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

[TheButcherknight]

Couple of theories, just guessing:

1. Kayla and Nick are not living together anymore, and Nick moved in with his parents.
2. Nick needs to be supervised by someone to comply with CPS demands.
3. Nick didn't want to dox his own house even though it's well-known where he lives.
4. Some combination of in-patient rehab and whatever conditions Nick is under makes it difficult for him to receive mail at his own address.

Regardless he's streaming from the main home. So where ever she is its not the spare house up for sale and they still go out together. weak at best . divorce arc wont happen till after this shit is over even if its a slim possibility

 

[Watching Rekieta]

. Kayla and Nick are not living together anymore, and Nick moved in with his parents.

And kayla changed her address to Wilmar too. Her case titling changed with the updated address. April still in Spicer.

 

[Terrifik]

Plz let this be court being dumb not figger out all 3 are living together.

 

[Lian Xing]

This has to be something as a result of the CPS case, which now being sealed, we can only speculate.

 

[he who has thus come/gone]

This has to be something as a result of the CPS case, which now being sealed, we can only speculate.

We can only pray that @MNPublicRecords enlightens us.

 

[MaltVinegarRespecter]

This has to be something as a result of the CPS case, which now being sealed, we can only speculate.

I wonder if they're not going to rent out the main house since Nick's lack of income is now hitting massive expenses for his criminal and civil shenanigans.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Incidentally was poking around Nick's file and found the following: Notice of Hearing filed for a Settlement Conference. Scheduled for November 26, 2024. Plea deal incoming?

 

[Your Starter for 10]

Damn... look at Hardin sweet talking that hottie MN clerk. Take my advice, invite her to Outback, and you're in like Flynn. Just stay away from the Bloomin' Onion, cause you'll regret it when you wake up at her place.

 

[LimeRikki]

My understanding is that if he takes a plea deal, that means he has to formally announce that he is guilty in court. Is it possible that something could be arranged that this particular proceeding isn't filmed? So he says it, but there's no video of it, and it's never released publicly?

 

[East_Clintwood]

My understanding is that if he takes a plea deal, that means he has to formally announce that he is guilty in court.

As has been discussed there are other options for pleas like an Alford (plead guilty but maintain innocence), or no contest plea (don't admit guilt, but accept punishment). Then of course there's always the other option of Nick pleading guilty in court and then maintaining his innocence online, saying he only did it because of muh keedz etc.

Is it possible that something could be arranged that this particular proceeding isn't filmed? So he says it, but there's no video of it, and it's never released publicly?

It's possible, maybe even likely, it won't be filmed, especially after previous attempts at broadcast were denied. Even then it's super unlikely he'd be able to get the court closed to the public meaning the Kiwi Reporting Squad or others could turn up to watch it in person again. Plus whatever he pleads is going to end up in the documents as part of the public record anyway.

 

[Sam Losco]

It's possible, maybe even likely, it won't be filmed, especially after previous attempts at broadcast were denied

Previous attempt was denied because MN law specifically states Omnibus hearings are not allowed to be broadcast. Trials are fair game and I'm sure Null will have Hardin resubmit the request when it's appropriate.

 

[AnOminous]

Previous attempt was denied because MN law specifically states Omnibus hearings are not allowed to be broadcast. Trials are fair game and I'm sure Null will have Hardin resubmit the request when it's appropriate.

That's the general rule but they can make an exception. We just didn't (in the opinion of the court) clear that bar.

 

[Dumpster dived waifu]

That's the general rule but they can make an exception. We just didn't (in the opinion of the court) clear that bar.

I feel like a lot of us would have been disappointed if Null went through all of the hoops needed to get the thing streamed, paid a lawyer or someone else to record it, and all we got was 30 minutes of legal floundering.

Now, I would have paid to see Nicks reaction to all of his shit being denied, but that wasn't an option.

 

[Kosher Salt]

That's the general rule but they can make an exception.

That is not the impression I get from reading the rule. I quote in relevant part (emphasis mine):

"[Rule 4.01, General Rule] Except as set forth in this rule, no visual or audio recordings, except the recording made as the official court record, shall be taken in any courtroom ... [Rule 4.02(d), Exceptions] In criminal proceedings occurring before a guilty plea has been accepted or a guilty verdict has been returned, a judge may authorize the visual or audio recording and reproduction of trial proceedings ... subject to the following limitations: ... (v) There shall be no visual or audio coverage of any pretrial proceedings, including ... omnibus hearings"

The general rule is that they do not allow trials to be recorded; an exception is that they may allow them prior to a guilty plea or verdict, and a limitation on the exception says they shall not allow an omnibus hearing to be recorded. That does not give the court any discretion to decide otherwise.

(Note that after a guilty plea or verdict is recorded, the language switches to say that "a judge must, absent good cause, allow visual or audio coverage". While this is not relevant to the trial at its current stage, it may be eventually, so I want to be clear.)

 

[AnOminous]

The general rule is that they do not allow trials to be recorded; an exception is that they may allow them prior to a guilty plea or verdict, and a limitation on the exception says they shall not allow an omnibus hearing to be recorded. That does not give the court any discretion to decide otherwise.

They've Rules Committee has reinterpreted that in spite of the seemingly strict language (which apparently remains in effect strict but not without any flexibility). That's probably why Hardin thought it was worth a swing even though the rules retained the shall). In any event if you managed to slip it past the judge it would take something on the order of mandamus to undo it before it happened.

 

[Kosher Salt]

In any event if you managed to slip it past the judge it would take something on the order of mandamus to undo it before it happened.

That is true; I would think it highly likely to receive mandamus relief, but I don't know to what extent Minnesota finds flexibility in its own rule. I don't see any from the bare letter of the rule, but I don't know the contextual caselaw.

 

[AnOminous]

That is true; I would think it highly likely to receive mandamus relief, but I don't know to what extent Minnesota finds flexibility in its own rule. I don't see any from the bare letter of the rule, but I don't know the contextual caselaw.

The most recent comments, which I think Hardin actually cited, are here:

https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/CIOMediaLibrary/News%20and%20Public%20Notices/Orders/Administrative-Order-Rules_7.pdf

The discussion, like the statute, explicitly excludes omnibus btw. The revisions:

While "may" doesn't always necessarily mean "may" and "shall" doesn't always necessarily mean "shall," it's generally an uphill climb when you have the permissive "may" and restrictive "shall" in close proximity to argue that's the case. The general rule is that makes it pretty clear the drafter wanted to permit one thing while forbidding or requiring another.

 

[Himedall All-seeing Waifu]

Why is this being sent to his parents address, have they finally stepped in to stop Nick from fucking things up anymore than he has already?
View attachment 6477009

Couple of theories, just guessing:

1. Kayla and Nick are not living together anymore, and Nick moved in with his parents.
2. Nick needs to be supervised by someone to comply with CPS demands.
3. Nick didn't want to dox his own house even though it's well-known where he lives.
4. Some combination of in-patient rehab and whatever conditions Nick is under makes it difficult for him to receive mail at his own address.

Do the rules prohibit receiving postage from criminal proceedings at a Post Box?

The alternative theory that I have is that Nick is being tard wrangled by his parents. I have no proof, but I always felt that Nick had a very tense relationship with his mother, and that she was the one in charge of the family.

 

[AnOminous]

The alternative theory that I have is that Nick is being tard wrangled by his parents. I have no proof, but I always felt that Nick had a very tense relationship with his mother, and that she was the one in charge of the family.

I hope he is because imagine the sheer seethe. Not just because of the wrangling but because it means he's such an unholy mongoloid tard he NEEDS to be tard wrangled.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Do the rules prohibit receiving postage from criminal proceedings at a Post Box?

The alternative theory that I have is that Nick is being tard wrangled by his parents. I have no proof, but I always felt that Nick had a very tense relationship with his mother, and that she was the one in charge of the family.

Of course he has a problem with his mother. Not only did she not help him get his Transformer back, but she wouldn't even talk about the sort of sex she did with Nick's dad! Unforgivable! How dare she not tell her son more about her bedroom experiences!