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: 65 21.4%
  • A WIN for the Toe against Nicholas Rekieta.

    Votes: 4 1.3%
  • A MAJOR WIN for the Toe, it's upheld against both of them.

    Votes: 83 27.3%
  • Huge L, felted, cooked etc, it gets thrown out.

    Votes: 48 15.8%
  • A win for the lawyers (and Kiwi Farms) because it gets postponed again.

    Votes: 104 34.2%

  • Total voters
    304
Even assuming arguendo that the bumbling statements in that transcript didn't result in the footage being admitted into evidence, I fail to see the relevance when the superseding statute pertinent to investigative data in particular doesn't hinge on what was admitted, and what matters is what was presented:

View attachment 7428846

[L]

Why wouldn't a MNDES upload of the exhibit, memorandum footnotes citing it in support of your motion's argument, and a transcript's initial discussion of it as one of your exhibits collectively count as presenting it, even if he subsequently wanted to "get rid of it" or it subsequently was not admitted? Without any statutory definitions section or any appellate direction on the definition of "presented" in this unique context, Hardin should be free to go straight to the Webster's definition and contend that the MNDES upload and the memorandum filing were the point of no return.

I have no idea why you are writing like that. In any case, whether or not he did in fact formally "present" (in the sense of the more common "offer") those recordings as evidence, a "no take-backs" rule for effectively withdrawn materials would be poor public policy and create a record cluttered with unnecessary and therefore irrelevant in terms of the case disposition items. That defeats the purpose of a record, which is a construct of material that is formally relied on for the outcome.
 
I suppose if he uses some of his legally gotten jew gold to fuck with Rekeita by helping fund the footage coming out so he can play e-hero, he'd be one of the more tolerable retards involved.
Hes never donating more than a $20 if that. Hes the type to be cheap if you catch my drift. Maybe it has to do with the Intimidation he was doing for Nick, but that's probably wishful thinking.
 
Personally, I think that the bodycam is the furthest thing from his mind at the moment.
I think some bad shit happened and he might be fucked with his PO or his family or our wife or something not about Internet drama.
"Hey Nick so about that bodycam f-"
[Nick goes nuclear spastic, and begins huffing nitrous]
"-ootage, the DA agreed to submit a thing requesting it get removed from evidence.'
[Nick is too busy doing whippets to cope to get back to streaming now]

We'll know if it was the bodycam thing if Nick streams tomorrow, because I am sure he is in smug faggot mode about the motion to suppress the evidence.

If he doesnt stream and is in tweet only mode? Something is fucked. Whenever Nick is taking a true L he's genuinely worried about he stops streaming. My guess is an unscheduled drug test announced or his PO asking questions.

Whoever called, it was something Nick couldn't put on Silent and answer back in a half hour, it had to be Right Now.
 
I have heard people say that, but I have yet to see it.

And now I don't fucking care to.

"Oh Manning, Chad Zumock is a cow, and you would know that if you just watch Karl from WATP." -Paraphrase of a message on my profile

Fuck that. I wouldn't be caught dead watching Karl now. Are you out of your mind? Lol.

Chalk that up to him throwing in with pedomelt and Rekieta (and Vito, Juju, etc). He lost any view I might have ever given him for that.
I have no idea who half of these people you speak of are. All I know is that the Dabbleverse's denizens should get a sledgehammer to the ankles like James Caan did in Misery.
 
Even if the footage doesn't come out it won't unfuck his life, undrug his child, or fix Our Wife's blown out body.
Exactly. Even now what is he pulling in per day? 200 in superchats? That's less than half most career professionals make in a day. I make more than that and I'm a retard who posts on Kiwifarms.
 
IMG_4458.webp
(Archived upthread)

Tbh this is a very insensitive insult coming from Rekieta, especially considering the fact that his own lawyer, Francis White III, who took time out of his day today to balldoguard extra hard, has a stunning and brave trans daughter of his own (“Layla” White). Do better, Nick.
 
"Hey Nick so about that bodycam f-"
[Nick goes nuclear spastic, and begins huffing nitrous]
"-ootage, the DA agreed to submit a thing requesting it get removed from evidence.'
[Nick is too busy doing whippets to cope to get back to streaming now]

We'll know if it was the bodycam thing if Nick streams tomorrow, because I am sure he is in smug faggot mode about the motion to suppress the evidence.

If he doesnt stream and is in tweet only mode? Something is fucked. Whenever Nick is taking a true L he's genuinely worried about he stops streaming. My guess is an unscheduled drug test announced or his PO asking questions.

Whoever called, it was something Nick couldn't put on Silent and answer back in a half hour, it had to be Right Now.
It's still been roughly a year since the arrest, and let us not forget that he is under the curse of a demon. If this curse acts in a cyclical manner, things may get hairy.
 
Even if the footage doesn't come out it won't unfuck his life, undrug his child, or fix Our Wife's blown out body.
Exactly. Even now what is he pulling in per day? 200 in superchats? That's less than half most career professionals make in a day. I make more than that and I'm a retard who posts on Kiwifarms.
Nick *might* get this one consolation W. He'll still be a reprobate jackass, and a W will only make him smug enough to eventually wipe it out with another L.
 
A nice donation to the next election campaign. It's not complicated.
I would be very interested in seeing any and all email communications bob and celeste had with the county government. Hardin got it for Greer's whoring misadventures in Nevada, what's one more public records request in Minnesota.
 
In any case, whether or not he did in fact formally "present" (in the sense of the more common "offer") those recordings as evidence, a "no take-backs" rule for effectively withdrawn materials would be poor public policy and create a record cluttered with unnecessary and therefore irrelevant in terms of the case disposition items. That defeats the purpose of a record, which is a construct of material that is formally relied on for the outcome.
The bodycam footage was evidence presented along with a motion that was material to the outcome of the case, said evidence was considered and that consideration informed the outcome of that motion. Even by the public policy standard you propose it seems to work for me.
 
Back