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: 71 10.7%
  • He pissed hot and he's in trouble!

    Votes: 94 14.2%
  • Yet another "family incident" happened.

    Votes: 208 31.4%
  • His lawyer ordered him to shut up.

    Votes: 174 26.2%
  • He's busy procuring the 5k LOCALS gift.

    Votes: 65 9.8%
  • He's dead.

    Votes: 51 7.7%

  • Total voters
    663
His retard lawyer and his retard lawyer's retard client are going for the longest of longest shots at trial, disputing science and legal issues that the court has already resolved countless times in countless cases (not in Nick's favour), instead of just taking a plea deal and avoiding jail time. Their crazy Lolbert theories are going to be laughed out of court, going with the Barnes strategy of invoking the constitution barely puts Nick above the level of a Sovereign Citizen.
Nick's praying to find a dodgy lab worker who will tank the entire lab's test history. A long shot ten years ago when a crop of a few dozen came up lousy. Attacking "bad science" thinking of arson calls and bite mark evidence is television show awful. He's running headlong into long proven, thoroughly vetted techniques for testing samples. It comes across as Crackets is actively trying to go to prison.
 
Updated version:
balldoed.jpg
 
Child protection law is often nonsensical and leads to weird results. "There are a lot of substances in your house that are perfectly fine to have that are dangerous to children, like... bleach."
Complete strawman bullshit arguments. Responsible parents make rational cost/benefit risk analysis for their children all the time. For the mentally retarded the state has to explicitly state in the law that there is ZERO benefit to possessing illegal drugs while being a caretaker of children. None. Only retards need to be told this.

In addition, all his examples of improperly storing dangerous substances are illegal as well. If Nick decided to store antifreeze in a used apple juice bottle and put it in the fridge and his consumed it, he's be charged for endangerment. He would have created a substantial unreasonable risk for little benefit. The law for drugs just makes it clear that any risk posed by illegal drugs is always unreasonable for the idiots that want to argue it wasn't THAT risky.

He's exactly the kind of shit-for-brains who tries to insist on an Alford. I hope the prosecution refuses any deal that doesn't involve admission of guilt.
The prosecutor should deny any Alford plea and point to all his public statements trying to impugn the character of tstate officials investigating his crimes.

No way he gets to continue protesting his innocence after a plea agreement where he's implied the cops planted the drugs, accused KCHHS of lying and perjury, and various other accusations of misconduct.

Prosecutor should point to those statements and say leniency in plea deals is contingent on contrition and taking responsibility. If he wants to continue to claim innocence and blame cops/govt, he can go to trial. Even after he's found guilty, he can claim innocence and blame the cops.
 
Hold on a second - Nick claims that the hair follicles of kids can be tainted by drug use in their environment, but was there any evidence listed in the police reports indicating the presence of crack pipes or any other paraphernalia related to smoking drugs as opposed to snorting them? I could be wrong, but I don't recall anything smoking-related being documented.

What's Nick's next genius claim going to be, that the kids are testing positive, because he and his wife were bathing the kids in cocaine?
 
So, I skimmed through rapidly everything since the highlight for Nicks interview, I'm probably blind and this has been asked before, but what're the odds this dumbass interview is used in court against him? 100%? 105%?
"Anything you say can and will be used against you in court." - Excerpt from the Miranda Warning

If they think he says something they can use, they'll use it.
 
Last edited:
It's funny to see people reference Dan Mullen in the wild, but the show he did blaming the kids was a long-form troll. He had been shitting on Nick for weeks or months leading up to Nick's arrest. Dan even cited Nick's downfall as the reason he heavily cut back on drinking.
Never heard of the dude prior. If I can get some citations on it being a Sam Hyde tier troll I’ll remove him from the list
 
Nick showed off part of his filled-in snake tattoo, presumably the heat allergy sufferer will return to the hot tub soon to show the rest off

tattoo.jpg
He has the muscle definition of an aids patient.
With that nasty looking red mark there on tattoo he might get an infection. I hope he gets sepsis and they amputate his arm.
 
Shameful. Chrissie is really trying to get her money's worth. Her video description reads worse than the AI chat summaries.

View attachment 6242775
ETA: link
So is she playing clips from this morning's interview to try to subvert those darn clippers? Such a lust for clout chasing.
EDIT: To clarify I'm not telling @DuranceVile or @daffodils to eat shit.
No worries, that came through. And really if anybody in this thread has the right to tell Rackets to eat shit, it's you.
 
So, I skimmed through rapidly everything since the highlight for Nicks interview, I'm probably blind and this has been asked before, but what're the odds this dumbass interview is used in court against him? 100%? 105%?
Nick has already said a ton of dumb shit that will be used against him in court, not just the words he used while running his mouth about the case, not just his reading and answering superchats or interview questions, but his reactions to them or lack thereof. I previously gave an example in this thread when it looked like he was going to blame everything on Aaron including his daughter's cocaine use, in that example his repeatedly wishing Aaron the best, and on one occasion hoping that he makes a million dollars, completely obliterates the entire "it was Aaron who done it" defence.
What father wishes the best for a guy who gave his daughter cocaine?
 
Rekieta's new claim: being around drugs being smoked may cause a hair follicle test to be positive

Nick mentions that exposure to smoked drugs can cause a hair follicle test to be positive even if the person was not smoking themselves.

This appears to be an odd statement, since it was not generally suspected that he was consuming his drug of choice through any method except up his nose.

Was Nick smoking crack?
Is this Nick???
 
Child protection law is often nonsensical and leads to weird results. "There are a lot of substances in your house that are perfectly fine to have that are dangerous to children, like... bleach."
Giving your children bleach will also bring you to the attention of child services.
Which is why most parents don't do that, and if you tested 500 random children for bleach metabolites in thier hair at least 499 would come back negative.

It's like watching Wile E Coyote run off a cliff: So long as Nick doesn't look down, he can pretend there is still solid ground beneath him and not a gaping void of eternal fail.

But, to archer Mass Effect, Sir Issac Newton is a deadly son of a bitch. Sooner or later reality is going to catch up with Nick I'm going to be here to watch.

Anyone for popcorn?
 
"I may have had the right to remain silent, but I lacked the ability. . ."
Every single thing Rekieta has said and done since the day of his arrest will alienate a jury. No way can his attorney ever let this go to a jury trial. Every parent on that jury--presumably a majority of them--would see the streams and the interviews and the dinners with the mistress and the trips and tattoos and imagine how they would react if their kids were torn from their lives and think in big blazing letters in their heads WHAT A SHALLOW, ARROGANT, SELFISH, STUPID, NARCISSISTIC PRICK. The only reason deliberations will take longer than 15 minutes is if a juror starts asking for a special category of Guilty verdict like Super Guilty or Fuck-This-Guy-Forever Guilty that will ensure Rekieta gets more time in sentencing.
 
Every single thing Rekieta has said and done since the day of his arrest will alienate a jury. No way can his attorney ever let this go to a jury trial. Every parent on that jury--presumably a majority of them--would see the streams and the interviews and the dinners with the mistress and the trips and tattoos and imagine how they would react if their kids were torn from their lives and think in big blazing letters in their heads WHAT A SHALLOW, ARROGANT, SELFISH, STUPID, NARCISSISTIC PRICK. The only reason deliberations will take longer than 15 minutes is if a juror starts asking for a special category of Guilty verdict like Super Guilty or Fuck-This-Guy-Forever Guilty that will ensure Rekieta gets more time in sentencing.
The jury will ask the judge what verdict on what charges will send Nick to maximum security with a child abuse conviction.
 
Back