💀 Horrorcow Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta / "u/Early-Leopard-8351" - Polysubstance abuser, child doser, dog killer. "Lawtube pope" turned zesty Dabbleverse Redditor streamer. Swinger "whitebread ass nigga" who snuffs animals and visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold. Still not over his ex Aaron. Wife's bod worth $50.

Judge brings up large number of people in gallery, reminds everyone to not record and wants to make sure there aren’t any “bots” – almost sounded like he was going to boot everyone out or get us to say “hi” or something?



First case lady called in from the worst connection I have ever heard and then switched to calling from her phone, we’re all getting booted to the breakout room because it’s confidential

Brian L. Johnson – aaron’s attorney
Francis H. White + colleague – nick’s attorney
Aaron is on camera with his attorney, Nick is on camera in his streaming setup

Judge checking name pronunciations, re-key-ta vs re-kay-ta
“everybody that’s not involved in this case, turn your video off”
Random guy turned off his video and Nick’s streamroom suddenly jumpscares me by appearing in its place

Meet and confer, neither side prepared to agree to any stipulations
relevancy decisions and cumulative decisions if needed
brief/highlights for exhibits likely required at end of hearing, because of sheer number of exhibits

White interrupted, asked for witness John Decaprio to be sequestered to prevent his testimony being tainted

Brian asked about proceeding under prong 1 or 2, hesitates, checks, says he believes they’re proceeding under both, White confirms Nick is objecting to the order in any form

Brian calls Aaron as a witness, sworn in, going through formalities
“we were friends” “in a complicated relationship” “rampant drug use in nick’s home” objection for relevance, sustained, aaron says this all led to him leaving the relationship – untenable for him personally and as a father. Brian prompts Aaron for situation involving Nick being charged, objection for relevance again, “limited testimony” allowed, aaron talks about the cocaine and judge tells him to focus on how the event affected his relationship, aaron says he was approached by law enforcement to discuss what he knew based on their friendship, what he had witnessed that may be relevant to the investigation “my discussions with law enforcement were relevant to the probable cause”
did nick threaten you in any way? Yes, after relationship was ended nick went on a “tirade” against aaron on signal, told him he should do the world a favour and kill himself, exhibit 23 is the signal screenshot, White does not know if what he has is this is exhibit 23, wants it on MDES/onscreen to confirm (exhibits sent to opposing council in confusing fashion, not numbered correctly?)

White says the last one he has is T-000042, exhibit 23 is T-000043, boomer tech moment or deliberately not sharing everything?
“the problem is that the parties have to share their exhibits” – apparently just submitting evidence to the court case on MDNES does not mean the opposing party can see it?
5min break, breakout room for White + Nick, Brian trying to fix permissions issues

Back – aaron says it was very jarring having someone tell you to kill yourself, made him feel worried and scared as to what lengths Nick would go to in his anger, judge asks if there’s a date on that/testimony, sent roughly April 11th of 2024 but cannot confirm a specific date, says April 2024
other messages/tweets referring to aaron’s death or “other forms of me either killing myself or being dead” have been posted by nick, pulls up exhibit 3 (T13), a twitter exchange with nick + random guy regarding why he still insists on talking about Aaron, judge clarifies that it’s X as in the website not ex as in a jealous ex, White says he has T22-T42, T13 is once again out of range “what can happen is someone submits it in MNDES, doesn’t click the share button” this is a terrible system, White says exhibits were previously shared and then revoked prior to this hearing this week, says it would have been aaron’s previous attorney, says they uploaded new exhibits in this case + Melton case, the former were unshared but the latter are still available, judge asks Brian to share his screen for exhibits T1-T21 in the future to mitigate this issue, brian says he can’t share his desktop
judge says “they didn’t make a copy because they expected it to still be available” re: T1-T21, is it expected that you might randomly lose access to exhibits in the cases you’re involved in?

“almost an anime type figure with their hands over their face” is one of the profile pictures, lmao
Objection under rule 1006 for incompleteness, “we do not know who actually said the first part”, asks why aaron did not include that in the exhibit, Johnson says it was park of Nick’s thread and Aaron is mentioned in it, judge asks if that means he thinks it’s relevant because aaron was mentioned re: harassment campaign, judge overrules and says Nick can offer an explanation later
judge asks if the term “because he isn’t dead yet” is unique or provoked somehow, says it can be explained later, Aaron says that seeing that post made it clear to him that Nick would not stop obsessively talking about him until he was dead, says the word “yet” in that, in his personal interpretation, seems very ominous and threatening, aaron talks about how he observed it and the context of the thread (the first post in it appears to be very relevant and is not screenshot here, digging up an archive of it could be very useful but we have yet to see the exhibit), objection for hearsay, sustained because the judge didn’t care about that, only the context of him observing
aaron says nick also accessed his google account without his consent and posted a screenshot of his google browser history, objection “basis of knowledge”, overruled no comment, nick publicly posted the screenshot on twitter with commentary saying he had been monitoring aaron’s google account without permission, exhibit 24 (T44) brought up, screenshot of post, November 11th 2024, White still does not have this, Johnson said he shared 23/24 (T43/44) with White on MNDES just now, looks like he can see them now, White asks if this item had been shared on July 18th, says he can’t see it (on a local copy, presumably)? Johnson says they were uploaded to MNDES yesterday, says he doesn’t know if it had been uploaded earlier by prior attorney, White needs to speak with Nick + share his screen with him, presumably another 5 minute break.

No objection to T44, White proposes chambers conference, “run up against the clock” we are an hour in so that’s fair

Nick attended Hackermania with Melton, Nick disseminated pictures of Aaron topless in bed/bathroom to the public, shared private text messages to a live audience without his consent, May 2025
Next exhibit is 17, or T7, submitted July 18th, youtube video 1hr 6min 40sec on the title or 1hr 40min 41sec on the video itself, relevant portion stated to be 20min long, “this little piggy live at hackermania”, apparently also uploaded as T37 more recently?

Rule of completeness objections, establish that the entire video was uploaded to the court and so the court can review the entire video in context – says the 1hr 40min video is not the full context? This is not objecting to the 20min relevant portion, white wants everything from a 3 day long event submitted for relevance, says he has objections regarding context and will get to them later
objection overruled, T37 admitted, johnson said he will share the video and asks if the court clerk can share it because he still can’t share his desktop

Entire point of “little piggy” is to embarrass subject, Objection, speculation, overruled without comment, released private messages of an embarrassing nature, aaron says they admitted to the hacking of his google account as well. Nick + melton gathered a group of fans to attend aaron’s hearing, objection for assuming facts, judge overrules because he hadn’t even got anywhere yet, “a group of people that were gathered”, judge asks how he knows this, aaron says there’s livestreams, aaron attended the hearing in person, there were people in the gallery, cannot recall if nick was in the gallery but he was at the hearing and aaron observed him at the hearing – sterns county courthouse, separate hearing, not involving nick, aaron says it was discussed and promoted on livestreams that he would be in court and that people should attend, says dozens of people attended, nick + melton travelled around town and to the hearing, livestreamed together, objection for hearsay, judge asks how he knows they were doing this, aaron says he observed them on youtube doing this, installed cameras outside the courtroom, posted on X/youtube, group of people waiting by elevator with their phones out to the point where his attorney + baliff brought him in a back entrance to avoid them, nick was not in the crowd but was travelling with mr melton + parts of crowd beforehand, documented, gathered at a business that advertises on aaron’s program, stoneys, broadway in rockwell? thrown out by the owner, objection basis of knowledge/hearsay, judge says he’s allowing it to get to the relevant point so it can be determined if it’s actually hearsay, aaron says this was all after the may 2025 threats and it made him feel threatened/intimidated/harassed/stalked seeing nick at the hearing, says it felt nefarious

Re: Stoneys, says he knows about it because the owner of the bar and social media told him about it, objection hearsay, some retard in chat called “Jesse Powell-Stroud” said “nice plug”, says it’s the equivalent of yelling out in person and in that case a baliff would remove you, user has been removed from the call, aaron confirms that multiple people with Nick posted pictures of them at Stoneys with Nick, “and that your honor is all hearsay”, nothing in evidence but Aaron says he saw a photo of many of the people at the courthouse with Nick at the bar together, hearsay objection sustained, submissions subject to credibility test, also saw a video of them going to the gym that Aaron was a member at and talking to the owner to try and get information about him, objection basis of knowledge, aaron says Melton uploaded a video of them at the gym and that’s how he knows about it, nick visited Stoneys + gym, believes melton visited other places, nick talked about aaron’s genitals at length on melton’s show which made aaron very uncomfortable and led to lots of online harassment, Feb 28th 2025 episode of Melton’s program, a detailed breakdown of how nick believes aaron’s genitals look, discussed his amazement of why aaron wasn’t comfortable being nude infront of him, exhibit 16, T15 and also T42, a video (3m 56s), johnson says he’d be happy if the court just takes note of the relevant times

White suddenly interrupts, objection under rule of completeness, unlike previous 1 (3 day festival) we are talking about a show with a small segment taken out of it, objecting to the rest of the show not being provided for context, judge asks if there’s anything related to aaron/other discussion of genitals/anything else in the rest of the show? Compares it to a news show where each segment is standalone “there is no great list of genitalia discussion – White, says the rest of the show provides more context to the relationship as a whole, judge asks if the people on this video discuss the relationship between aaron/nick and why he might have observed him naked outside of this section? Then clarifies and asks what the rest of the missing context is that isn’t in this clip, white says it’s context about how the relationship deteriorated and how the entire group was in the nude)
incredibly funny hearing the judge ask Mr Johnson for his opinion on the penis discussion context
Johnson says the story has no context and was brought up on the spur of the moment, no supporting footage affects the conduct involved

Aaron says he was contacted by Nick after the initial restraining order, notifications of his phone saying nick was tweeting at him/participating in tweets referencing him, received a text from Nick containing a “Samsung link” of some kind, Nick mentioned him multiple times on stream, objection for “outside four corners of petition”, johnson says it shows habitual conduct that existed prior to and after the HRO was granted, says it shows Nick feels he is above the law, White objects and says counsel is now testifying to nick’s mental state

Petitioner rests, reserves right to call rebuttal witnesses/exhibits if the need arises

White says he wants to crossexamine but first needs a bathroom break, 10 minute break

Cross examination begins
What do you for a living? Broadcaster, internet talk show, asked if he considers himself a journalist, says talk show host would be more accurate, objection asked and answered, overruled, says he considers himself in the entertainment business
Asks what he considers nick to be, says it’s complicated, attorney + streamer, part time journalist?
Standup comedy in Sartel, Minnesota, Rekieta was a participant, guest set, attempted standup comedy for the first time, objection for relevance, judge says he’s giving leeway, overruled, aaron says “standup should not be nick’s profession”
Relationship deteriorated April 2024, specific date “on or around April 11th”, communications with law enforcement re: Nick were after the deterioration of his relationship, nick was arrested before aaron was contacted by law enforcement, aaron was called by pomplun after the arrest
Aaron asked to talk about April; ex-wife, “complicated relationship” with nick + aaron, general relationship deteoriation credited to all of it
Regarding access to Google account, Nick tweeted a screenshot of Aaron’s browser history, White asks how he knows nick made it, aaron says it’s tweeted from nick’s account and that nick/melton talked about this on their show, johnson points out this has already been covered above, white objects specifically to what melton was alleged to have said, judge says it’s irrelevant unless melton is called, objection sustained for the record
White asks if anyone else had access to his google account, objection for speculation, asks aaron if he has a computer in his home and if anyone else used it, aaron said only he used it and that April used her own laptop/phone, her devices were not logged into his google account, asked if April streamed from that PC on April 21st 2024 to try and set up a reasonable objection where someone else had access to the PC with his accounts and claims he cannot prove that Nick is the one who had access and posted that image, Aaron says it’s a reasonable assumption as it was posted on his twitter account, White says he can’t PROVE it and asks if Aaron has ever left his phone unlocked and if anyone could have gained access to his accounts that way, judge tells them to move on

Other court case, objection to relevance, victim in case is nick’s wife, nick’s wife is not a party to these proceedings and outside of scope, White says it’s relevant because Nick was attending the hearing because his wife was the victim

Aaron says he provided a video package to a different host at the Hackerverse event, did not have final control over how that was used, white asks if he’s ever posted a photo of him shirtless, says the bedroom photo that was released was never consented to,

Gym, aaron was not at the gym when melton/nick were but could have been, video evidence for this (basis of knowledge) is not in evidence, aaron says the June 25th stream contains discussion of them going to various places and is in evidence but for the MELTON case so it is not in evidence here? Johnson says they were provided, exhibit 15? June 26th 2025, total video time is 22m 13s, white wants to put it into rebuttal, also completeness objection for not being the whole video, judge interrupts; crossing him about proof, crossing him about nature of evidence, crossing about what hasn’t been put into evidence and anticipation of such, johnson objects for crossing him over anticipation, judge says this is bad and moves on

did nick have a gym membership? Aaron said he paid for a day pass, implying no membership, said nick attended 2-4 times a month

Did you ever tell nick that what he was doing is unwanted? Objection, vague. Referring to time specifically related to what he is now claiming is harassment, post-deterioration, aaron says he didn’t contact him because he reported the google incident to law enforcement and felt it would not be appropriate to do so, white asks if aaron responded to the “if he was dead” post, white says “you cannot testify you told him to stop”, aaron says he wasn’t going to reply to someone wishing his death, aaron told nick he was cutting off the relationship entirely during that signal exchange and that the response on signal was tied to that; white asks if he explicitly told nick to stop during this, aaron says that personally he’d know he’d crossed a line if he’d told someone to kill themselves

after the hearing in June, did you go to Stoneys? No. did you go to the gym after the hearing? No. where were you? For an hour, in stearns county bail and posted bail, then went home, objection relevance, sustained, white says it’s relevant because they know what aaron was doing, objection counsel is testifying, white says he could not have been at stoneys or at the bar and nick would know that when he went to either, so it’s relevant regarding harassment and intent

Aaron, are you afraid of nick? Yes, yes I am. When did you become afraid of mr rekieta? After the arrest, after a pattern of behaviour emerged that wasn’t stopping and showed he wanted some form of vengeance, multiple references to my death, nick has a documented history of drug and alcohol abuse, objection court already ruled, judge says it’s reasonable context, overruled and tell me why it affected you. Aaron says he’s worried about erratic behaviour, impulse to act on vengeance that could put him or his family in danger

when did nick allegedly send a message telling you to kill yourself? April 2024. When did he send the X post “not dead yet”, May 10th 2025. Aaron allegedly said on may 27th 2025 “I am not afraid of him”, aaron says he’s not afraid of him in the context of a physical contest but he is worried about nick showing up to his house unannounced when he is not ready/prepared, worried about nick acting impulsively and erratically. Aaron says nick appeared at his house uninvited one time, April allowed them in, white says “how do you know that”, aaron says “she told me”, white says “objection, hearsay” and judge overrules it
exhibit 24? Statement of aaron saying he is not afraid of rekieta, to the above, objection counsel is testifying, johnson says he’s only been provided with a link and not the actual video, white says aaron on information and belief has prevented people downloading his videos (how? Unexplained) and shows aaron impeaching his testimony (aaron has provided context to his statement that makes sense at a surface level at least, so this seems wrong; very easy to argue this all away as bravado in a public setting and fighting demons internally)

Aaron does not recall the statement “kick him upside down and sideways” re: nick, white says he was paraphrasing and checks notes

Discussed on livestream, melton/nick travelling together during trip in Minnesota, aaron was in the courtroom and knew they travelled together on the day before/after the courtroom, white asks relevancy, aaron says he believes it’s coordinated, white asks for proof, aaron lists streams where they’ve publicly discussed this coordination, white asks if he’s ever harassed anyone on stream, objection relevance, sustained, white asks if aaron participated in the event if he knew he was going to be “roasted” direct quote, aaron says he was asked by vito to cut a video for an UNRELATED show not about him, did not know that any photos of him would be used in a different show at the same event, says he would not have been involved if he had known the full extent, judge asks if the video provided to vito included the images/posts posted by nick? Aaron says no, said it was for dick masterson’s program, not a program featuring aaron, was not told he would be shown topless or any other photos, judge now understands and moves on

Aaron says the events at hackermania, photos disseminated, bothered him greatly; violation of his privacy, aaron allegedly said days after hackermania that he wasn’t bothered by it (bravado, again)
exhibit t50, “urine and baby oil day 1 of the diddy trial” STMS 05-13-25, 4hr 16m at least, aaron says he remembered saying on his program that the trolls didn’t bother him and that he was engaging in legal action behind the scenes, makes the distinction between his public persona on the program and his private feelings on the matter (yep), white says “wasn’t hackermania an online event?” aaron says that disseminating private media of a person goes beyond the level of a performance in his opinion, white says he just testified that aaron’s show is not connected to his real life, aaron says the dissemination of private images is the issue; distinction between objecting to content of show and this, aaron says he does not know who took these images, “your honor we already had this line of questioning” from johnson, “no you didn’t” from white, judge sustained, judge tells everyone to close this shit out and says there’s 4 minutes left, white takes a break for 30 secs, white asks aaron about his concerns re: nick commenting on his genitalia and asked why he showed his genitalia to nick, objection for relevance, white says this was already brought up, judge says not in that scope, judge asks aaron if at any time did you discuss disseminating information about your genitalia to other people outside of that complex relationship, aaron says no, never
white asks aaron if he disseminated a private image of someone else on his show, objection relevance, overruled, johnson says there’s a pending criminal matter regarding this, pre-sentencing, feels it is safer to not answer, white says he can take fifth amendment and a negative inference, johnson objects and says the issue is nick’s behaviour towards aaron not aaron’s behaviour and that white is trying to get information to embarrass aaron, judge says the other case is related to admission of content on his show but says he does not feel that defeats plaintiff’s argument on whether nick could do the same

informal scheduling conference with attorneys in melton’s case, blocking out date to continue hearing, continuing hearing in 73-CV-25-5504, says for the record it was scheduled at 11am and shares attorneys, this hearing was scheduled for 1h but lasted 3h, future hearing to discuss to make sure evidence has been gone over and is admissible, asked if parties have ideas how to not repeat the hearing again for melton as it’s functionally the same evidence/argument, says he will reach out and discuss steps with both attorneys, asks white/johnson if there’s anything extra, both says yes
white wants 5379 to proceed in person, melton’s case is difficult because he’s in Nevada but wants nick’s to be dealt with in person, Scott BBC News posted in chat saying “BACK Ethan Van Scivers’ Frog Meets World on indiegogo”, has been personally killed by the judge, judge noting the unusual public interference in this case and does not want to deal with this in person, johnson asked for a temporary restraining order to prevent discussion of the case by anyone involved, white asks for clarification on breadth, johnson says no social media/youtube posts regarding this matter, all inclusive regarding all evidence submitted today and going forward, not be discussed in any way,

NICK KICKED OUT OF HEARING FOR RECORDING, COURT CLERK DETERMINED HE WAS RECORDING AND BOOTED HIM, SAID HE’D NEED TO DISABLE IT BEFORE BEING ALLOWED TO REJOIN

I missed the entire last minute because of this, apologies