State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Rekieta, Kayla Rekieta, April Imholte

Will Nicholas Rekieta take the plea deal offered to him?


  • Total voters
    1,268
  • Poll closed .
Even if the cops happen to be off duty, they might have, I dunno, a 9 year old kid at home to take care of. I guess that's hard to understand for the Defendant since he'd just let her play with his cocaine to keep her busy.
2 days is plenty of time to file a motion to quash if the subpoena is unreasonable. If they can't appear on Wednesday, the hearing would just get rescheduled to a date when everyone is available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Long-time Lurker
Doesn't not seem exactly smart move from man who has been swatted infinite number of times...
mild PL - I was chatting with a local cop and out of curiosity asked how he would feel about receiving a subpoena the day before the hearing.

His response: “I mean, you’re gonna do it if you were supposed to be at work anyway. But I’m gonna be super mad about it, and it’s not going to go well for the person who dragged me in.”

Nick might be in for a rough go. He should have a drink to take the edge off.
 
What you're suggesting would be witness tampering.
Is it? @AnOminous or @waffle or @Sheryl Nome ? Isn’t witness tampering only if you influence a witnesses testimony? IANAL which is why I @ Null to ask his lawyers.

If so then don’t show him shit and ask if he would be willing to sign a release of the body cam and if someone else in the department is willing to sign a release.
 
Weren't they the cops who talked to April? Sounds to me like somebody knows whose testimony is going to be presented as evidence via the prosecution and desperately wants to discredit it.
Pomplun was the guy who wrote the warrant application, investigated his stream, and all that.

(ETA: according to Nick's motion) Braness read April her rights while he had her in custody. He then left to get her shoes and gave her over to Pomplun plus one other cop.
 
I looked a little further. Both are peace officers and were "served" via Lori, whom I presume was at the front desk, at the Kandiyohi County Sheriff's Office. Service itself was Monday August 19th (yesterday). It was filed this morning at 8:07 AM. (How much money on the service being near end of business Monday?)

It is a little less outrageous to serve cops without much notice, I guess.
It's not like it's a subpoena on a couple randos. It would be entirely expected that they might have to show up over a fairly high profile bust for a small town.
What you're suggesting would be witness tampering.
Why would it be? He's not trying to solicit their nonappearance or get them to change their testimony with threats or bribery. If he asked his lawyer to do it and his lawyer thought there was anything improper about it, he'd be entirely capable of telling Null that himself.

I'm not sure it's worth the attempt but witness tampering requires, you know, tampering.
His response: “I mean, you’re gonna do it if you were supposed to be at work anyway. But I’m gonna be super mad about it, and it’s not going to go well for the person who dragged me in.”
I think Nick's probably delusional if he thinks this guy is going to give him anything useful, and it would have to be something that wasn't in his filing.
 
Last edited:
Why would it be? He's not trying to solicit their nonappearance or get them to change their testimony with threats or bribery. If he asked his lawyer to do it and his lawyer thought there was anything improper about it, he'd be entirely capable of telling Null that himself.

I'm not sure it's worth the attempt but witness tampering requires, you know, tampering.
There's just no reason to show the witness a bunch of clips of the defendant calling him a liar, unless you thought it would influence him somehow. And if you're trying to influence him somehow, it's kinda right on the edge of being improper. But yes, I'm entirely sure that Null's lawyer would know this.

He'll probably get a fairly accurate impression of what Nick thinks of his truthfulness when he's being questioned by Nick's attorney, anyway.
 
New discovery disclosure just came in the MCRO. The new disclosure is a lab report and a supplemental police report. Unfortunately, the documents are not included, but are possibly referenced in the hearing tomorrow.
1724183828297.png1724183869260.png
 

Attachments

New discovery disclosure just came in the MCRO. The new disclosure is a lab report and a supplemental police report. Unfortunately, the documents are not included, but are possibly referenced in the hearing tomorrow.
It's the BCA laboratory testing which Rekieta was whining just last week to Dax about how they STILL never did it.

:story:

:story:

:story:

EDIT: Here's the clip

 
Last edited:
The strategy of introducing last minute motions and subpoenas to delay the state and attempting to poke holes in the warrant is sound. If none of that pans out he can always just take a plea deal.

FWIW, he's doing all the right things, and just hoping that he can catch a break. It's unlikely he will though and he'll take a plea. No way he takes this to trial, I mean, Nick is retarded but not that retarded.

I hope I'm wrong though, at least on the last part. Him taking this to a jury trial would be incredibly entertaining.
 
So the prosecution just threw the ball back to the defense, disclosing what the BCA lab report and the Pomplun police report contains.
Did this disclosure shoot holes in Nicks Defense plans or did the disclosure give Nick hope?
Who is scrambling now?
Smug intensifies?
 
The strategy of introducing last minute motions and subpoenas to delay the state and attempting to poke holes in the warrant is sound. If none of that pans out he can always just take a plea deal.

FWIW, he's doing all the right things, and just hoping that he can catch a break. It's unlikely he will though and he'll take a plea. No way he takes this to trial, I mean, Nick is retarded but not that retarded.

I hope I'm wrong though, at least on the last part. Him taking this to a jury trial would be incredibly entertaining.
NO NICK, don't listen to this rational INCEL PRUDE. You are the LAW. POPE. You can beat the state with your mental acumen! Keep writing legal documents and forcing your lawyer to include them in his filings! It's the only way to prove the KAREN FARMERS wrong!
 
Back