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.

[Maraschino]

When will you guys allow Nick to stream again? It's getting boring...

Losing MNPublicRecords has affected all of us, and we're worse off for it.

 

[Mr. Manchester]

When will you guys allow Nick to stream again? It's getting boring...

When we get that bodycam footage, that's when. Until then Nick must obey his lords and masters at the Kiwi Farms. Like a bitch.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

Funny how FOX9 has stopped reporting on the case, despite the denied motions and finding of facts being very relevant developments and absolutely newsworthy.

Neither have Horsie Mayr, Keanue Floppytits opened their gaping holes to balldoguard either.

 

[Desktop User2]

There's no good evidence of that. Whatever drug it is, it's still the same lowlifes that are peddling it

There is a lot of research on psychedelics use in psychiatry coming up...

 

[LiquidKid]

Rekieta continues to be an arrogant asshole! That's such good news for me!
THE HARVEST WILL BE PLENTIFUL!
View attachment 6461590
(Tweet | Archive)

I love this because even in the context he originally intended, it was still Nick being BTFO’d by his non existent understanding of the legal system

 

[Desktop User2]

I love this because even in the context he originally intended, it was still Nick being BTFO’d by his non existent understanding of the legal system

I think Rackets would prefer the out of context quip of him being wrong about another case than the flurry of horrid takes we have, and specially that @Third World Aristocrat clipped, about his own.

 

[he who has thus come/gone]

Same for smartphones and chocolate. You feel any guilty that some kid is now disabled from huffing iPod manufacturing fumes, got his hand machetted off for eating the crop, or got buried alive in a coltan mine?
Sheesh.

Oh please. There is massive benefit to the world from things like smartphones. Cocaine literally only exists to give you a brief high that makes you want to do more cocaine. It doesn’t help you in any irreplaceable way, medically or otherwise, and is solely a drug for young people and adults stuck in a childhood mindset so that they can party or look cool to shallow women at a party. Everything about it, from its production to its end use, has no benefit for the world at large.

You’re one step away from pulling a Vaush and comparing buying a smartphone to consuming CP.

 

[Kipersonapiscesotter]

I love this because even in the context he originally intended, it was still Nick being BTFO’d by his non existent understanding of the legal system

Haha, I know what you mean. He does seem to get some super obvious stuff wrong. That blunder on April's hearing when he accused the prosecutor of lying after he misunderstood his statutes was eye opening. Being so smug as to argue with people on X over his Franks hearing. Then that smug YouTube video on it. Potentially Criminal's intro nailed it.

I still don't know what it is. If he knowingly lies or if he is just that wrong.

Either way, considering his recent fails, who would trust would he has to say on the next big case he covers?

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

That blunder on April's hearing when he accused the prosecutor of lying after he misunderstood his statutes was eye opening.

If you mean the situation where Nick himself objected in court citing the "rule of completeness", that was actually his own CHIPS case hearing.
Or which situation with "April's hearing" do you mean exactly?

 

[Homer Simpson]

People believe all manner of nonsense about their favourite intoxicants, but when the research comes out it generally doesn't support the claims.

I don't do any drugs and think people like nick who gave into it are weak. MDMA isn't psilocybin nor is it LSD.

 

[Kipersonapiscesotter]

If you mean the situation where Nick himself objected in court citing the "rule of completeness", that was actually his own CHIPS case hearing.
Or which situation with "April's hearing" do you mean exactly?

He streamed after April failed to get her charges thrown out.

In doing so he said the prosecutor lied by saying the drugs were out in the open so that the prosecutor could charge her under a Minnesota statute that permits the charging of someone if they are present in the room. The only statute I found that comes close covers sale and redistribution and April isn't charged under it.

The prosecutor even said being present isn't enough, so how he messed that up is beyond me, as she obviously wasn't talking about the statute he was.

So with that one, what was it? Did he tell April that charge goes away? She looks shocked when it goes ahead and looks around. Did he lie, on stream, to justify himself to April for the charge staying? Or is he that shit of a lawyer he genuinely did mix up his statutes? It took me all of 4 minutes of research. You'd think a law graduate with weeks of time would be better.

 

[St. Alia of the Knife]

I still don't know what it is. If he knowingly lies or if he is just that wrong.

I think it's that despite everything and all evidence to the contrary, he still believes with every fiber of his being that he is the smartet guy in the room, regardless of the topic or circumstances. So basically, like that one female admiral in Picard says, it's "Sheer. Fucking. Hubris."

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

He streamed after April failed to get her charges thrown out.

In doing so he said the prosecutor lied by saying the drugs were out in the open so that the prosecutor could charge her under a Minnesota statute that permits the charging of someone if they are present in the room. The only statute I found that comes close covers sale and redistribution and April isn't charged under it.

The prosecutor even said being present isn't enough, so how he messed that up is beyond me, as she obviously wasn't talking about the statute he was.

So with that one, what was it? Did he tell April that charge goes away? She looks shocked when it goes ahead and looks around. Did he lie, on stream, to justify himself to April for the charge staying? Or is he that shit of a lawyer he genuinely did mix up his statutes? It took me all of 4 minutes of research. You'd think a law graduate with weeks of time would be better.

Ah, you meant him streaming after and sperging about it, not ranting in the courtroom.
I mean, thanks to Nick a judge just made a ruling regarding the motion for a Franks hearing in his case.

It is now a matter of fact in his case that the police found cocaine and where it was found. (No mention of credit cards because that would be for April's case)
But for Nick alone the description is pretty clear the drugs were partially out in the open (and then additional drugs were found in a safe and a closet safe).

As always, Nick lied.

 

[AnOminous]

In doing so he said the prosecutor lied by saying the drugs were out in the open so that the prosecutor could charge her under a Minnesota statute that permits the charging of someone if they are present in the room. The only statute I found that comes close covers sale and redistribution and April isn't charged under it.

I forgot how bad that was. That was clearly one of many things the prosecutor cited, the most obvious being her credit card out in the open as well with cocaine on it. I don't think that's necessarily a stake through her heart but it's way more than just being present in the room.

 

[TheLastJoestar]

Six way, for sure. Rackets and Lady Gollum, Steel Toe and April, Mint and Riley. No holes unbarred!


People believe all manner of nonsense about their favourite intoxicants, but when the research comes out it generally doesn't support the claims.

I imagine Mint smells like piss and moldy cheese and Riley like a dead rodent.

So the idea of Nick forcing these people into any sexual situation with the other women disturbs me. Does Nick have no shame? No regard for the noses of his other two sex partners?

 

[BathTubShine]

(NICK AND DAXIPAD LIVING THEIR DREAM LIFE TOGETHER SOMEWHERE IN LA IN A CUTE BARBIE TRAPHOUSE IN 2030)
Cuck Pope please don't fire up a stream to own all the incel prudes at the Kiwi-Law-Couch. We would never recover from that.
Also please plea out your case, fighting it in court would also own KarenFarms so so hard....

 

[Vibralldo]

I imagine Mint smells like piss and moldy cheese and Riley like a dead rodent.

So the idea of Nick forcing these people into any sexual situation with the other women disturbs me. Does Nick have no shame? No regard for the noses of his other two sex partners?

Camelot mentioned Nick loves strippers, so I genuinely believe it's very within the realm of possibility that he fucked Mint

 

[Beavis]

When will you guys allow Nick to stream again? It's getting boring...

Here’s a preview of chat on his next stream:

DENIED
denied
D
E
N
I
E
D

 

[owed to joy]

What are the odds Nick is actually a homosexual? Obviously a violently closeted Looking for Mr Goodbar-esque homosexual but a genuine m4m faggot just the same? I didn't initially think so. I suspected more of a bi-sexual down-for-anything type degenerate vibe was at play but after some careful thought and consideration of the facelicking story, his obvious feminine characteristics and interests, his lispy voice, hypersexualism, weird disgust with fat men & obsession with being petite and his inarguable lust for Dax aka Juju the Cow, plus his faghag loyalty from profoundly stupid women; I'm starting to think the root of all his problems is that he is in fact a closeted homosexual.

 

[Goku 1000000 O]

Silly Kiwi Stalkers, I never said I’d win. I was just extremely confident in my legal argument.

Isn’t it funny and weird that no one can show where I said I would win? How can this be an L if I never said something would definitely happen?