Wow, what a whirlwind of events! I'm not advocating any retarded stalker shit or bugging the locals as 1) it's retarded and 2) anything that can fuck things up for Josh and his efforts should be avoided by sensible Kiwis. But if Sheriff Tollefsen thinks he can shut something down without pissing off an Autist Army looking into all the dirty business of his county, I think he will be sorely mistaken.
a few points...
1. Can we stop talking about how the "nanny didn't clean enough" or "Nick, it's your fault the nanny didn't clean" or "Nick, it's your fault the nanny gave the kids alcohol?
I don't think her nanny job entailed any housework. From what I remember, she was only a nanny meant to drive around muh keedz, buy some groceries, and watch them at the house occasionally. It wouldn't surprise me if the gradual and steady decline in the house was a part of her leaving that job. I bet they were always messy and hoardy, but that things escalated after Nick found the coco.
The only person claiming she gave them alcohol is NICK REKIETA! Am I taking crazy pills... or brownbrown... or galaxy gas? Since when is anything coming from Nick believable? Was there some MNPublic Records drop where this was reported to the police by the kids and I missed it? Even PPP, who has generally been great on this arc, said something indicating he gave some credence to the "drunk Nanny" thesis. Fucking why?
I guess I'm a stickler for these kinds of details as I really suspect that the trend of Balldowashers saying that "the cops touched the girls hair with cocaine" came DIRECT from our own spergs in this thread. I don't remember any Balldoguards or Nick saying anything like that until AFTER I read that kind of speculation here. Maybe I''m wrong about that timeline, but I just don't remember hearing it before I read it here on the Farms. It came from people who didn't know shit about drugs whose thought process went a) reads "hair test" b) thinks "that must mean the coke was on her hair?" That seemed to be the origin of the entire theory! Good for them for being ignorant of hair tests and I complimented them for their lack of knowledge of the drug world. Problem is some of them didn't shut their traps and kept rambling about "well, ackshully... here's a study...". What a fucking waste of time.
I had a thought, aside from some grand zoospricy could something like the bodycam be put away as part of a plea deal to get the nick to rat on his dealer? Considering the amount he had, he wasn't getting it from a rinkydink corner dealer so him snaking would be worth it to the court and police?
I don't really think it is the case, but it would explain the actions of the sheriff and the court going so far to protect him for no reason.
2. I don't think we are discussing the "was Nick a dealer?" angle enough? I just searched the last few days of the thread and the only time I found "dealer" was the above quote. I think Nick being supremely uncool and dorky really throws people off, but I have known some very dorky and uncool dealers over the years who also wouldn't have been suspected.
-The scale. Sorry, but most drug buyers don't carry around scales to check their buys. Sure, it happens, but it's not that common. Not trusting your regular dealer is going to piss them off and they can easily find other buyers. But dealers? Yeah, they all have fucking scales!
-The weighed out baggies. I heard Warski suggest (giving Nick the benefit of the doubt, mind you) that Nick may have just been selling at cost to friends as opposed to dealing for profit. He forgot one important detail though: the Rekietas don't really have any friends! They were giving it away to Aaron and April, but who else were they hanging out with? I never heard Aaron mention any other people in their social circle. Drex? Not into drugs, as I recall. The only times I can remember them doing things with friends were online friends at cons or randos at Hedonism. But could they have been selling to people they met at places like Gay Nineties or Sodomy Barn? Not hard to sell coke at a gay bar... Aaron? Hello? I understand though if he doesn't want to touch that question with a 10 foot pole. If we know two things about Nick, he's a) greedy and b) loves the coca. Why not make money off what he loves?
-The piles of cash. I'm a little shocked that the police dropped the possibility of distribution quickly, but without any known buyers, they wouldn't have much of a case. The case developed as a posession/child neglect case, not a trafficking case, so they didn't come into the situation expecting to bust a dealer, just a loser junkie. If they had been talking to people who had bought from him and working up the chain to Nick, their approach would have been likely different.
-The absurdly overpriced paintings and "3k monthly snack budget". For those of you who don't know, the art world is all about money laundering and hiding dirty assets. And the 3k monthy snack budget.... for underfed kids... always screamed to me that Nick was doing something odd with money and needed to be able to explain where all his money went? Maybe to the cops or IRS? Maybe to Mommy and Daddy? Who knows?
3. I also think that people should continue looking at the political power in this county and possible Rekieta family clout. I know I will be! The Chrissley story and the quote below made me laugh as it reminded me of Our Husband. This is how the world works: campaign contributions buy pardons and light treatment. It's not a Trump thing or a Biden thing or a Clinton thing, it's a politics thing.
“Their daughter,
Savannah, campaigned for Trump. During a speech at the
RNC in 2024,
she said her parents were ‘persecuted’ for their political beliefs,” Anna Bower, a reporter for
Lawfare, said
.
