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

  • 🔧 Actively working on site again.

Will Nicholas Rekieta take the plea deal offered to him?


  • Total voters
    1,268
  • Poll closed .
So they had the entire video Pomplun disclosed to them and tried to pass off a lazy screengrab from cog's channel as the entire discovery?
Any ramifications for this type of fuckery?
To me it's not really clear whether Rekieta and his lawyer LIED or whether the Barneswalker was so unbelievably sloppy in making his arguments that he failed to articulate what his issue was.

One thing that's been established from how the Barneswalker described the watermark and examining Cog's video is that it was part of the YouTube user interface and not a watermark added by Cog prior to upload.

This means that the only way the full four-hour video would have a watermark on it is if the video was saved by screen recording a computer for over four hours. If it was downloaded through software tools like yt-dlp or websites or browser extensions providing similar functionality, the watermark would not be present and it would be effectively indistinguishable from the original broadcast (less any "muh ENCODING" issues)

It's the prosecution's filing, not a Court decision.
Unfortunately, there is a Community Happenings post which implies otherwise which means probably a lot of misguided posts will flood the thread unless it is corrected.
Nick Rekieta's motion to dismiss evidence was laughed out of court in a rather sassy manner.
 
White:
a clip of Defendant’s May 21, 2022 live stream video, as well as an image purporting to be a screenshot of the same. Not only is this video titled differently, it came from a different YouTube channel (Backwards Internet) and was uploaded at a different date/time from Defendant’s original. It also contains a watermark not present in the original video.
State
The only editing is to cut the short clip from the entire video. The other brand on the clip may have been from the application used to make the clip. The full video shows that it is entirely from the Defendant’s channel. There are no other labels or markings to indicate that the video is not authentic.
White's attempt to move the "watermark" (youtube overlay) from the screenshot to the clip confused the shit out of the state, she's trying to find a watermark on a likely clean clip.
White's (likely Nick's) inability to be straightforward and ask "did this video come from youtube.com/rekietalaw, rumble.com/rekietalaw or somewhere else" is going to get the whole motion dismissed by the boomer judge.
 
Unfortunately, there is a Community Happenings post which implies otherwise which means probably a lot of misguided posts will flood the thread unless it is corrected.
I realized my poor wording and added "by the prosecutor". Do you thing further elaboration is needed?
EDIT. Added full context.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, there is a Community Happenings post which implies otherwise which means probably a lot of misguided posts will flood the thread unless it is corrected.
Yes this needs to be corrected. I immediately thought that the court had issued a ruling.
Any ramifications for this type of fuckery?
Legal ramifications? Probably not, as a practical matter. But it makes Nick look bad to the judge, and it shows that the prosecution is, at the very least, very annoyed. And you don't want to piss off the judge and prosecution in your case unless you're purposefully trying to construct a situation in which you are the target of the prosecutors and judges in your small town. Because then you'd get shafted but can cry that the people in the community are out to get you.

Maybe that's what Nick finds preferable. Sure, he might piss everyone off and ruin any professional relationships between defense, prosecution, and judge. But if can build out his narrative that he's been made a target by the entire town, then he can continue refusing to take any responsibility for his actions. And that's pretty much the cope that's keeping his entire persona as a shock jock Internet lawyer afloat.

After all, you can justify your seething at actual practicing attorneys finding your positions laughable if you can doom your position by turning yourself into a government target.
 
Nicks motion to dismiss:

From the state's response:

So they had the entire video Pomplun disclosed to them and tried to pass off a lazy screengrab from cog's channel as the entire discovery?
Any ramifications for this type of fuckery?
We've long described Nick's ability to argue a traffic offense up to the Death Penalty. This is that in action.

With all of the escalating Bullshit, including the Nick initiated arrest games with Aaron, the County DA's office is just going to drop the hammer on all of these annoying degenerate assholes.

Remember the only true unforgivable crime is wasting the DA and the courts time with stupid, petty and inane bullshit. Bonus if it has the stench of lolbertarianism or Sovereign Citizens.

Originally it seemed likely they all would avoid even the possibility of jail time. Just a pack of midlife crisis in suburban perverts who discovered recreational drugs at 40. But the more Nick pushes buttons and plays games, the more the Prosecutor is going to ask for harsher penalties and the Judge will probably agree.

Judges are very good at telling the difference between an attorney aggressively defending all of his clients rights and leaving no motion unfiled. And those attorneys and clients who are burying them in ever more absurd bad faith bullshit.
 
I like to imagine the whole station has been watching his past and current streams, some are probably trolling him in chat.

Pomplun 1.png
Pomplun 2.png
 
The response doesn't even address the "They didn't watch my video they watched a COPY of my video! POMPLUN LIED!" argument. Did they not follow it or was it not even worth addressing?
they're saying it doesn't matter because the detective saw the original before it was no longer publicly available and had noted that the copy submitted to the court is no different from the original other than the application watermarks, if I read that right.
 
But if can build out his narrative that he's been made a target by the entire town, then he can continue refusing to take any responsibility for his actions
My theory is that Nick is going full on stupid because in the end his plan is to cop a plea. This tactic affords him time to run some damage control on his online reputation while maintaining a hopeful way to avoid facing any responsibility for his actions. Basing this on how Nick is avariciously fighting for his (long sought after) Cool Internet Guy image. He doesn’t even bother with reality because he plans to take a plea at the last. His only concern is how people see him, especially online. That’s what this balldo court circus is all about. Nick’s desperate tactics to control his image reek of self interest & delusions of grandeur which only a stupid cuckold could think makes him look cool.
View attachment 6365391
"The Defendant may disagree with it but that does not make it a lie," sums up Rackets's continuous cope perfectly.
That was my favorite part. Found it summed up Nicks defense, Nicks refusal to pull up, & Nicks marriage & main relationships very well.
 
My favourite part of this whole legal saga is that it was very possible Nick could've gained leverage through the involvement of a crooked cop, sympathetic judge, bumbling prosecutor, careless social worker etc. because these people undoubtedly exist, and yet at every turn he's only managed to run into competent government officials for whom his lolbertarian arguments are least effective and his language games find no purchase. This is your personal hell, enjoy it Balldo.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think he’s gonna be fucked. I don’t think he will overturn the warrant or evidence but he will get a cushy deal. 2 years suspended sentence, 2 years probation, random drug testing.
I don't think he's going to jail but that he's fucked in the sense that his e-celeb career is over unless he wants to adopt Ethan Ralph's perma-heel persona. The days of being the Sunday School teaching trad father of five is over and can't be recovered once he pleads guilty to this and has to go on record admitting to being a cucked-out child-endangering cokehead.
 
I don’t think he’s gonna be fucked. I don’t think he will overturn the warrant or evidence but he will get a cushy deal. 2 years suspended sentence, 2 years probation, random drug testing.
While I still think that's the case, I also thought he was going slightly pull up after the arrest. It's far from certain that he'll take a deal, a deal he's insistent on losing all leverage on for some reason.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think he’s gonna be fucked. I don’t think he will overturn the warrant or evidence but he will get a cushy deal. 2 years suspended sentence, 2 years probation, random drug testing.
If he takes that deal he wouldn't last a week without pissing hot for alcohol and cocaine (and Ricardo and Romaine)
 
Back