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.

Why is Nicholas Rekieta offline?

  • He's spending time with his family, NERDS.

    Votes: 72 10.7%

  • He pissed hot and he's in trouble!

    Votes: 95 14.1%

  • Yet another "family incident" happened.

    Votes: 209 31.1%

  • His lawyer ordered him to shut up.

    Votes: 175 26.0%

  • He's busy procuring the 5k LOCALS gift.

    Votes: 70 10.4%

  • He's dead.

    Votes: 51 7.6%
  • Total voters
    672
Potentially Criminal said:
He shit the bed.
He tried one thing (that was completely retarded) and failed completely.
Click to expand...
My personal favourite was attempts to throw out Aaron Imholte's STMS statements because of his animosity towards Rekieta, yet refusing to elaborate on the nature of their relationship as to why such animosity would occur.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogHot, Pedophobe, The Motorizer and 12 others
Sneed Force One said:
My personal favourite was attempts to throw out Aaron Imholte's STMS statements because of his animosity towards Rekieta, yet refusing to elaborate on the nature of their relationship as to why such animosity would occur.
Click to expand...

The cop lied! He said Aaron and I had a "falling out!" That's a LIE because we had WAY MORE than a mere FALLING OUT! - actual argument by Nick when explaining why there was no probable cause. It was even in his Franks motion I think.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Windy Moors, CindyChafe, The Motorizer and 12 others
Sneed Force One said:
I've got to give it to Barneswalker, he threw the entire box of spaghetti at the wall in attempt to make something stick.
Click to expand...
Not really, no.

He was focused so much on that stupid watermark, and the fact the video was a reupload, that he practically raised no other defense, and thus waved all other defenses he could have potentially raised (not that there were many, or they would have worked).

However, despite Nick's cope that it's all White's fault, such pathetic lawyering was almost certainly at Nick's direction. You can tell because Nick is STILL bitching and moaning about the fact they used Cog's reupload.

Muh Watermark.
:really:
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Pedophobe, Sneed on Cloud 9, The Motorizer and 10 others
N1bbaN3rd said:
Minneapolis just became the first American city where it will be legal to broadcast the Islamic call to prayer over loudspeaker. All five of them, every day.
It's like they're trying to outdo California and New York for sheer insanity.
Click to expand...
You're mistaken. And though a bit off topic, it does have a few lolz.
Hamtramck MI has has it for 20 years+.
It used to be a Polish town (by Detroit). Went full lib so they welcomed Muslims & all things Muslim. Now the Muslims took over & libs pissed cuz they can't hang Pride flags anymore.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Associate Rick, Dropa5pack, Peanut Butter Trails and 5 others
Captain Manning said:
Not really, no.

He was focused so much on that stupid watermark, and the fact the video was a reupload, that he practically raised no other defense, and thus waved all other defenses he could have potentially raised (not that there were many, or they would have worked).

However, despite Nick's cope that it's all White's fault, such pathetic lawyering was almost certainly at Nick's direction. You can tell because Nick is STILL bitching and moaning about the fact they used Cog's reupload.

Muh Watermark.
:really:
Click to expand...
He's still arguing that he's right and the warrant should be tossed because muh "he said it was from my YouTube when it was a reupload"
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: The Motorizer, DuranceVile, Peanut Butter Trails and 9 others
Illuminati Order Official said:
I'm starting to think that Nick saw those fine gentlemen and decided that he wants to go to prison.
Click to expand...
"Hedonism III here I come!"
nick fought the law and the law won.webp
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Feels
Reactions: Windy Moors, Sneed on Cloud 9, The Motorizer and 13 others
Vibralldo said:
He's still arguing that he's right and the warrant should be tossed because muh "he said it was from my YouTube when it was a reupload"
Click to expand...
That's just what I said. That's how you know that debacle was more Nick's fault than White's. He blames White for the argument Nick still employs. White did exactly what he wanted. Problem is, what Nick wanted is absolute garbage.

(It's also why Nick should never lawyer again. He sucks. He's a menace to every client he would take on. He'll fuck up a parking ticket).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: Pedophobe, Sneed on Cloud 9, The Motorizer and 16 others
Captain Manning said:
That's just what I said. That's how you know that debacle was more Nick's fault than White's. He blames White for the argument Nick still employs. White did exactly what he wanted. Problem is, what Nick wanted is absolute garbage.

(It's also why Nick should never lawyer again. He sucks. He's a menace to every client he would take on. He'll fuck up a parking ticket).
Click to expand...
Don't make me show you kiwis a video of Nick eating a potato chip. TAKE THAT KIWIS! --oh wait...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuranceVile and USAroXX
MNPublicRecords said:
Don't be silly, he had to know it would all end up here sooner or later.
Click to expand...

Second to last page, circled. Does this mean he doesn't want a court hearing if the HRO is later denied or just that he doesnt want a court hearing unless its later denied? The wording is ambiguous as to whether it means the initial granting or the full order (which seems to need to happen?)

Currently scanning through to if it says anything more specific about what's banned, but the box is checked for 'monitoring online' as a behavior that led to the HRO.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: DuranceVile, Associate Rick, Peanut Butter Trails and 6 others
DiabeticSydePhil said:
Second to last page, circled. Does this mean he doesn't want a court hearing if the HRO is later denied or just that he doesnt want a court hearing unless its later denied? The wording is ambiguous as to whether it means the initial granting or the full order (which seems to need to happen?)
Click to expand...
I think it's "I want \ don't want" and neither is circled or is not visible on this copy.
I would assume "want".
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuranceVile, Peanut Butter Trails, Red Kagedo and 1 other person
MNPublicRecords said:
Don't be silly, he had to know it would all end up here sooner or later.
Click to expand...
Hats off!

Aaron requests Nick not allowed within 1000 ft of Aaron's home, no direct contact, and [as @elb notes below], no online mentions. Good from June 26, 2025 unless changed by another court (can be changed/vacated by Nick if he requests it within 20 days).

It seems the judge agrees on the no contact and not within 1000ft, but not the mentions.

Aaron claims Nick (these were options to be checked or not, only the listed options were checked below):
  • Followed, monitored, or pursued petitioner
  • made uninvited visits to petitioner
  • Made harassing calls or text to petitioner
  • made threats to petitioner
  • frightened petitioner with threatening behavior
  • called petitioner abusive names
  • used social media to harass petitioner
Notably in the fee waiver section, Aaron alleges fear of substantial harm due to Nick "follows, monitors, or pursues another, whether in person or through any available technological or other means"

He requests his address be withheld, but it's in the document in at least two places.

Aaron calls Nick a "former friend"

The April 11th date from Nick does appear, and it does appear to be Aaron's handwriting. The end date for the "using personal info without consent to invite, encourage, or solicit a third party to engage in a sexual act with the victim" ends November 10th, 2024. [That must be when Aaron finally secured his Google account?]

Aaron notes the start of monitoring as September 1st, continuing through the present day. He also claims Nick "

...has shown up at businesses he works with to harass the ownership in hopes I will be there. [Stoneys?] He constantly threatens myself, hints at the fact that I should have been killed on his X account, he has accessed my google account without authorization and posted screenshots on his X of my search history, and claims he shared my private google information with others.

he has appeared on numerous live streams on Youtube on his own channel and on other peoples channels (NLO on youtube 6/25/25) and encouraged people to report me to law enforcement. He has gathered people in public places to harass or intimidate me."

Aaron describes the effect of the harassment:
"I cannot live a normal life, do my daily work, without worrying if he is going to invent some new threat or make up some new charge that I am not responsible for. Ever since his arrest for felony cocaine possession and child endangerment, and my cooperation with the police, and his access of my google account, I have been worried he could come to my house and cause trouble, especially while my children are home."

On if he believes it will continue:
"Yes. He seems unhinged in regards to me and obsessed with inflicting whatever kind of 'punishment' he feels I deserve. I do believe he could get physical at some point."

Aaron does ask he and his kids are included, including an adult ward for whom he is the legal guardian. That seems to have not been granted, since Nick's actions to date have not been directed at the kids.

Aaron seems to not request an initial hearing (even if not granted). Clearly the court agreed.

HRO was requested for 1 year.

The filing date and time seems to be 6/26/2025 (us format) at 3:51pm.

The funniest bit is from the 4-11-24 date:
"He made a message to me on the app signal telling me to kill myself because I refused to come over to his house and continue 'swinging with him'." [the 'with him' is handwritten in as an edit in Aaron's writing.]

Edit to clarify on what was actually granted. Good catch, @Third World Aristocrat
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: 6thRanger, Allakazam223, Windy Moors and 72 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back