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 21.8%

  • A WIN for the Toe against Nicholas Rekieta.

    Votes: 4 1.4%

  • A MAJOR WIN for the Toe, it's upheld against both of them.

    Votes: 83 28.2%

  • Huge L, felted, cooked etc, it gets thrown out.

    Votes: 43 14.6%

  • A win for the lawyers (and Kiwi Farms) because it gets postponed again.

    Votes: 100 34.0%
  • Total voters
    294
Oh god. April is pinning Joker tattoos again.

IMG_0305.jpeg
IMG_0304.jpeg
IMG_0306.jpeg
 
  • Lunacy
  • Horrifying
  • Like
Reactions: Coo Coo Bird, Rabbits, Local Fed and 111 others
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: make_it_so, koos koets, Pepper Jack and 24 others
  • Like
Reactions: Amateur Shoelace Tyer and USAroXX
God's strongest milkman said:
given his claim that he has recordings of people saying they are going to set him up and conspire to get him jailed
Click to expand...

I wanted to review the context for this claim, so I went back and ended up listening to a good bit of the episode it was from.
It got lost in the aftermath of Nick posting Aaron's alleged browser history a day or so later, so I don't think too many people had done a deep dive on what Nick said. For those paying attention, I think there were few interesting things.

I think most of this episode has been clipped/archived, so I won't be putting any clips in here, just timestamps.

1:09:40 - 1:10:13
"I don't want to prevent Aaron from being a state witness. . . 'cause I know what he actually said to the cops, and I know what he said to you guys and I know they're different. And . . . I have the recordings".
Click to expand...
So Nick's going to cross-examine Aaron on whether he snorted coke before he balldo'd April or after, and hold that up as a gotcha moment, got it.


1:23:21 - 1:25:04
"I liked April right away, but I didn't know her . . . April started coming over and just hanging out because it's really fucking cold so after you hunt or before you hunt, pop inside, you have some coffee or hot chocolate, whatever, warm up and then she would go home. Then it was like 'we hang out with you all the time, maybe we should like meet your husband because I met him at that stupid comedy thing' ".
Click to expand...
When asked about whether Nick was fucking April on one of her hunting trips, he denies it, but then appears to confirm that he was hanging out with April, without Aaron for some time after they met in person at the comedy show. Maybe this had already been covered before, but I don't remember reading it. Definitely gives a plausible explanation for what Kayla supposedly said about thinking Nick and April had planned this whole swinging thing for awhile. I don't know if anyone has put together a timeline on what contact Nick had with April before the swinging began, but that's worth noting.


1:27:20-1:27:49
"I'm going to prove all of it when it's done 'cause I have all the recordings of the people conspiring to tell the lies to the fucking prie... preacher"
Click to expand...
What Nick wants you to think he has: video evidence of his sister-in-law and other church members saying verbatim: "Yes, we will tell the pastor that these beautiful, well-fed and finely dressed children are stinky and hungry. We will also say that we saw Nick driving drunk through the parking lot. Hail the Toe! Hail Victory!"

What Nick probably has: Taped police interviews with the pastor, the people who reported the mistreatment to the pastor, or both, with them saying on camera "Yes, I asked Denise if the Rekieta kids had ever come to her asking for an entire box of graham crackers and she said 'You too? We should tell Pastor Melin'"


1:47:40 - 1:48:30
I was a contractor with Rumble for... for awhile
Click to expand...
Added in the question to the timestamp for context. Blink and you'll miss it, but I just thought it was funny to catch Nick realizing he forgot how much time he needed to lie and say that he had the Rumble contract for.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: make_it_so, New Username, The Motorizer and 21 others
I'd love to hear the manic last minute shower calls the Barneswalker is getting from Nick in the Silent Hill shower. "I can't accept this deal! That fucking bitch is putting my nutsack through a goddamn salad shooter, Frankie! I have to fight this! I have the proof that Pomplun is ABSOLUTELY BULLSHIT LYING! The state does not have the full story!"
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: koos koets, Mourning_Cloak, Peanut Butter Trails and 10 others
Mike Stoklasas Spock Ears said:
I couldn’t find the clip so I can’t review it to be certain, but pretty sure Nick admitted that those “recordings” of the “conspirators” trying to “set up” Nick were just part of the evidence that the state provided to him. It’s probably just people from church talking about how weird Nick’s behavior is and how they’re worried about the kids. Even so, he’s probably still going to try to legally frame it as some sort of grand conspiracy and it will be funny.
Click to expand...
Could be people who saw concerning things but agreeing to tell the pastor knowing he was a mandatory reporter and would take it from there. Which happens all the time as common sense would dictate but hey he sure wants to make an argument out of it.
drsb said:
I beg forgiveness, but I've been traveling and am abt 30 pages behind. I'm not a conspiracy freak... but...what if the "expose" of PPP and Warski was done by a Baldowasher? Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Nah PPP basically confirmed it as true now, check the community happenings thread
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Gorton Colu, Hellion, Blackhole and 2 others
Dr. Jaime Reyes said:
I don’t have Instagram or Pinterest or whatever this is, but is that really her? Low follower/following, using her old name, still has the Toe in the bio. Surely Nick alone would be following her under a dozen aliases.
Click to expand...
It is most definitely her Pinterest. Been posted more than once in this thread. Look around a bit at her follower/following and the content for yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Third World Aristocrat, USAroXX, Turbo Hornbag Hervez and 3 others
Oh Darn said:
What Nick wants you to think he has: video evidence of his sister-in-law and other church members saying verbatim: "Yes, we will tell the pastor that these beautiful, well-fed and finely dressed children are stinky and hungry. We will also say that we saw Nick driving drunk through the parking lot. Hail the Toe! Hail Victory!"
Click to expand...

Well. If he had any evidence like that, he needed to produce it earlier at the omnibus. That was the proper forum for challenging the search warrant. The trial at this point concerns the results of the search warrant. Did CPS find neglect of the children in the search and can the cocaine found during the search be linked to the defendants through a constructive possession argument. All that stuff doesn't really matter much now.

Oh Darn said:
So Nick's going to cross-examine Aaron on whether he snorted coke before he balldo'd April or after, and hold that up as a gotcha moment, got it.
Click to expand...

"When, Mr. Steel Toe, did you STOP fucking my client's wife! Answer the question Mr. Steel Toe. The Jury wants to hear it".

I'm still not convinced that in the drug cases they even need testimony from Aaron. And if there were testimony from Aaron at trial, its unlikely that the judge would allow Nick's side to go into all sorts of what would be considered extranious matters. Nick already tried in the previous motion to sell the judge on bringing in personal beefs with Aaron and the judge wasn't interested.

This is a really straightforward sort of trial typically. Mr. Police officer did you find Cocaine in the house? Mr. Police Officer was it in his bedroom? Mr. Lab tech did you do analysis of the cocaine taken in the search? Was it cocaine? Ladies and Gentleman of the Jury, near an ounce of coke was found in the bedroom of this dumbass as the police have testified to and it is cocaine as the lab has testified to. Constructive posession requires a couple of things which we have clearly provided proof of. So lets find him guilty and go home.

As the defendant, you can attack the police or the lab. But that is about it.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: The Motorizer, Scandinavian Incel Prude, Mourning_Cloak and 16 others
Strix454 said:
This is a really straightforward sort of trial typically.
Click to expand...
yes. the only reason nick feels otherwise is because he has the mentality of a child and can't accept the fact that his case is neither special and that he is no more than your typical druggie junkie loser except for the fact that he fell from grace from an exceptional height.

Strix454 said:
That was the proper forum for challenging the search warrant. The trial at this point concerns the results of the search warrant.
Click to expand...
this bears repeating ad infinitum; the chance for going after aaron or supposed co-conspirators for the search warrant is gone.

if he goes to trial, the only room now for nick to wiggle is to try and pin the possession charge on either april, kayla, aaron, or one of the kids, which would involve tremendous amounts of lying on the stand. but with the way possession works i don't even know if that would work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Third World Aristocrat, USAroXX, Thunderous Lightning and 1 other person
TL;DR: I don't think Nick is going to get a sweetheart deal because the prosecution was already lenient with It's charging.

Apologies if this was brought up before but I wanted to point out something about the possession in the first degree statute.

From 152.021 subdivision 2 (a):

" A person is guilty of a controlled substance crime in the first degree if:

[...]

(2) the person unlawfully possesses one or more mixtures of a total weight of 25 grams or more containing cocaine or methamphetamine and:

[...]

(ii) the offense involves two aggravating factors;"

From my reading of a few different lawyers' articles BOTH of the misdemeanors Nick is charged with are considered aggravating factors. In other words he has been charged with all of the elements of first degree possession.

The hilarious, extremely unlikely, thing that (I think) could be possible is the judge declaring him guilty, as a matter of law, of 1st degree if he is found guilty of all counts. I assume much more likely is that getting a downward departure or good plea deal will be near impossible given the prosecution already showed leniency in how they charged him.

For context there is a massive difference in sentencing guidelines between 1st and 2nd degree possession. Most significantly, with 1st degree there is no presumption of a stayed sentence. By default you're doing prison time if convicted of 1st degree, even on a first offense, unless you sell the judge on a downward departure.

Also this largely puts to bed the idea he is being hard done by by the government. He hasn't been charged with 1st degree. He was given multiple warnings before the cops started actually giving him tickets. Even after they started they gave him a brake on no proof of insurance. Despite having the driving record for it the state hasn't gone after him as a habitual offender. Plus, even Nick admits, the CPS case is going extraordinary quickly.

Basically every step of the way the system has been merciful to him and Robert Barnes remains a fat lying retard.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Optimistic
Reactions: The Motorizer, Mourning_Cloak, HenryRollinsLiar and 15 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back