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.

[AnOminous]

It's been stated previously that Aaron took the photo. He may be the one who shared it with the Signal group.

It's inferred that he did because he sent it to someone basically as a boast. I suppose Nick could have taken it and sent it to him. I prefer to think of it as a trophy picture though. I suppose it would be equally WEIRD and FUNNAY if Super Monogamy Bro Nick took it and sent it to him for some reason.

The whole purpose of sending it was "hey bro look at this I got me some of this."

 

[repentance]

Where has that been alleged? It's not in the complaint.

It's been posted in one of the threads. I don't know what source the poster had for that information. The complaint carefully avoids making any statement about who took the photo and I absolutely believe the polycule know its origin.

Technically I guess it's irrelevant because the central issue is Aaron sharing it, not him possessing it. There's also no suggestion in the complaint that it was taken surreptitiously or that the group didn't know of its existence. Quite the reverse. If Nick set the messages to auto-delete, though, Aaron having taken the photo would explain why he still had it.

 

[Mr.Bucket]

It's inferred that he did because he sent it to someone basically as a boast. I suppose Nick could have taken it and sent it to him. I prefer to think of it as a trophy picture though. I suppose it would be equally WEIRD and FUNNAY if Super Monogamy Bro Nick took it and sent it to him for some reason.

The whole purpose of sending it was "hey bro look at this I got me some of this."

To which anyone who received it should have replied "Did you get yourself tested after?"

 

[demicolon]

Why would you even want that lifestyle?

I think making bank from lawstreaming, casual sex and drugs was the first time Nick felt like a real man. Arrested development, I guess.

 

[Strix454]

Aaron's issue here is that while his constitutional rights might be violated and the RP statue is overly broad, none of the people who usually challenge state laws as unconstitutional want to have their name on a felony charge for revenge porn.

That isn't actually true. A large array of mainstream groups sided with a worse plaintiff than Aaron in the last legal attempt (Minnesota v. Casillas) to go after the constitutionality of the Minnesota law. The groups included among others the American Booksellers Association, Association of American Publishers, Media Coalition Foundation, the ACLU and National Press Photographers Association.

The problem with challenging the law now is that the Minnesota Supreme Court decision that finally established its constitutionality has made any further legal challenge to the law extremely difficult if not impossible. The decision explicitly established a legal reasoning that the law cannot be challenged due to broad application. The court as good as directly said that the health and safety issues associated with "revenge porn" are a justification for an entirely new unlimited carve-out of the first amendment in that area.

Aaron in normal circumstances would have a good case for going after the broad nature of the law as written. But the Minnesota Supreme Court's decision and the general trend of that court favoring collective rights over individual rights means that there is less than zero chance of winning in the state courts. The difficult part of the Casillas decision is that the Minnesota Supreme Court effectively said that not only is the law constitutional, but the law in its most extreme absurd application would also be constitutional.

I suspect that the sort of case required to strike down that law will have to involve a publisher, media company or journalist being charged under the law for unintentionally showing a fraction of a nipple without consent. The best point for Aaron in his case is the extremely limited nature of the distribution and that the facts of his case are not what anyone would think of in terms of addressing a "health and safety" issue around revenge porn. But in the current political, legal and media climate in Minnesota the whole idea of constitutional rights is considered something that is just in the way of doing good.

 

[Pagan Min]

I think making bank from lawstreaming, casual sex and drugs was the first time Nick felt like a real man. Arrested development, I guess.

It's both sad and pathetic that Nick ONLY felt like a real man after that. Not after marrying someone and having 5 kids, nosiree! Having a loving wife & family doesn't make the cuck feel fulfilled! Instead, he's gotta throw it all away just so he can live out a twisted fantasy.

Oh, BTW, happy 6300, Nick... Only a matter of time before we hit 7k! Maybe your YouTube channel will hit that at the same time!

 

[HodgePodgeRogerDodger]

Aaron if you are reading the thread, crowd fund the lawsuit. This will be your Maddox lawsuit. If Montegraph can crowdfund his goal you can, too.

You will make bank on this if you look around for a better lawyer. Just legally get Nick on the books as a cuck. Make him release the photos from Hedo 2. Find out if Gino got down on his knees and took the Balldo from Nick (they were riding on the Balldo for a bit, see if they got a cash infusion after Gino got canned by Gavin).

 

[Oh Darn]

It's inferred that he did because he sent it to someone basically as a boast. I suppose Nick could have taken it and sent it to him. I prefer to think of it as a trophy picture though. I suppose it would be equally WEIRD and FUNNAY if Super Monogamy Bro Nick took it and sent it to him for some reason.

The whole purpose of sending it was "hey bro look at this I got me some of this."

It's been posted in one of the threads. I don't know what source the poster had for that information. The complaint carefully avoids making any statement about who took the photo and I absolutely believe the polycule know its origin.

Technically I guess it's irrelevant because the central issue is Aaron sharing it, not him possessing it. There's also no suggestion in the complaint that it was taken surreptitiously or that the group didn't know of its existence. Quite the reverse. If Nick set the messages to auto-delete, though, Aaron having taken the photo would explain why he still had it.

the complaint makes it pretty clear who sent the photos. It’s entirely possible to save or screenshot media from signal which is what I assume Aaron did if they had an autodelete policy in place.

ETA: Signal also has a "View Once" feature for any media you upload where recipients can (as the name would suggest) only view once, much like Snapchat. It's not the most amazing argument to say that because Kayla didn't use that feature that it implied she consented to dissemination, but paired with her past history of exhibitionist behavior (Hedonism rowboat fucking, locals lewds, "proud of my body" posts), it's far from the worst argument to make.

 

[AltisticRight]

the complaint makes it pretty clear who sent the photos. It’s entirely possible to save or screenshot media from signal which is what I assume Aaron did if they had an autodelete policy in place.

Or he can just take a photo with a second phone, which in that case, it's a reproduction and who owns the copyright?
It's also actually been altered in this case!
Please let this be the case, I want to hear the cope.

 

[zyclonPD]

Aaron if you are reading the thread, crowd fund the lawsuit. This will be your Maddox lawsuit. If Montegraph can crowdfund his goal you can, too.

You will make bank on this if you look around for a better lawyer. Just legally get Nick on the books as a cuck. Make him release the photos from Hedo 2. Find out if Gino got down on his knees and took the Balldo from Nick (they were riding on the Balldo for a bit, see if they got a cash infusion after Gino got canned by Gavin).

Go for it, try to subpoena the posts from locals and establish a record that Nick and Kayla openly shared nudes online to their locals group. They surrendered privacy in their nudity by sharing it on the Internet. Get Kayla's statement about being proud of her body and sharing it on the record, make Nick divulge all the dirty details of his relationships in the Qover and thruple by explaining how you would even have received nudes in the first place. finish off any chance of him having a reputation as a respectable person once and for all.

You have the opportunity to deliver a death nail to this mans career by simply forcing him to argue his case in court. At worst you get a slap on the wrist sentence as a first offense. You have everything to gain and Nick has everything to lose from this fight.

 

[Tubby Aardvark]

View attachment 6373513
the complaint makes it pretty clear who sent the photos. It’s entirely possible to save or screenshot media from signal which is what I assume Aaron did if they had an autodelete policy in place.

I can't believe aggressively monogamous Kayla would cheat on her husband in such a way. He must be devestated, and probably drawing up the divorce for her now documented cheating she's doing. No alimony for cheaters Kayla.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

I suspect that the sort of case required to strike down that law will have to involve a publisher, media company or journalist being charged under the law for unintentionally showing a fraction of a nipple without consent. The best point for Aaron in his case is the extremely limited nature of the distribution and that the facts of his case are not what anyone would think of in terms of addressing a "health and safety" issue around revenge porn. But in the current political, legal and media climate in Minnesota the whole idea of constitutional rights is considered something that is just in the way of doing good.

How does this impact legal pornography and sharing of nudes on platforms with hundreds of people?
It seems wrong that some mad cuck like Nick can just use these previously shared nudes to go after someone, and the state does it for them.

If this was a civil thing it would feel a lot different. But its a criminal thing where the state throws their weight behind a charge that is levied out of pure spite.

[EDIT] Happy 6300 pages Nick. Celebratory drink and a line. You deserve it.

 

[Why am I doing this?]

We're 6 posts away from 6300 pages. Time for a drink and some cocaine, Balldo!

View attachment 6373329
Does anyone see what's new in the thread's subtitle?

Nick has come full circlejerk

 

[repentance]

It’s entirely possible to save or screenshot media from signal

That seems kind of stupid.

 

[Captain Manning]

It's been posted in one of the threads. I don't know what source the poster had for that information. The complaint carefully avoids making any statement about who took the photo and I absolutely believe the polycule know its origin.

The complaint states that Kayla (K.R.) sent the photo to Aaron via Signal.

I dunno which post or poster you are talking about, but it doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me for Aaron to take the photo, but then Kayla to send it to him. If he took the photo, he would presumably already have a copy and not have to have it sent to him.

Also, I think Keanu said at one point that the photo was not a selfie (to whatever extent anybody wants to believe her).

So that would rule out Aaron and Kayla as the photographer, and suggest either April or Nick.

The funniest scenario would be that Nick himself took the photo of Kayla, and then Kayla sent it to Aaron.

Whoever the photographer is, the bottom line is Kayla sent a naked photo of herself to Aaron. That's just embarrassing for Nick (or ought to be, if he had a sense of shame), and is a further blow to the narrative he's been wanting to run with.

EDIT: Typo.

 

[Oh Darn]

That seems kind of stupid.

In spite of what PPP asserts, Signal is not exclusively used by perverts and drug dealers. There's utility in being able to capture your chat history with someone if you're a normal person.

And if say, you're a really fucking paranoid user, you can use "View Once" media features and set the chat autodelete to 30 seconds to work around the fact that all your chat history is capturable.

 

[Fallen Preacher]

Oh, BTW, happy 6300, Nick... Only a matter of time before we hit 7k! Maybe your YouTube channel will hit that at the same time!

Could you imagine Jim Sterling having more subscribers than Nick?

 

[Why am I doing this?]

death nail

Spoiler: Death Knell

A knell is the sound of a bell being struck. A death knell is a church bell being struck to announce a death.

The expression is currently almost exclusively metaphorically, meaning something that announces, presages or brings about the death, destruction, or end by other means of something else.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

All this hand wringing about revenge porn has made me come around to Nick's point of view. Minnesotans are Scandinavian incel prudes. There is no reason a tit pic should be classified as pornography.

But there it is, in the statute- exposed or partially exposed nipple.

I'm not sure that entire statute isn't facially unconstitutional. It's absurdly broad.

the sort of case required to strike down that law will have to involve a publisher, media company or journalist being charged under the law for unintentionally showing a fraction of a nipple without consent.

@Strix454 gets to a point I wrote but didn't post yet.

If Aaron had been sent a photo with a wardrobe malfunction and Aaron forwarded it to Geno, EVEN IF HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY REALIZE WHAT WAS SHOWING IN THE PICTURE AT THE TIME, he could plausibly have still been in the same situation as he is now for allegedly sharing a full nude!

And if the state asserts that it is reasonable that any dropped lover would know that his ex does not consent to her nudes being sent around, points to the fact that the pic was either sent just to Aaron or shared only in a very small, tight group of intertwined lovers, then Aaron would need to pull up something to rebut the assertion and show that it was, in fact, unreasonable for him to think Kayla wouldn't be OK with him sending her full frontal to Geno in NY, who, at the time, was Team Aaron. Absent any evidence one way or another (and Kayla could of course testify that she would never ever have consented to that, so good luck defeating that without some explicit indication of "sure send it to Geno"), you're at a jury assessment of whether the reasonable starting point for Aaron was consent or non-consent. And even in outstate Minnesota, implicit consent to sending or publishing private pics is going to be a hard sell.

It goes to reasonable doubt, which is all Aaron needs. Whether the polycule existed or not, whether it was exclusive within the four of them, etc, all of that matters.

They can't just brush off how the photo came to be in Aaron's possession.

Oh damn. What if Gino & his gang are also swingers?? The one slutty gal Gino is with already has an onlyfans. So... Yeah what if Aaron shared, in the spirit that Gino et. al. were swingers too??? And Kayla set the precedent they share with fellow swingers openly - and proof was that Keanu is a swinger too, or on the signal chats too??

The rumors that Geno and Keanu were "swingers" and were "swinging" with the Imholtes predate the Imholte connection with the Rekietas.

 

[prolapsed_cranium]

It's inferred that he did because he sent it to someone basically as a boast. I suppose Nick could have taken it and sent it to him. I prefer to think of it as a trophy picture though. I suppose it would be equally WEIRD and FUNNAY if Super Monogamy Bro Nick took it and sent it to him for some reason.

The whole purpose of sending it was "hey bro look at this I got me some of this."

Sean was thinking that this can negate the felony issue of "intending to harass" if he was bragging.

But that still leaves him facing the misdemeanor