suit and tie.
Tl; dr: dress like the parents you wish you had.

Or:

Still think an actual suit and tie would be overdoing it, as nothing more than a courtroom observer. But when in Minnesota, dress as the Minnesotans.
Some Minnesotans go to the opera in jeans. Don't do that. Dressing decently signals respect for the Court. Wear a pair of khakis and a button-up (or button-down) shirt. Preferably not obviously recently balled-up in a remote corner of your closet after a messy spaghetti dinner. Morning suits and/or ascots are not necessary.

[80,000 "what should I wear" comnents]

...Y'all retards (said with :feels: ).
Here's some inspo. A jacket over any of these is even better, but you'll be fine. And idk why men's pants are all so skinny rn. Unnecessary. Be neat. Tuck in your shirt. At least clean your sneaks. Between smart casual and business casual is good.

1723860993058.jpeg
1723861352166.jpeg
1723861372683.jpeg

Gals:

(long cardigans are a great alt to jackets, especially in summer or if you're not a 4).
1723861527812.jpeg

1723862589750.jpeg1723862022795.jpeg

Idk why they're all neutrals. Unnecessary. As are kitten heels. Unless you want.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but the only reason for individuals to go to the hearing would be to get a transript early, ie before the court reporter transcript is released. I don't think there is a need for an entire transcript to happen early, as an entire transcript will be available to the public anyway.
Balldo is fighting to get everything sealed, and I'm tired of MN Public Records drip feeding shit, to the point where I was going to go to the courthouse and get all the dox in person since I was in Minnesota for business anyway but, then it was revealed everyone who requests court documents is getting their dox released.
 
Morning suits and/or ascots are not necessary.
Ascots are absolutely inappropriate attire for court. In fact, they're inappropriate unless you're Fred from Scooby-Doo.

Found the story:
A Milwaukee judge known as a fastidious dresser held up a sentencing hearing for three hours yesterday because a prosecutor came to court wearing an ascot.

Judge William Sosnay said the ascot violates a court rule that requires lawyers to wear neckties and “borders on contemptuous,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports.

“This is not about the definition of an ascot or a necktie,” Sosnay said. “This is an issue which I believe deals with the integrity of the court.”

The prosecutor, Warren Zier, wore a red ascot that matched the handkerchief in the breast pocket of his pinstriped suit. The newspaper has a picture of Zier’s courtroom attire.

The manager of Harleys for Men haberdashery begged to differ with the judge. Ben Norris told the Journal Sentinel that ascots are considered formal and might be worn to a fancy dinner party. He pointed out that Hugh Hefner has worn them for decades.
 
Last edited:
Apologies if this has already been clarified, are there any witnesses due to be at Court on Wednesday? I'm thinking Imholte in particular.

Also do they allow live tweeting from these court rooms?
Pen & papper only friend hope you have good hand writing. ✍️
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Procrastinhater
Back