State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Rekieta, Kayla Rekieta, April Imholte

Will Nicholas Rekieta take the plea deal offered to him?


  • Total voters
    1,268
  • Poll closed .
Conversely, for defense atty's: I realize that firing a client is not all that easy, but it seems like the Barneswalker has lost all control of his client (if he ever had any control). Would his behavior the last few days get you to seriously consider firing him? If you decided not to, or couldn't fire ihm, what would/could you do to try and salvage this mess? (I mean in general terms, not to give them any ideas of how best to proceed.) Or is this ration of shit all par for the course for a defense atty?
Why would they care? They are getting paid by the hour. The client is just helping pay off the yacht that much faster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thoughtcrime84
In a twist for the Gunt and Rekieta cross over. Apparently its highly likely the Gunt is subject to a national arrest warrant because he refused to talk to the police about his illegal stream of the Aaron Imholte hearing, which was most likely obtained via Rekieta's illegal access of Aarons GMAIL account that gave rackets the link, which he gave to Eathan Ralph. Ralph isn't just wanted for the simple misdemeanor. He's a potential witness for Felony Obstruction, Felony Witness Intimidation and Federal level computer fraud crimes. Stearns county doesn't just want piggy for the slaughter. They want piggy to squeal.

Which if true, never mind everything else, both will enjoy prison. But Ralph may get to enjoy prison less if he sells out Rekieta.

 
Last edited:
This explains why I couldn't find your post in this thread. Just making it clear that @Gobermental Supervisor was the one who first alerted to this court decision.
Someone would have eventually found it over the day, the most important part is how badly that documents burn Nick again.


The state has not filed a response.
The state decided this was so dumb they did not even have to respond.

Petitioner does not explain why the district court’s pretrial ruling denying his motions to suppress evidence and for a Franks evidentiary hearing requires this court’s immediate review.
Nick forgot to tell them a reason why they should grant his petition.
 
Back