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

Will Nicholas Rekieta take the plea deal offered to him?


  • Total voters
    1,268
  • Poll closed .
Then why are they being tried separately and need separate lawyers? And how was April able to slip through? Genuine questions, not being sassy.
Many options why this might be possible.

  1. Kayla's family saw how Nick was handling the case and got her a lawyer so she does not go down with him
  2. Kayla is reading this thread and watched videos on youtube and realized Nick is a fag and a wannabe lawyer
  3. There are possession issues regarding the cocaine and it is entirely possible only one person had access to both the safe with cocaine and the gun safe

Nick and Kayla have clashing interests and for Kayla to not go down without a fair plea, she needs a lawyer.
[EDIT] It is also entirely possible that Kayla will plead guilty and take a much bigger sentence than Nick, and she needed a lawyer to represent her so it does not look like Nick railroading his own wife.


On the topic of April
  1. April was initially charged the same as Nick and Kayla, which was then dropped because she was a guest, which means no constructive possession of the drugs (it is assumed the resident owns the contents of the house)
  2. April was charged again when it was clear her credit card was on a bedside table with cocaine, meaning those drugs can be assumed to belong to her
  3. April blabbed to police and was a potential witness against Nick
It was very likely April was going to skate and that her charge was, even while still justified, heavy handed to motivate her to cooperate and testify against Nick and Kayla. Keeping April happy has been important through the entire process, as she could not only sink Nick's and Kayla's felony drug cases, she could also speak about the living conditions and children in proximity of drugs, causing much bigger CPS issues down the line.
 
I'm not from 'Merica, so correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a rule that married couples aren't legally obliged to give evidence against eachother?

I suppose that would naturally make April (and her big mouth) a significant risk to the Rekietas and it would be in their best interests to keep her happy and insulated from the consequences of her actions.

This is a horrendous look for Nick though.
 
At this point it seems like Kayla is the lowest rung on the Cuck totem pole. Fucking Aaron, who has the revenge porn charges, seems to be treating Kayla with the most amount of respect in this situation, granted he's kinda prevented from talking shit, but that hasn't stopped him before I.e his ex wife. Has Aaron said anything worse about Kayla then Nick when he said her body was ruined (pre charges)? Would he even if he could? Plus all the passive aggressive, vague shit April has been tweeting.
 
I'm not from 'Merica, so correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a rule that married couples aren't legally obliged to give evidence against eachother?
The rule in Minnesota is that married couples cannot testify against each other about things that happened during the marriage unless the partner testimony is made against allows it.

There are of course exceptions, like crimes committed against each other or children in the care of the parent.

So yes, April was a big risk for the Rekietas, especially because April blabbed to police during the house search.
 
April was initially charged the same as Nick and Kayla, which was then dropped because she was a guest, which means no constructive possession of the drugs (it is assumed the resident owns the contents of the house)
She wasn't. She was initially released without charges. From the OP:
https://publicaccess.courts.state.mn.us/CaseSearch/ (case number 34-CR-24-341 (Nicholas), 34-CR-24-342 (Kayla), 34-CR-24-487 (April). Searching by name may not work)
She was charged well after the Rekietas were. We don't know why. The speculation was they were trying to get her to rat and she wasn't so they brought down another charge to pressure her (although recent events suggest it might have been to pressure Nick instead).
I'm not from 'Merica, so correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a rule that married couples aren't legally obliged to give evidence against eachother?
While spousal privilege exists in all states, it's been considerably weakened in recent years. Nick is lucky enough to live in Minnesota, which still recognizes a robust form of it where both the witness-spouse and the spouse being testified against can raise the privilege.

Increasingly commonly (and at the federal level) it is permissive, and while the witness-spouse can invoke it, she can choose to waive it.
I think Nick desperately doesn’t want April and his whole gross polycule thing brought up in the court and put on public record.
This is the same stupid fuck who paraded around in public with both his whore and his other whore, even bringing his side whore to court. What the fuck does this idiot think he's achieving?
 
She wasn't. She was initially released without charges. From the OP:
Ah, my bad. I mixed it up with the story Nick told about it. He spun it as "he got the charges against her dismissed".
I guess she was never charged because they told police that she is the nanny and lives next door or whatever.
 
Watching Nick's appearance on Camelot's stupid stream makes me think he hasn't learned shit. I would bet he fails rehab at some point
He already did. He literally told someone after court all about how he just did coke for fun and could have stopped anytime.

He learned nothing.
 
Then why are they being tried separately and need separate lawyers? And how was April able to slip through? Genuine questions, not being sassy.
Because they are entitled to have their own defense. The prosecutor isn't treating them differently. There is no charge where one could roll on the other.

April didn't live at the house. She doesn't even have standing to challenge the search warrant. He charges were very limited with a much more difficult constructive possession. Personally, I think they charged her to keep her away from the kids. Felony charges means she doesn't get to be the foster home as I suspect Nick floated.
 
If April was convicted, I would see probation requirements that Nick & April had to stay away from each other. Now that April is getting off Scott Free, she can see Nick (trust fnd aside) whenever he wants.

Nick also looks good, self-sacrificing in April's eyes and how she owes him one.

Will Nick try to get April to try and take the fall for Nick on the hacking charges? Quid Pro Quo.
 
He already did. He literally told someone after court all about how he just did coke for fun and could have stopped anytime.

He learned nothing.
What is there to learn? He's godking Rekieta the infallible. All these puny small brain retards can't understand his 170D chess maneuvers to do whatever he wants and bang 10/10 prostitutes without cheating on his wife because she's into it as well. Also, the children are cool with it, Rekieta has given them 50 hours of story time discussions about his mastery of the balldo.
 
@Friend of Dorothy Parker @AnOminous @Potentially Criminal

Lawyer question (sorry if I missed any): One of Nicks traffic tickets in Stearns County has a status of "Under Court Jurisdiction." He never pays his fines but this status isn't "Closed" like the other adjudicated ones. I thought that status was for probation but all the convictions are petty misdemeanors. They initially cited him for the a more serious insurance vio but dropped it down.

His license is still valid apparently. What is that status and why would he have it? Is he on double-secret probation? Can Wentzell force him to pay all his court ordered fines as a condition of probation?

2025-01-16 21_02_55-Case Search - Minnesota Court Records Online (MCRO).png
 
This is the same stupid fuck who paraded around in public with both his whore and his other whore, even bringing his side whore to court. What the fuck does this idiot think he's achieving?
Well, there two parts to this.

The first part is, I do think for a while Nick was trying to “normalize” his relationship with April, but obviously Kayla’s family (Scandinavian prudes) have put their foot down and now they’re trying to undo it all.

But another part we cannot disregard is the fact that Nick is a compulsive liar and literally gets a big ol’Boner when he openly lies to people.
Remember, Nick is the same person that will tell you that he’s not drinking then take a huge exaggerated sip from a suspiciously large, foamy cold mug, while on stream. He loves lying to people’s faces and especially loves it when there is no evidence to the contrary.
Nick, like all compulsive liars, has to live in a world of plausible deniability. If the courts don’t bring up Nick’s drug problem, then he doesn’t have one. If the courts don’t show his kids disheveled and stinky with a disgusting house, then it doesn’t exist. If the courts don’t bring up his polyamory. He’s not a gross polygamist.

Nick is mad that we all know he’s all those things, but we have never seen him snort cocaine, we have never seen his dirty house and we have never seen him raw dog April while Aaron sits in the corner and cries.

Even when the courts do inevitably say those things about him, he’s just gonna lie later and say that he had to cop a guilty plea to save his family and that the evil mean Minnesota Karan-Farms court wouldn’t give him a fair trial because he’s basically like a black man accused of rape in the 1950s fr fr no cap.
 
Keeping April happy has been important through the entire process, as she could not only sink Nick's and Kayla's felony drug cases, she could also speak about the living conditions and children in proximity of drugs, causing much bigger CPS issues down the line.
She may also be able to release that FUCKING BODYCAM FOOTAGE.
I’VE BEEN EDGING SINCE MAY WHERE IS MY FUCKING FOOTAGE!?
 
Even when the courts do inevitably say those things about him, he’s just gonna lie later and say that he had to cop a guilty plea to save his family...
And I hope he does do it, because I'm fairly certain it's the kind of statement that immediately gets a plea deal revoked and gets the process for a trial started. To plead guilty in this type of case, you have to admit you're guilty. Trying to imply you're pleading guilty but are not actually guilty only pisses off the judge, and I hope they look at his most recent appearance with Camelot to determine even at this point he's not actually pleading guilty, and they smash his face with it.

He's going to have a lot of squirming to do if just less than 2 weeks before his next hearing (next Friday on the 24th, if I'm not mistaken), he's implying or suggesting he's not actually guilty, but has to say (in court) he was lying. They might end up not buying his horseshit and drop the plea anyways.
 
Null refiled his motion to record (different from the notice he filed earlier)
Screenshot_20250117_202721_Firefox.jpg
Regarding April:
Screenshot_20250117_203055_Firefox.jpg
 

Attachments

Back