I'm confused.
Which forum rule did MNPublicRecords violate?
Why is this faggot skelly trying to pick up MY BROOM?
So it was fine when this faggot had people acquire largely confidential records through local console printouts during the Amber Heard/Depp/Ron whatever cases, but it wasn't okay when someone did the same to him? Am I getting this right? Nicky, you're not special. You're a child doser, you're worse than all of them combined. Oh, I guess that means you are special in a way.
He wants to hide his fleshlight, we get it.
7286 gang rise up!
Edit: So he claimed the user was "stalking" which is a "site violation"?
Prove it.
Ethan Ralph

who snapped photos of the finely dressed lady and gentlemen who attended one of Skelly's hearings wasn't deleted for stalking, why should anyone touch this?
I still remember when this cuck fag thanked Josh for "deleting his thread" while clearly a subforum was being made.
Buckbroken cuck skeleton.
Rekieta responded: "I have never cheated on my wife. She always consented."
This reads like something one of us would write with the Skelly Tomlinson meme.
Who says that? What a cuck.
Juju is on Melton's show. Nick is in chat, proudly proclaiming he's beating the Toe in views.
View attachment 7278187View attachment 7278199
View attachment 7278291
STMS has 13.2k subscribers
Skelly Rekieta "Law [sic]" still has above 400k.
What is this faggot bragging about? "I have more viewers than a literally who show with under 15k subscribers"?
Brag worthy???
The test results showed levels you would expect from a regular user. Either they gave her coke or she was somehow ingesting it on a frequent basis. A one-off accident doesn't explain it away.
Also how much environmental exposure should occur before it becomes gross negligence?
Let's just entertain the idea that her environmental exposure was so prolonged it blew out the instruments' upper bound yielding a >5000 (ie it could be 25,000, we don't know). Now what?
I've read a few case laws where a suitable and smart lawyer was able to dismiss very low, borderline cutoff results citing environmental exposure. NONE of them had levels above 1000**, let alone 5000.
The parent(s) in question always at least showed they're aware of "proper" drug use and claims they thought a good wiping will prevent accidental ingestion.
Was she swimming in cocaine dust?
**: there were one or two cases with just above 1000, but a retest using proper decontamination cycles dropped it to far below the cut-off.
Cut-off = 500.