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.

[Lurking9e9]

is he hoping to financially ruin Aaron through a mountain of frivolous lawsuits, leveraging his supposedly superior financial position?

This is what he really wants, dozens of pro se/pro bono frivolous lawsuits against Aaron to drive him into financial ruin.
He doesn't care if they get dismissed as long as he made Aaron waste tens of thousands defending himself.

 

[Maraschino]

Aaron's stated multiple times that he can't because he's a "public figure" (Aaron also wants to milk content off this)

Celebrities get injunctions against demented fans all the time. He should really be somewhat concerned with his safety at this point and whether or not he cops a murder charge for defending himself against this psycho.

Aaron's refused to get restraining orders out on these fucking weirdos because "muh public figure", as if being a "public figure" means people can say and do whatever they want to and about you with impunity, but they can't (and that's one reason among many why he's a fucking retard). At the very least he should get one against the fucking creeps for the sake of his kids.

But if Aaron had said, "I'm not putting a restraining order out on these fucking weirdos because I want to make money talking shit about them, and I can't if I have an order out against them," it'd still be fucking stupid, but at least he'd be fucking honest about it.

 

[Tayto]

In MN, distributing revenge porn is both a crime and cause for a civil suit. Aaron has pled guilty to the crime, and this admission could be used as extremely strong evidence against him in a civil suit. Iirc an RV civil suit would come with some automatic damages awarded, iirc something on the order of $10k, with additional possible damages based on damage to reputation, emotional harm, impaired business, etc.
There are a couple complicating factors to this, mainly that Nick wouldn't be the one with the right to sue, but instead Kayla would have to be the one to initiate the suit. Nick has talked about getting his law license back so that he could represent his wife in a RV suit against Aaron, there were posts about this in this very thread a few pages ago.

I don't believe "revenge porn" should be a civil or criminal matter, if you voluntarily take part in the production of porn, you deserve to deal with the shame of people seeing it, really sick of the government stepping in to stop people from having to deal with the consequences of their own actions. Also, I don't believe someone elses privacy should supersede another individuals property rights, that was Aarons picture, which he took (with Kaylas consent) on his own device - he should've been able to do whatever the fuck he wanted with that picture.

 

[northstar747]

If Aaron has even a microgram of brain matter in his body, he'll be gathering up every single crum of this psychotic shit to stick in an anti-SLAPP/restraining/harrassment order when Nick inevitably launches his wave of blatantly malicious suits. Aarons really started to piss me off with how he just sits on his arse and takes this shit from all these freaks - for the love of god man, grow a pair & stop letting this angry little poofter lash out from behind his husk of a wife.

I am going to ask a very retarded question.

I get that these retards did swinging because clout chasing.

Swining is imo stupid.

I view aaron in a more sympathetic light because he pulled up and like a faggot theatre kid tried to do the right thing.

Why is nick soo fixated on Aaron?

 

[Soapmore]

That doesn't seem right. If you're charged with something criminally, why should you then be targeted civally? It seems it should only be one or the other.

Edit: When I say "right," I mean fair. I believe that this legally true in Minnesota, but It seems wrong (from a fair sense) that you can plead guilty and then get punished for it. The idea of guilty pleas is to reward people for coming clean.

Welcome to 1947 or some bygone age. Nowadays you can be found criminally innocent and still end up on the hook for a civil judgment.

I am going to ask a very retarded question.

I get that these retards did swinging because clout chasing.

Swining is imo stupid.

I view aaron in a more sympathetic light because he pulled up and like a faggot theatre kid tried to do the right thing.

Why is nick soo fixated on Aaron?

IT's not a stupid question it's a deep question, with a lot of psychology behind it, but to keep it quick it's like this: Nick knows he's a degenerate piece of trash. He drags people down to his level, so he doesn't feel personal shame. He ruined his wife (perhaps with low effort) and he ruined April (because he could). But what he could not ruin was Aaron. Aaron was the one that got away. Aaron left before the raid and arrests. Aaron was the one who was able to escape all the penalties Nick is paying.

And worst of all, Nick sees that Kayla had a genuine affection for Aaron--probably because Nick only ever gave her the bargaining of shame versus complicity. So Nick, knowing he's a fucking dirtbag pile of filth, sees his "Lady Rackets" responding to the only real affection she's see in years, from Aaron, and Nick knows Aaron is the better man, that his wife liked the better man, and that Aaron escaped just in time because Aaron is the better man.

So Aaron must be destroyed.

 

[August Levasseur]

That doesn't seem right. If you're charged with something criminally, why should you then be targeted civally? It seems it should only be one or the other.

Edit: When I say "right," I mean fair. I believe that this legally true in Minnesota, but It seems wrong (from a fair sense) that you can plead guilty and then get punished for it. The idea of guilty pleas is to reward people for coming clean.

The idea of guilty pleas is to not have to go through the trouble of a trial because it is expensive, stressful, and time consuming for all involved. Being targeted with a civil suit after going through criminal proceedings for the same event is not that uncommon, actually. OJ Simpson got sued for the wrongful death of Nicole Brown by her family after he was acquitted of murdering her; her family won and he was ordered to pay $33 million.

Why is nick soo fixated on Aaron his former gay lover?

Should be self explanatory.

Welcome to 1947 or some bygone age. Nowadays you can be found criminally innocent and still end up on the hook for a civil judgment.

Civil suits and criminal proceedings follow different standards of proof. The idea that you could be found Not Guilty in a criminal trial (subject to the higher standard of proof) yet still be found liable as part of a civil trial (subject to the lesser standard of proof) is neither contradictory not novel, but rather it is how the law has worked in this country since law came to this country.

Theoretically you could be tried up to three times for the same event: once in State court, once in Federal court, and once in Civil court. This has probably happened at least once, probably with a Civil Rights related case.

 

[AncientPhosphur]

I doubt a "barely even a violation" would get anywhere even in the middle range. Attorney fees could be steep depending on how involved the litigation got and a wannabe Russell Greer like Nick would be as vexatious as he could get.

Ah looks like we’ll get an update to how much a KNU is. Good for Nick for getting 2 things he wants: an attempt to target his gay lover and shame his wife

 

[Vibralldo]

I am going to ask a very retarded question.

I get that these retards did swinging because clout chasing.

Swining is imo stupid.

I view aaron in a more sympathetic light because he pulled up and like a faggot theatre kid tried to do the right thing.

Why is nick soo fixated on Aaron?

Aaron was the first person to confirm that Nick was a drug abusing, swinging degenerate. Nick HATES being called out for his degeneracy, especially if there's proof (see also his violent hatred of Mama K and Elissa Clips)

He also hates that Aaron was never charged with anything despite the rest of the Qover getting charges from it. He also thinks Aaron snitched to the cops and caused the raid (he didn't)

 

[Potentially Cat Mom]

As far as the Turtleboy interview goes, if Nick gets completely felted on Wednesday at Aaron’s hearing, he may get so pissed off he cancels the stream in favor of hanging out in Melton’s chat. I hope Mamma K doesn’t plan on going to the hearing b/c I don’t trust Nick to control himself. He has just been too unhinged acting on Twitter. Though it could be just him trying to sound tough or something.

I would love for a document drop during the interview, though.

 

[Sneed Force One]

if Nick gets completely felted on Wednesday at Aaron’s hearing, he may get so pissed off he cancels the stream in favor of hanging out in Melton’s chat.

This will be the litmus test as to Nick's psyche if he believes he "won" or not.

 

[Oxyjen]

Found this case on Law & Crime, and boy howdy, does it sound familiar.

What a difference sunshine laws and not being beholden to crooked Good Ol' Boy small town scumfucks make.

On the subject of real crime things that sound familiar, I watched this predator catcher one yesterday. Relevant bit clipped

 

[DiabeticSydePhil]

hope Mamma K doesn’t plan on going to the hearing b/c I don’t trust Nick to control himself. He has just been too unhinged acting on Twitter. Though it could be just him trying to sound tough or something.

Honestly I hope she does, because Nick'll be even more of a seething mess publicly.

 

[Fapcop]

Best case scenario here is the judge sentences aaron, rekieta, and melton all to life in prison without the possibility of parole, or force all three to get jobs, their choice.

Nah man.

The best case scenario is Pedo Melton and Rekieta getting life without parole, and Aaron getting an acquittal and a personal apology and handshake from the judge.

Remember, this is Rekieta. Aaron not being punished while Nick is, would make Rekieta seethe harder than any jail sentence.

 

[Oxyjen]

Welcome to 1947 or some bygone age. Nowadays you can be found criminally innocent and still end up on the hook for a civil judgment.

Just ask OJ Simpson.

 

[Fapcop]

This is what he really wants, dozens of pro se/pro bono frivolous lawsuits against Aaron to drive him into financial ruin.
He doesn't care if they get dismissed as long as he made Aaron waste tens of thousands defending himself.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Chad Hardin would take on Aaron as a client just to fuck with Nick.

Either way, Aaron won’t go bankrupt. Yeah, defending against litigation is expensive.

Defending against a shitty pro se litigant like Nick though, isn’t.

 

[RaptInPlastic]

In other news, and likely already noted in the legal thread.
Nick and big-brain Marc Randazza withdrew their Anti-SLAPP argument against Montegraph.
All that huffing and puffing for barely more than a breeze!
View attachment 7551174View attachment 7551173
So far its Hardship Hardin 1 : 0 Retard Randazza
Now the case will have to proceed to discovery and eventually Nick writing a big fat check.
View attachment 7551244
Nick probably didn’t want this on the record. where Retard Randazza outright admits that Montegraph had a positive online reputation, undermining his own claim that Montegraph’s character was already ruined and couldn’t be defamed.
Also his attempted Anti-SLAPP motion was fucking massive, at Randazza's rates he just pissed likely over ten thousand dollars into the wind.

If that is the one where Rekieta's lawyer makes statements about him still being a lawyer I'm guessing that would be why the document had to exit stage left.

 

[TherapyMan]

I can see Kayla having a decent chance of winning something against Aaron.

That doesn't seem right. If you're charged with something criminally, why should you then be targeted civally?

The concept of the day is "offensive collateral estoppel." Basically, the legal system hates having to re-litigate the same legal issues from scratch if another court already decided it. If another court already rendered a judgment on a specific issue in an earlier action—in this case, via a guilty plea for revenge pornography—then the plaintiff in a subsequent action can use that prior judgment to foreclose the issues included in that judgment—in this instance, whether Aaron committed the elements of criminal revenge pornography against Kayla.*

Frankly, this makes perfect sense. If Aaron says he committed revenge pornography and pleaded guilty to revenge pornography, why should a second court have to re-litigate the entire issue when it involves basically the same evidence and facts?

If Kayla wanted to bring suit against Aaron, she would have a pretty easy time of it—to the extent any civil claim can be characterized as "easy." Aaron should have been advised that Kayla could do that if he pleaded guilty. If his lawyer didn't do that or Aaron didn't understand, well aw shucks Aaron.

*This however only is useful to the extent that the elements of the criminal revenge pornography charge overlaps with elements of the civil revenge pornography charge. Different states also have different standards on how to use offensive collateral estoppel, and I am not familiar with how Minnesota does it specifically.

Nowadays you can be found criminally innocent and still end up on the hook for a civil judgment.

Nobody is found "criminally innocent." You are either guilty or not guilty. Additionally, civil versions of criminal charges require a less stringent evidentiary threshold to prove than criminal charges.

 

[Sneed on Cloud 9]

Didn't he already disclose what the ethics investigation was about on his show? I recall that he said he was being investigated over his criminal charges and that the professional responsibility office asked him for his input on what his punishment should be, and that Nick's opinion (of course) was that there shouldn't be any.

ETHICS COMPLAINTS: VIDEO COMPILATION

Below is a chronological series of Nick Rekieta addressing ethics complaints on video.

June 21, 2024

Mr. Douglas complains about Nick Rekieta's use of vulgarity, mocks race (racism), sexual orientation, drunkenness, online legal advice, and complains the Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Office will not act against Nick Rekieta Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Office. Mr. Douglas continues to state Nick Rekieta is not a lawyer and Nick's audience claims he is a good lawyer.
This complaint was dismissed and was not investigated.

May 16, 2025

The context is about judges. Nick talks about his previous law experience and his encounters with judges. He says they are "not even human anymore." Dave the Lawyer nervously laughs it off, keep in mind he is an actual practicing lawyer. He says, "you're supposed to critique the decision, not the judge."

Nick copes about the ethics complaint of calling a judge retarded. I'm presuming he is referring to Hon. Judge Fischer.

As an aside, fuck you Dave the Lawyer for displaying your minor child for the internet to gawk at.

May 28, 2025

@RaptInPlastic filed an ethics complaint about Nick's daughter. Nick has your "name and address You can be served. You're really disgusting."

June 6, 2025

In regards to an ethics complaint which was filed to the Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Office for talking about his former nanny.

"Apparently saying things online, that are true about someone, is now an ethical violation in the minds of retarded people. So those idiots send ethics complaints to the Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Office in Minnesota and say 'get rid of him! You've got to ban him from practice' or whatever." Nick continues, "it's weird because it's like, look I didn't give my kid alcohol, this lady did. All I did was find out about and I said it."

Nick claims this guy lost and it was @RaptInPlastic .

Also, Nick says he found out about the nanny gave his kids booze a year after she left.

It appears to be three separate ethics complaints Nick is referring to in these videos. Sorry, I'm very behind on the thread, but I too was wondering about the ethical complaints he talks about while streaming.

 

[northstar747]

IT's not a stupid question it's a deep question, with a lot of psychology behind it, but to keep it quick it's like this: Nick knows he's a degenerate piece of trash. He drags people down to his level, so he doesn't feel personal shame. He ruined his wife (perhaps with low effort) and he ruined April (because he could). But what he could not ruin was Aaron. Aaron was the one that got away. Aaron left before the raid and arrests. Aaron was the one who was able to escape all the penalties Nick is paying.

And worst of all, Nick sees that Kayla had a genuine affection for Aaron--probably because Nick only ever gave her the bargaining of shame versus complicity. So Nick, knowing he's a fucking dirtbag pile of filth, sees his "Lady Rackets" responding to the only real affection she's see in years, from Aaron, and Nick knows Aaron is the better man, that his wife liked the better man, and that Aaron escaped just in time because Aaron is the better man.

So Aaron must be destroyed.

Aaron was the first person to confirm that Nick was a drug abusing, swinging degenerate. Nick HATES being called out for his degeneracy, especially if there's proof (see also his violent hatred of Mama K and Elissa Clips)

He also hates that Aaron was never charged with anything despite the rest of the Qover getting charges from it. He also thinks Aaron snitched to the cops and caused the raid (he didn't)

Thank you guys that makes sense

I figured with the body cam footage arc nick would move on,

I also guess that nick s beefing had to do with april but april moved on.

 

[Major]

Welcome to 1947 or some bygone age. Nowadays you can be found criminally innocent and still end up on the hook for a civil judgment.

it's so that lawyers can charge double commission (kill all lawyers by the way).