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.

[Illuminati Order Official]

Melton kicks Nick off his show, citing his fans hating him, and then hosts the uncut, full stream of Nick potentially violating his RO.

Shiver and shake, this pedo's a snake!

 

[Tiger Jack]

Melton kicks Nick off his show, citing his fans hating him, and then hosts the uncut, full stream of Nick potentially violating his RO.

Melton snake arc coming sooner than we thought?

If the HRO gets upheld, possibly expanded and Nick loses the ability to talk about Aaron at all then he's no longer of any use to Melton. Him kicking Nick's annoying gay ass to the curb is inevitable, just a question of when.

 

[SterilizedGlowsticks]

I'm trying to remember a time when Nick was talking on twitter about Aaron, and said something about, Aaron should be put in the dirt or in a sane world would be put in the dirt, or something like that (not necessarily "dirt", I might be mixing up times he's talked about his enemies being dead) ... my memory is fucking trash. Doesn't anyone else remember this more clearly so I can search for it?

 

[AnOminous]

Remember that Aaron had a full year since that period of time where Melton was saying shit about Aaron's daughter where Aaron could have attempted to obtain an HRO, where many people in this thread were wondering why the fuck he didn't try to do something to stop at least Melton talking about Aaron's kids... but Aaron never bothered and as far as is known hasn't bothered to do that and even offered to participate in a boxing event in Vegas with the Hackamania hosts.

He should have gotten the HRO just out of concern for his kids. It was a dereliction of duty not to and instead to milk it for content. I think everyone can agree with that.

That said, with his giant L on Wednesday, he should have also done it out of concern for himself, instead of getting blindsided with a violation and having no evidence in the record showing the very people complaining of his conduct were engaging in far worse themselves and deliberately baiting him into it.

I have a fairly low opinion of Judge Bulldyke at this point (subject to revision), but it's not like Aaron gave her anything to work with. To her it probably looked like a one-sided harassment campaign where Aaron was using a public platform to harass his victim on a daily basis. Should she have seen through this transparent bullshit? Obviously, but it still isn't really her job to go on some personal investigation of the case. That's the defense lawyer's job. She can hardly rule on something that never even came before her.

Absolutely not (inshallah). I was pointing out that that certain takes on this judge are incorrect in addition to dumb.

Clarification: I am not referring to @Potentially Criminal's takes.

The only take of his I have an issue with is on judicial elections. Incumbent judges almost never lose these. They aren't generally competitive elections, and in Minnesota, there are merely periodic retention elections, that is, a straight up vote on whether or not to retain them as judges.

Only utterly reviled judges lose these.

Personally, I always vote to retain even if I detest the judge personally because I don't believe it's even proper to have such elections.

 

[buttmunch]

never forgetty the shame nick risotto has to live with till he dies (i made this to immortalize it)

 

[Clamater]

>declares lawfare
>immediately cries when it begins
What did he mean by this?

Spoiler: hint

he's a fag

 

[Schpoots]

My canon is that the balldo damaged nicks nerves and now hes a cripple.

 

[Melty Butter]

I am confused about several things.

Objective of each HRO: Do I have this correct?

Nick: Objective is vengence. Simple as. Using Kayla as a proxy, he filed the RP charges and RO against Aaron intending to watch every second of STMS for even loose violations to get him charged with a... felony(?). This also muddies the water in the court of public opinion by shifting the narrative to Kayla being a victim.

Aaron: Objective is tactical related to the RP charge, right? I assume Judge Heidi Shultz will eventually have to read every goo tweet and and vitriolic comment from NLO penned by Nick. Realistically, Aaron's probably not afraid for his safety, right? If he were, he'd have filed an HRO months ago.

Outlier Issues:

• Hacking: Aaron's RO against Nick will reflect positively on that case if ever happens.
• Breaking Probation: No one seems clear about whether Aaron's RO against Nick could land Nick jail for 28 days but it's a possibility.

Am I missing anything?

 

[Kipersonapiscesotter]

I am confused about several things.

Objective of each HRO: Do I have this correct?

Nick: Objective is vengence. Simple as. Using Kayla as a proxy, he filed the RP charges and RO against Aaron intending to watch every second of STMS for even loose violations to get him charged with a... felony(?). This also muddies the water in the court of public opinion by shifting the narrative to Kayla being a victim.

Aaron: Objective is tactical related to the RP charge, right? I assume Judge Heidi Shultz will eventually have to read every goo tweet and and vitriolic comment from NLO penned by Nick. Realistically, Aaron's probably not afraid for his safety, right? If he were, he'd have filed an HRO months ago.

Outlier Issues:

• Hacking: Aaron's RO against Nick will reflect positively on that case if ever happens.
• Breaking Probation: No one seems clear about whether Aaron's RO against Nick could land Nick jail for 28 days but it's a possibility.

Am I missing anything?

No idea on the speculation, but from what I read the HRO is likely not a probation violation. Not unless he violates it, that is. Then it is.

Where it can maybe get murky is the harassment is against a state witness in his drugs posession case. A keen prosecutor could likely get creative on a charge, if they wanted.

 

[Captain Manning]

The only take of his I have an issue with is on judicial elections. Incumbent judges almost never lose these. They aren't generally competitive elections, and in Minnesota, there are merely periodic retention elections, that is, a straight up vote on whether or not to retain them as judges.

We have the same thing here in Arizona. We don't get to actually pick any of the judges. The Governor does. The best we can do is vote "no" during the retention elections that occur every four years. And even then, the Governor still gets to pick their replacement.

Only utterly reviled judges lose these.

Correct. It's happened only six times since we adopted the system in 1974.

They have less job security than Federal judges (who you have to outright impeach), but better than those in states that hold competitive elections.

I assume it's the same way in every state that uses this system.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

[Nick's whole blather]

Here's a thing about people like Nick - and it also happens to be why he thinks he's smart and why he thinks he is or thought he would be a good lawyer: he has a deeply on-guard orientation, meaning he lies intuitively and naturally speaks and acts in a way that (usually) is, or can plausibly be presented - in a war of ackshually - as, Not Quite Nailable. They will in fact will 100% predictably try to spin it as that they ackshually have the moral high ground, no matter what sins they committed to get and stay there - and I believe they simultaneously believe themselves and know they are absolutely, laughably spewing rot. They'll get haughtier and haughtier, turn the moralizing up to 11, work themselves into a right tizzy - half performance, half self-preservation/ defective ego-overcompensation. It's a predictable pattern.

People like this have a way - a way that, while deliberate, is based not in incredible conscious masterminding, but in a combination of

1. In-born (or early developmental), effectively natural tendencies to skitter away from accountability;
2. Reflexive avoidance of clear language or commitment to anything (everything comes with a built-in "out"*);
3. Lack of any moral scruples whatsoever: if it can't be proved wrong, it's not;
4. Deliberate decisioning to embrace their natural "gifts" described in 1 - 3; and
5. 100% denial (in the form of acting metaphorically deaf when confronted) of all of the above.

* There can be a minor personal joy and amusement when, after too many vexing scenarios, a good person stuck dealing with someone like this person finally figures out that adopting an assumption of zero good faith and planning ahead a bit results in seeing how easy it an be to outfox that malignant midwit "cleverness," lack of moral fiber, and unwarranted confidence.

And that is when you see their faces go red and purple with rage. Best met with an even gaze, a slight smile, and saying nothing. Omfg, do they rage.

...that said, putting on that kind of person's mask, even for a moment of sweet victory, of watching your enemy stumble, feels a bit dirty. I think that learning the mind and m.o. of someone like Nick to that degree brings with it a little bit of corruption of one's own soul, a small permanent melancholy. ...with experience comes knowledge and wisdom...often in the form of scars, I suppose.

People like Nick surely belueve the ends justify the means...but the funny thing is, they don't really even have clear or important ends. There are useful and honest ways to wordsmith or be precise - and very good and reasonable reasons for it. That's not what they are after. They aim to make the process is wearing and disagreeable as possible, and then as soon as the ink is dry, to immediately disregard what was clearly intended and start immediate "litigation" - or a war of attrition.

Someone like Nick will do this immediately, intuitively, and relentlessly. They will fight to the death on day 2 revising what they said on day 1. Why? Because (pick any or all):

• They realize they made a bad deal and feel foolish and angry (note: "bad deal" means anything they later think of and then toss and turn all night over).
• It is their nature to fight like a petty, irrational bitch.
• They have no positive or honorable principles.
• They very literally cannot abide someone else not being devastated.
• If the other side seems not utterly destroyed, still has a gasp of life left in them, maybe even a limb remaining, then that must mean something went wrong (pettily paranoid); they obsess that
  • either they missed some advantage and are being laughed at or have been taken advantage of, or
  • there is more harm to inflict and they must exploit that opportunity.

There is zero satisfaction in a mutually beneficial agreement. They will seethe and ruminate, irrationally furious and obsessively plotting revenge.​

• They are never satisfied because there is an aching void where their soul should be.

People like Nick will fight to the death with no regard to who is really harmed by it. People like Nick will comfortably put the loved and innocent ones you're charged to protect on the railroad track with the train coming, knowing you will not let them die - and indifferent to the fact that you might while trying to save them.

They will do that to "win," whether a penny or "one million dollars." No victory is too small; no destructive consequence too great. And they will NEVER, EVER look back at the burning and ruined city they torched and think it wasn't worth it. In fact, they'll avoid the question altogether (or will make up some bullshit about it if they must); it does not compute and is not a question they care about.

 

[AnOminous]

And that is when you see their faces go red and purple with rage. Best met with an even gaze, a slight smile, and saying nothing. Omfg, do they rage.

"Grey rock" is a thing, at least if you are absolutely forced to deal with such a person, and you've probably fucked up if you're in a situation where you have to.

But where they're impotent and can't do shit to you? I'm going for laughing uproariously while making their faces go red and purple with rage. That shit's hilarious. That's a lolcow.

I think that learning the mind and m.o. of someone like Nick to that degree brings with it a little bit of corruption of one's own soul, a small permanent melancholy. ...with experience comes knowledge and wisdom...often in the form of scars, I suppose.

I've crossed that Rubicon and it can't really be uncrossed.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

The only take of his I have an issue with is on judicial elections. Incumbent judges almost never lose these. They aren't generally competitive elections, and in Minnesota, there are merely periodic retention elections, that is, a straight up vote on whether or not to retain them as judges.

Effectively retention elections, sure (write-ins are permitted, ofc, but yes, most are unopposed). However, there can be and are some exceptions.

In 2024, of 103 judicial elections in MN, 9 were contested, and though the data at the link doesn't specify, if we assume the incumbent was listed first in contested races, in 4 of those 9, the challenger won. In the other 5, the results for the winners ranged from barely over 50% to at least the 70s%. 2 MN Supreme Court and 1 Court of Appeals positions were contested; the rest were districts. There are some write-in votes in each race, generally under 2% of votes cast, which is typical.

Schultz won with 99.21%; our friend Wentzell won his with 99.22%.

 

[RodgerDodger]

Would violating the restraining order constitute violating his parole?

Aaron was a named prosecution witness in The criminal matter that Nick is on probation for. So yes. The consequences for Nick may be worse in Candyassy County than Stearns where the HRO was issued.

Every single subhuman shitsack in or surrounding the qover should be flogged in the public square for degeneracy and rampant stupidity. It's the only way any of it ever stops.

 

[AnOminous]

Schultz won with 99.21%; our friend Wentzell won his with 99.22%.

Okay so I was totally wrong on the specifics (my search history suggests I herped and derped and mistook Michigan for Minnesota) but I'm pretty sure I was right on the actual results, which is that judges do NOT get unelected, and certainly not for some decision that is absolutely of no concern to people other than Internet weirdoes.

Every single subhuman shitsack in or surrounding the qover should be flogged in the public square for degeneracy and rampant stupidity. It's the only way any of it ever stops.

"Just put down the Balldo and there will be an end to the horror."

 

[Captain Manning]

People like Nick will fight to the death with no regard to who is really harmed by it. People like Nick will comfortably put the loved and innocent ones you're charged to protect on the railroad track with the train coming, knowing you will not let them die - and indifferent to the fact that you might while trying to save them.

This is why Null (with assistance of Hardin), will be Nick's greatest nemesis.

It's unstoppable force versus unmovable object with those two.

I have never encountered two more stubborn people in my life. Null being a (mostly) good stubborn, and Nick being the evil side.

 

[JamFlowMan]

Every single subhuman shitsack in or surrounding the qover should be flogged in the public square for degeneracy and rampant stupidity. It's the only way any of it ever stops.

Honestly it would be so much easier to have sentence everyone involved to 80 hours in the stocks. Whole thing would have been long over by now.

 

[DiabeticSydePhil]

While I think Aaron won't get the RPO long term, I think Nick going on stream to talk about it immediately makes it more likely.

The funniest option is that the final version prevents Nick from mentioning Aaron at all entirely, something Nick is incapable of doing.

Talking about his ex-boyfriend being what gets Nick's probation fucked up would be the funniest option.

 

[Swole McPole]

[19:39] Rekieta claims this move by Aaron was a serious misstep, as it now allows Rekieta to file discovery requests

Perhaps this would work both ways. Perhaps Aaron could ask for copies of the bodycam as part of HIS discovery?

 

[Nana_Feeder]

While I think Aaron won't get the RPO long term, I think Nick going on stream to talk about it immediately makes it more likely.

The funniest option is that the final version prevents Nick from mentioning Aaron at all entirely, something Nick is incapable of doing.

Talking about his ex-boyfriend being what gets Nick's probation fucked up would be the funniest option.

Preventing Melton from mentioning Aaron would snuff out most of his content.

When it comes to qover, it's easy to dust off your hands with "They're both fags." And they are, but Aaron is a lolcow who does a boring show. Nick is an irredeemable degenerate narcissistic crybully. The Aaron alogs' handwaving of Nick's actual crimes with "Yeah but Aaron eats cum!" makes me hope every fan of the Dabbleverse keeps an Israeli pager on them at all times.