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.

[Journoscum]

No. His story makes no sense.

Oh, I know he's full of shit. I'm just trying to make sense of the nonsensical.

 

[TrainWreckWatcher]

https://x.com/RekietaLaw/status/1925350221166321855

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/8PgOB

Lmao
View attachment 7394312

I have my reasons stalker child.
Now if you excuse me I have to reply back to this 5 follower account 30 posts deep in a twitter thread at 4AM.

 

[AnOminous]

This nanny stuff is new to me, I'm stunned it wasn't featured. Let's just say Nick IS telling the truth (lol)

If Nick is telling the truth, he admits he had a nanny who gave alcohol to his kids and he did nothing about it. He's literally admiting the very child abuse he has been constantly denying. And he's admitting that months after she left, he was so incompetent and pathetic that he was literally incapable of cleaning up his own home, what a worthless crackhead loser.

Nick has just literally admitted that he is such a worthless crackhead piece of shit that he was incapable of feeding his kids and cleaning up the home literal months after the nanny (for obvious and sane reasons) abandoned his crackshack, probably after he tried to rape her.

 

[3MMA]

Nick complains constantly. On his show, on others shows, in his social media posts, & in his personal relationships. He’s been complaining, in his home, in front of his kids, for years. It’s easy to picture him name-calling everyone who reported him while in front of the kids with no self awareness. He’s modeling some very fucked up behavior.

Nick doesn’t make time for his kids when they interrupt his show, (I’m ignoring that one, obviously performative time that Nick purposefully had his daughter on the show a week or two ago, when people pointed out how horribly he reacted to her worried interruption a day prior, as it was obviously scripted bullshit.) He ignores his kids as a matter of course so it’s easy to picture them vying for his attention by imitating him, his complaints, & ease with lying.

It’s obvious that either his kid didn’t say shit about the nanny & it’s just another Nick story, or that the kid is modeling Nick’s behavior, complete with lies, in a (very sad) attempt to try & be like their dad to get his attention. Either of those things are easier to picture than Nicks bullshit story being real. He can’t even repeat it correctly, as the story he tells keeps changing.

 

[N1bbaN3rd]

If Nick is telling the truth, he admits he had a nanny who gave alcohol to his kids and he did nothing about it. He's literally admiting the very child abuse he has been constantly denying. And he's admitting that months after she left, he was so incompetent and pathetic that he was literally incapable of cleaning up his own home, what a worthless crackhead loser.

Nick has just literally admitted that he is such a worthless crackhead piece of shit that he was incapable of feeding his kids and cleaning up the home literal months after the nanny (for obvious and sane reasons) abandoned his crackshack, probably after he tried to rape her.

If you parse it through the filter of "Nick's accusations are actually confessions," then he is in fact admitting that he's given his kids liquor, and paid them money to chug energy drinks (presumably because it's funny and weird?).

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

He has a fucking law degree. He could have logged off, practiced law, and lived a more comfortable life than most of the posters in this thread. But that wouldn't be enough for him.

No, he couldn't have. He sort of tried, and he sucked.

And he's literally said that being a lawyer is too much work.

 

[Sneed Force One]

A broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[AnOminous]

Nick complains constantly.

That's literally all Nick does. He bitches, he whines, he complains, he autistically fails to understand why people don't like him, he fails to pick up on social cues, he gibbers, he babbles, he rages, he launches bizarre assaults on random innocent people, attempting to blame them for shit he did, he tards out, he throws tantrums.

That's pretty much what Nick does. He complains, and it's always complaining about things he did to himself.

 

[N1bbaN3rd]

No, he couldn't have. He sort of tried, and he sucked.

And he's literally said that being a lawyer is too much work.

Even streaming is too much work for this no-good junkie faggot.
Nick's parents are abject failures - they did nothing to instill anything resembling a work ethic within him.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

Here are a few common Nick copes with subsequent analysis to complement your post:

You are forgetting my favorite cope, "I wish that was true. That would be fun."

If he was being tested 2x a week, then he really wouldn't really have the time to do anything without being caught. This way the holes in his brain are swirling with the thought of potential binges that will go undetected if he's getting tested every 7-10 days. It's tempting him because he's non-using drug addict. AA calls it a dry drunk.

But he stopped and it was easy because he could stop at any time and it's as simple as "Just stop!"

 

[John Andrews Stan]

either his kid didn’t say shit about the nanny & it’s just another Nick story, or that the kid is modeling Nick’s behavior, complete with lies, in a (very sad) attempt to try & be like their dad to get his attention

Fabricating stories and testing boundaries are a natural phase of childhood development. But neglected and abused kids are especially prone to making up stories. Kids do what they need to do to get their needs met, whether that’s lying, hitting, throwing tantrums, etc. I can’t imagine how traumatizing it will be for her if she spun this yarn to get her checked-out father’s attention and (because he’s a reckless moron) he blabs about it online and gets himself in real trouble.

Again, he should have killed himself a year ago so his kids wouldn’t have to live as hostages to this destructive loser.

 

[RaptInPlastic]

You are forgetting my favorite cope, "I wish that was true. That would be fun."

How to Spot Lies: Words
Liars often give themselves away in subtle ways. Sometimes it’s what they don’t say—like avoiding direct denials. Other times, it’s how they phrase things, using overly formal speech, unnecessary details, or rehearsed-sounding responses. Instead of saying, “I didn’t do it,” a deceptive person might shift the focus with a protest statement like “Why would I do something like that?” or “You know me, I would never.” Others might repeat a question verbatim, buying themselves time while crafting a response. Rather than answering a simple “Did you take the money?” with a direct “No,” they may pause and question the question, “Did I take the money?” before continuing with a carefully worded explanation.

Spoiler: tl;dr on Lying Liars who Lie and the Lies they tell

What Are the Key Phrases and Speech Patterns Liars Use?​

Liars will repeat a question verbatim

Hey Charles, did you send the email to Jackie? Did I send the email to Jackie? If this is Charles’s response, you have your answer—he didn’t send it yet. Repeating a question in full is a common stalling tactic used by people looking for an extra moment to prepare their deceptive reply. In natural conversation, people will sometimes repeat part of a question, but restating the entire question is highly awkward and unnecessary—they clearly heard you the first time.



Liars will take a guarded tone

If Charles had replied to the direct question by lowering his voice and asking, What do you mean?, a lie may well have been in the works. A suspicious or guarded approach isn’t usually called for, and may indicate that he’s concealing something—whether it’s the truthful answer or his attitude toward you for asking the question in the first place.



Liars won’t use contractions in their denials

Bill Clinton provides the classic example of what interrogators call a “non-contracted denial” when he said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” The extra emphasis in the denial is unnecessary if someone is telling the truth. I didn’t have sex with her is how the honest person is likely to phrase his claim of innocence. Clinton said a lot more than he realized with his words.



Liars tell stories in strict chronology

To keep their stories straight, liars tend to stick to chronological accounts when relating an event. They don’t want to get tripped up by an out-of-place detail—there’s enough to think about already. But this isn’t how we talk when being truthful. We relate stories in the way we remember them, not in strict chronological order. That’s because memorable events carry an emotional component too. Often we’ll lead with the most searing emotional moment and jump around in time.



Liars love euphemisms

It’s human nature not to implicate ourselves in wrongdoing. This holds true even for liars, who will shy away from dwelling on their deception if possible. One way they do this is opting for softer language—instead of saying “I didn’t steal the purse” they may say “I didn’t take the purse.” If you ask someone a direct question about their involvement in an incident and they change your words to something softer, raise your deception antennae.



Liars overemphasize their truthfulness

“To tell you the truth…” “Honestly…” “I swear to you…”Oh, if only it were so! When people use these bolstering statements to emphasize their honesty, there’s a good chance they are hiding something. Learning to baseline someone’s normal behavior is important in situations such as this: You want to listen for normal or harmless use of such phrases. There’s no need to add them if you really are telling the truth, so be on guard.



Liars avoid or confuse pronouns
We use a fair amount of pronouns in normal conversation. They are a sign of comfortable speech, and they may disappear or be misused by someone who is trying to be extra careful with his words. A liar may say “You don’t bill hours that you didn’t work” instead of making the clear first- person statement: “I don’t bill hours I didn’t work.”

Liars use long introductions but skip over main events
When a liar wants to build credibility, she will pad her story with as much factual content as possible. The Israeli researcher Avinoam Sapir found that deceptive individuals will add more detail around the prologue of a story, but gloss over the main event where the deception comes into play. Careful listeners can pick up on this lopsided storytelling style and use the BASIC method to zero in on the missing details with specific questions.

Liars give very specific denials
We’ve already discussed the human impulse to avoid implicating ourselves. So we can expect liars to be very particular in what they say and don’t say. Truth-tellers have no problem issuing categorical denials—I never cheated anyone in my whole life—whereas the liar will choose his words ever so carefully.

Liars hedge their statements
We hear them in court testimony, political hearings and TV confessional interviews all the time: qualifying statements that leave an out for the person on the hot seat. “As far as I recall…” “If you really think about it…” “What I remember is…” Hedged statements aren’t an absolute indicator of deception, but an overuse of such qualifying phrases certainly should raise suspicion that a person isn’t being totally up front with what he or she knows.

Inappropriate Detail
Another telltale sign is the level of detail a liar provides. Deceptive people tend to go to one of two extremes: either they offer vague, evasive responses or they overload their story with unnecessary details. Someone telling the truth usually recounts events naturally, jumping from one moment to another as memory recalls them. Liars, on the other hand, may stick to a strict chronological order, rehearsing their version of events in a way that feels too structured. If a story sounds too perfect or if a person adds irrelevant specifics—like what time they left the house, what color shirt they were wearing, and what they ate for breakfast—it could be an attempt to make their lie seem more believable.

Distancing Language
One of the biggest verbal red flags of deception is distancing language—a technique liars use to avoid direct ownership of their actions. Instead of saying, “I broke the glass,” they might say, “The glass broke,” subtly removing themselves from the equation. Politicians and corporate spokespeople use this tactic frequently, opting for vague, impersonal statements like “Mistakes were made” instead of acknowledging responsibility. Similarly, liars often avoid contractions in denials, saying “I did not take the money” instead of “I didn’t take it.” This overly formal structure can be an unconscious attempt to sound more convincing.

Why Do Liars Use These Verbal Tricks?​

Lying is a mentally exhausting task. A liar must not only construct a believable story but also monitor their own behavior and predict how they are being perceived—all while suppressing their natural emotional responses. This cognitive overload leads to speech that sounds unnatural. A deceptive person might pause longer than usual before answering, use vague language to avoid being pinned down, or repeat questions to stall for time. They may also shift their vocal tone, either speaking unnaturally slowly to control their response or too quickly to rush past a potential lie.

When a liar is confronted, their verbal response often reveals just as much as their body language. Instead of addressing the question directly, they may deflect with another question, such as “Why would I do that?” or “Do I really seem like the kind of person who would lie?” Some will try to redirect blame, saying, “I can’t believe you’re accusing me of this,” while others attempt to over-explain or change the subject entirely. When someone is telling the truth, they usually answer directly and confidently. When they’re lying, they work harder to convince rather than simply stating the facts.

 

[Dipodomys]

Nick can't lie like he used to and it's killing him.

If you watch earlier streams, he could roll with the punches okay. He liked to attack vague language and do the care to elaborate lawyer thing. When he was fucked up on coke and alcohol, he would say the stupidest shit imaginable, but say it quickly. Now he can't even react without a 5 second pause.

And it's still the stupidest shit you've ever heard.

 

[John Andrews Stan]

Nick can't lie like he used to and it's killing him.

Apart from his sluggishness and lack of intelligence or wit, KF made a huge dent in his ability to peddle bullshit people will actually believe.

Zero influence? He wishes.

 

[AnOminous]

Now he can't even react without a 5 second pause.

He's visibly befuddled. He's obviously trying to come up with a lie. And when he takes the dick out of his mouth long enough to tell the lie, it's always aged to the point nobody would believe it anyway.

 

[Smashed & Slamed]

Fabricating stories and testing boundaries are a natural phase of childhood development. But neglected and abused kids are especially prone to making up stories. Kids do what they need to do to get their needs met, whether that’s lying, hitting, throwing tantrums, etc. I can’t imagine how traumatizing it will be for her if she spun this yarn to get her checked-out father’s attention and (because he’s a reckless moron) he blabs about it online and gets himself in real trouble.

Again, he should have killed himself a year ago so his kids wouldn’t have to live as hostages to this destructive loser.

That's assuming the entire story is true.
It's quite clear from Nick's ineptitude at keeping the story straight that this is made up. If the timeline of the Nanny's abuse is made up, it's safe to assume the kids telling him about it is made up by himself.
Plus it's quite clear from Nick's abuse that his kids are developmentally stunted and I doubt the drugged up daughter could actually make up a story that detailed.

 

[Gulls on Film]

What would proof be? 15 months after the fact my kid told me the nanny let them try a beer? That she paid them 75 dollars to chug energy drinks?

I already know the answer(Nick is a liar), but how would he not notice that his kids have large(for a child) amounts of money. Kids are terrible liars when they find cash. That shouldn't have taken 15 months to figure out.

Nick's children: Can we go to the store so we can buy candy, we have the money.
A hypothetical, sober Rekieta: Where did you get that money?

Either way, this just makes him look like a terrible, drugged out father.

 

[Moss Monster]

Ethan Ralph has a year's salary riding on this and Bossmanjack sacrificed everything to win lolcow of the year and now Null hands Nick the victory on a silver plate.

Nick Rekieta is in hell. No matter what anyone else does, his life will be made worse to win Lolcow of the Year just one more time, every time. He shall never die, and is not even truly alive. Nick Rekieta is in hell.

 

[SterilizedGlowsticks]

He isn't adding Johnny Depp to the AI voices because of copyright concerns?

So apparently, whether or not it's a copyright issue is down entirely to how much money the person in question has to be able to sue him.

 

[Casval Rem Deikun]

Nick Rekieta is in hell. No matter what anyone else does, his life will be made worse to win Lolcow of the Year just one more time, every time. He shall never die, and is not even truly alive. Nick Rekieta is in hell.

And just wait until the bodycam footage null said on the latest MATI there's been progress for it.