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 20.1%
  • A WIN for the Toe against Nicholas Rekieta.

    Votes: 4 1.3%
  • A MAJOR WIN for the Toe, it's upheld against both of them.

    Votes: 86 27.0%
  • Huge L, felted, cooked etc, it gets thrown out.

    Votes: 51 16.0%
  • A win for the lawyers (and Kiwi Farms) because it gets postponed again.

    Votes: 113 35.5%

  • Total voters
    318
The absolute shit quality of Nick's legal filings is also probably attributable to his lawyer being a Twitter-obsessed boomercon with 11.5K posts in less than 2 years.

lolyer2.PNG
Link

Google also thinks he operates out of a Lane Bryant (for non-Amerimutts, Lane Bryant is a clothing store for fat women).

lolyer.PNG
 
I was also surprised to see the price tag. The tulle is obviously very cheap and stiff. Sequins scream “cheap” in any context. There’s runs in the fabric and loose threads everywhere. Stitching is sloppy as hell. It just looks bad.
Yeah, fully agreed. I wore some sparkly sequin dresses in my late teen new agey phase, so I can have empathy for bad taste, but this is just awful, especially when you have a few hundred dollars to play with. You can do tacky and still look if not okay then at least not terrible.

It's also not impossible that it's not a new dress, but something April borrowed from Kayla, which would be hilarious. I think there was a photo of Kayla on Nick's instagram where she was wearing a similar style dress, not the same, but similar sparkly prom vibe. I guess that's what Nick likes.

1724512788978.jpeg
 
Also, if this goes to trial, I want Balldoman's lawyer mention Nick's "heat allergies" at least once. PLEASE.
My retarded and totally true and honest prediction IF this goes to trial is that his idiotic arguments end up with the jury and judge having to watch the entire cokestream, including the 45 minute 'bathroom break' uninterrupted (advancing the video where it's just a chair would be modifying it after all!) and finally the meme from the ancient days of Lawsplaining will be true, Nick will get someone the electric chair.

Himself. :really:

Edit: included dramatization.
the_trial_and_frying_of_Dick_Licketa.jpg
 
Last edited:
EVS says that Nick told him that the police touched his daughter's hair with cocaine on their gloves and that is why his daughter tested positive. Nick also claimed that it is on video (bodycam footage?). Is this something Nick tells people to try and control the narrative, or is he really wanting to try this as a defense? Is this the "full story" he keeps saying will come out? I wonder if he means to admit that there was cocaine in his house or if he intends to say the police brought cocaine into his house.
@Null's theory has been confirmed. Rekieta has been feeding conspiracy theories about what is shown on the footage to his fat moron friends (Dax, Ralph, EVS) so they can spread lies on his behalf without Rekieta himself being implicated!

Ethan even gives the game up directly!
"Now it's the kind of thing that you would want out there. Like it's honestly it's the kind of secret that you would tell because you weren't allowed to say it but you would hope other people would get out there and say it, you know, on your behalf, so that you don't have to say it...."

Rekieta earlier hinted STRONGLY at this conspiracy theory on his show with Dax.

He specifically pointed out that "I know and can say definitively that while in our care in our home, those children were never exposed to any illegal substances" (1:23 of below clip) and then at 2:32 (timestamped in below clip) Rekieta specifies that he later learned his children were taken back into the home "several times" by during the search AFTER Rekieta was arrested, which he implies may have something to do with it by immediately afterwards stating that the hair follicle test is "hugely environmental".

 
It's also not impossible that it's not a new dress, but something April borrowed from Kayla, which would be hilarious. I think there was a photo of Kayla on Nick's instagram where she was wearing a similar style dress, not the same, but similar sparkly prom vibe. I guess that's what Nick likes.

Nick is obsessed with his e-daddy Juju who peaked as a prom king. The prom aesthetic obsession is a natural outflow of such .

(In consideration of Juju and Vito's IQ-deficiency, this is a joke)
 
Nick is obsessed with his e-daddy Juju who peaked as a prom king. The prom aesthetic obsession is a natural outflow of such .

(In consideration of Juju and Vito's IQ-deficiency, this is a joke)
I have no doubt Nick is sending him photos of April for that daddy validation and Dax is trolling him by saying how amazing she is.
 
I think those two would make a pretty sweet sitcom. Nick and Ralph: Two podcasters constantly trying to sneakily backstab each other, while getting into hilarious (often drug fueled) hijinks.
One and Half Men, would be a good title.

The judge is gonna watch it, immediately join the farms, and become an active member
Who knows he could be here right now, oh shit I've said too much. Strike this comment from the record.

The AGP smirk is doing wonders 🙈
That's a sneer induced by the smell of her own undercarriage. Nick please tell April to use unscented soap and santatise your Balldo.

I lurk and was clicking through the highlights, calm down nigger.
It's just the faggy way you said it that raised suspicion.
 
Rekieta has been arguing about his case on Twitter for the last 3 hours

There are so many tweets I don't care enough to archive and screenshot individually, I only archived his main page and took screenshots from that archived page.

His first screed was too long and had to be archived individually.
His theory of the case is now "muh video compression"

View attachment 6340363
Archive

The rest:
View attachment 6340365
View attachment 6340349
View attachment 6340350
View attachment 6340347
View attachment 6340348
View attachment 6340345
View attachment 6340346
View attachment 6340342
View attachment 6340343
(Archive for above tweets)
Now maybe I'm just slow, but he keeps going back to this refrain of "arguing the wrong thing", has he ever actually said what the right thing to argue is? Is this just another "I know but I'm not telling!" thing, or is he really trying to die on the hill of hyper-semantics that the compression/color grading/ bitrate/ et cetera constitutes an actual significant alteration? NAL, but that just sounds like an awful idea.
 
Hence why I clarify I cannot make any scientific claim. Short of Null tracking his IP and throwing him in the penis explosion chamber we can't 100 percent know and all I can do is state my strong suspicions.
I don't think it's him, dude. I think you should just drop this. I think it's a guy who just doesn't like the test you are using. I have heard plenty of other reasonable people criticize those tests. I think the impetus for all this is that some people (including myself) thought it would be interesting to run Write's and Rekieta's writing through a AI thing and see what the results would be, and not that the results of those tests would constitute a smoking gun.

Honestly, I'm inclined to think that if Nick did ever show up here it would be so blatantly obvious you wouldn't need any sort of test.
 
EVS says that Nick told him that the police touched his daughter's hair with cocaine on their gloves and that is why his daughter tested positive. Nick also claimed that it is on video (bodycam footage?). Is this something Nick tells people to try and control the narrative, or is he really wanting to try this as a defense? Is this the "full story" he keeps saying will come out? I wonder if he means to admit that there was cocaine in his house or if he intends to say the police brought cocaine into his house.
damn, you mean to tell me the bodycam footage has evidence of the police contaminating the crime scene? what da?
 
Is Nick seriously blaming artifacting for the cocaine now? That was literally a joke I made a couple of days ago about stuff that might actually be a concern in a different scenario, has he seriously started claiming it's applicable here???
That's more of him trying to lie to his fans through his trademark ambiguous implications.

Nick's saying:
"The cop said on the warrant request that the video he watched was the same as the original, but it was actually a reupload by COG. So that means COG could have edited the video and presented it as the original and no one would have have known it was edited. The cop knew this was a possibility and lied by saying that it was the original on the warrant on purpose to fuck with me."

Screenshot_20240824-111200.png

It's an argument designed so, even if it doesn't work (it likely won't, any reasonable person would believe that cog's reupload is essentially a replacement for the original, especially if it matches any testimony made or online discussions of the stream. It also ignores the fact the cop said it was the video "taken off" Nick's channel, which means it has to be a reupload, since that's the only way they could have gotten a video that was taken off before they could watch it on Nick's channel), it'll give his simps a way to ignore the video because he's using words like "edited" and claiming the police lied. Now they'll just assume the bad stuff Nick was doing was somehow edited with AI or crisis actors or something.

Screenshot_20240824-111459.png
 
Last edited:
That's more of him trying to lie to his fans through his trademark ambiguous implications.

Nick's saying:
"The cop said on the warrant request that the video he watched was the same as the original, but it was actually a reupload by COG. So that means the cop didn't mention the off chance that COG could have edited the video to make me look worse, even if he didn't edit it. The cop knew this was a possibility and lied that it was the original on the warrant on purpose to fuck with me."

View attachment 6342679

It's an argument designed so, even if it doesn't work (it likely won't, any reasonable person would believe that cog's reupload is essentially a replacement for the original, especially if it matches any testimony made or online discussions of the stream. It also ignores the fact the cop said it was the video "taken off" Nick's channel, which means it has to be a reupload, since that's the only way they could have gotten a video that was taken off before they could watch it on Nick's channel), it'll give his simps a way to ignore the video because he's using words like "edited" and claiming the police lied. Now they'll just assume the bad stuff Nick was doing was somehow edited with AI or crisis actors or something.

View attachment 6342791

Look man, you're providing a pretty good argument but on the other hand DarthGoku69 is saying it could all just be CGI that COG did. I'm inclined to believe Ussj4Brolli. Really the only question that remains for us is how did COG CGI the real cocaine into Nick's gun safe and into his child's bloodstream?
 
It's an argument designed so, even if it doesn't work (it likely won't, any reasonable person would believe that cog's reupload is essentially a replacement for the original, especially if it matches any testimony made or online discussions of the stream. It also ignores the fact the cop said it was the video "taken off" Nick's channel, which means it has to be a reupload, since that's the only way they could have gotten a video that was taken off before they could watch it on Nick's channel), it'll give his simps a way to ignore the video because he's using words like "edited" and claiming the police lied. Now they'll just assume the bad stuff Nick was doing was somehow edited with AI or crisis actors or something.

Screenshot_20240824-111459.png
Least dumb Balldo simp.
 
View attachment 6342679

It's an argument designed so, even if it doesn't work (it likely won't, any reasonable person would believe that cog's reupload is essentially a replacement for the original, especially if it matches any testimony made or online discussions of the stream. It also ignores the fact the cop said it was the video "taken off" Nick's channel, which means it has to be a reupload, since that's the only way they could have gotten a video that was taken off before they could watch it on Nick's channel), it'll give his simps a way to ignore the video because he's using words like "edited" and claiming the police lied. Now they'll just assume the bad stuff Nick was doing was somehow edited with AI or crisis actors or something.
This is fucking insane because what he's posted here is a rewording of part of a post I made yesterday, explaining why this WASN'T a case of this situation

He's misremembered 'taken off of' as 'taken from', even though it wouldn't make sense for Pomplun to have taken the same video from both Rumble and Youtube. I'm doing Nick a huge favor by assuming he misremembered it; it is entirely possible Nick is illiterate enough that he doesn't understand what is actually being implied by the text of the warrant, or that he hopes everyone else is. Pomplun never states where he saw the video, only that the video he saw originated from Nick's Rumble & Youtube channels.

It's an absolutely dogwater argument as the two layers of it are both stupid:
A) The Affiant never said where he viewed the video, only its original source, so he cannot have lied about where he viewed the video.
B) The 'venue' the footage is viewed in does not matter, only the original source of it and whether it has been altered. Otherwise you could say the police downloading the video to a USB stick and later viewing it in a court setting is a 'different video' because the physical medium on which it is held is different, the resolution of the TV it's being shown on is different etc.

I could see circumstances where a legal argument could be made that the manner in which footage was shown could be misleading, for example if it was shown on a TV so low resolution, or in a download so compressed, that the coke on Rekieta's nose is hidden by pixelation or noise, and thus mislead the jury in some manner. These are not those circumstances.

If anyone wants I can go through an explanation of how compression works and how it's unlikely that his nose would A) consistently have an artifact on it or that B) the artifact would just happen to fucking transform in each frame to perfectly conform to the contours of his nose, but it just seems like wasted effort. Everyone knows it's fucking ludicrous. Nick's nose is long enough to guarantee it's a motion frame in every second of footage, and areas in motion tend to be the least artifacted because they're the areas being redrawn each frame.
 
He's Polish, we shouldn't be making jokes about Deutchland, a Katlyn massacre joke is more appropriate...
However, every time Rekieta thinks it's about to be a W I think of this scene.
Das ist kein Strassenkehrer, das ist ein Scheissschwatzer...
Rekeita is kind of like the uboat in Das Boot as the trad lawyer family man being undone by polyamory and hard drugs is sort analogous to a u boat sinking from an air raid while at port.

If you were to say "Das Boot, Cinema and Nick Rekeita" my mind would jump to picrel.

2_Liter_Glass_Beer_Boot__89968.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back