💀 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.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Luna's expiration date is?

  • <1 year

    Votes: 159 22.5%

  • Around 2 years

    Votes: 279 39.5%

  • 3-5 years

    Votes: 95 13.4%

  • As long as a pug lives, Karen farmer.

    Votes: 174 24.6%
  • Total voters
    707
Mother fucker is so retarded and delusional, he thinks he can brute force an god damn appeal out of the judge.
Sorry to break it to yeah, Balldo pope, but judges dosen't give appeals to NERDS!
 
Folgers Can said:
No idea if he mentioned it directly, but there's multiple attestations from friends that he did it to the point of infamously making a scene on it, which adds to the explanations of his brain being as fried as we see now:
Click to expand...
Hmmm. That makes me wonder whether Kayla was tripping balls when she had to be talked down from the roof at Anime Matsuri.
 
Fapcop said:
Hope Nick goes down swinging with a long speech about how one man’s cuck is another man’s husband
Click to expand...
Is a man not entitled to snort cocaine off of his bull's cock?
"No" says the Pastor at church, "It belongs in his pants"
"No" says the superchatters, "I wanted you to toast my grandma"
"No" says the social worker "Think of your children"

I rejected those answers; instead I chose something different. I chose the Balldoreich where the coomer would not fear the prude, where the cool would not be harassed by nerds. Where the adult isn't constrained by caring for his child.........And with a snort of cocaine, the Balldoreich can become your home as well.
 
30+GameOvers said:
Must bite knowing nobody will ever take his word on anything, let alone legal stuff, seriously.
Click to expand...
I re-watched a film/show critique podcast called EFAP not too long ago about She-Hulk.
Nick was on it, and even with the little legal analysis on that show, I still have to wonder if he even knew what he was talking about in light of his recent fuck ups.


Also hello to me on page 7202. I'll see you at some point.
 
All becomes gunt said:
Anything that comes out of the mouth of this retarded faggot should be taken with a mountain of salt. Not a grain but a mountain. Need i remind everyone that this disgusting faggot is stolen valor. As much as i hate balldo and maybe this makes sense, maybe it doesn't, i don't believe Spec tree, because he spec'd all his point into gay niggeraids.
Click to expand...
They are both mythomaniacs (or, if you prefer, liars) who shouldn't be believed if they don't support their claims with solid evidence.
 
Sketchy Minecraft Mod said:
She's very desperate and delusional. Her own personal Love Quest.
Click to expand...
Quite simply she's emotionally trauma bonded to Nick. Borderlines can easily become irrationally fixated, and fall for the manipulative narc's future faking/love bombing shared fantasy bullshit. It's like limerence on steroids. I'm sure Nick made her many promises he never intended to keep.
Fun fact, women with BPD always fuck on the first date, but once you become their "Favorite Person" it's only a matter of time before you really regret not heeding the wise old idiom "Don't stick your dick in crazy"
Let that be a lesson kids.
 
Mr E. Grifter said:
On the subject of coaching of Children in interviews - due to their age a specialist interviewer usually has to speak to them in a certain way to extract relevant information.

A six year old is unlikely to know what cocaine is, and is unlikely to talk about a specific issue at request. Instead, they have to be drawn into conversations about these things. The difficulty from an evidentiary perspective is ensure that you don't lead the child towards a pre-determined conclusion. This is why specialists are used, these things are easy to fuck up.

If Nick isn't just babbling utter shite, entirely possible, he could just be objecting to how people normally interview children.
Click to expand...
People who interview children, from what I've seen, do take a distinctive approach to asking questions that is both extremely specific and extremely redundant. They'll ask all sorts of things that would seem obvious but they have to ask to make sure the kid isn't confused about anything, or to rule out any remote possibilities, that sort of thing. It would make total sense to me if Nick learned about what sort of questions his kids were asked somehow and his wetbrain concluded it must be "coaching" because the phrasing of the questions didn't make sense to him. It's not like he has much courtroom experience after all.
 
All becomes gunt said:
And here is the other issue here at hand. It's a prepubescent girl, so "secondary exposure from some other source", it's very limited the amount of sources that a little 8 yo girl can get cocaine from. It's not like she can go to her friends and ask for it, it's not like she can go to school or her church and get some. Like what would that "secondary source of exposure" even be ?
Click to expand...

Yes, the "other sources" seem to be very limited.

In the supplemental report one of the anonymous parties advised that they didn't believe that the two eldest daughters were being homeschooled at the time. This would include the daughter who tested positive for cocaine.

Since they are part of a homeschool co-op, this would indicate that the daughters were missing classes or otherwise noticeably absent.

Not Homeschooled.png

If the Rekietas were just making do with iPads for their homeschooling needs then that further restricts "exposure" from others.
 
Gobermental Supervisor said:
Nick was DENIED again.
lmao

[EDIT] I accidentally posted in the Montegraph lawsuit thread, so here is everything again.
The biggest burn in that entire document: "The state has not filed a response."

View attachment 6662809View attachment 6662808View attachment 6662807View attachment 6662806
Click to expand...
Popper Whiting said:
legal advice gone bad.mp4
Click to expand...
DENIED.png
If only he could have seen the warning signs... 😔
Potentially Criminal said:
Nick's lawyers suck so fucking bad.
Click to expand...

They're trying their best OKAY? :story:
 
Last edited:
Potentially Criminal said:
Nick's lawyers suck so fucking bad.
Click to expand...
In the line that says,

"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."

could the court just be saying that the motion did not make an adequate argument that satisfies some standard? Or would you take this line to mean that Nick's lawyers really made no argument at all as to why the court should grant them a review?
 
He's back at it again (archive)

Screenshot 2024-11-19 162553.png
No matter what he does for the rest of his life, he will forever be known as the man whose nine-year-old daughter tested positive for cocaine. If only somebody, a friend perhaps, had warned him to pull up from his nosedive while there was still time.
 
Mouse Cop said:
He's back at it again (archive)

View attachment 6663941
No matter what he does for the rest of his life, he will forever be known as the man whose nine-year-old daughter tested positive for cocaine. If only somebody, a friend perhaps, had warned him to pull up from his nosedive while there was still time.
Click to expand...
Possession of cocaine and a firearm technically. Theres where the endangerment charge comes from. He’s so fucking dishonest.

“No nerd I did not endanger my children with a shitload of cocaine while having firearms. The constitution says I have a right to have firearms while I’m high as shit off this fine Bolivian marching powder! And the fact my child tested positive for also being on it is irrelevant to my case!”

🥃:really:
 
Mouse Cop said:
He's back at it again (archive)

View attachment 6663941
No matter what he does for the rest of his life, he will forever be known as the man whose nine-year-old daughter tested positive for cocaine. If only somebody, a friend perhaps, had warned him to pull up from his nosedive while there was still time.
Click to expand...
Fully healthy child according to a man that (allegedly) self doses cocaine because it "helps" him
 
Last edited:
Mouse Cop said:
He's back at it again (archive)

View attachment 6663941
No matter what he does for the rest of his life, he will forever be known as the man whose nine-year-old daughter tested positive for cocaine. If only somebody, a friend perhaps, had warned him to pull up from his nosedive while there was still time.
Click to expand...
Nick must be the only dumbass on earth to not understand at a basic level that being wasted off your ass and high on narcotics while in charge of your kids is child endangerment. Would enjoy seeing someone besides a drug user say the kid is normal and fully healthy. Seems like this whole mess partially started because mandatory reporters thought otherwise.
 
Grayback said:
In the line that says,

"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."

could the court just be saying that the motion did not make an adequate argument that satisfies some standard? Or would you take this line to mean that Nick's lawyers really made no argument at all as to why the court should grant them a review?
Click to expand...
The Court is saying that the Applicant did not make ANY argument for WHY extraordinary relief should be granted. He simply asked for extraordinary relief.

Which pretty much sums up Nick's approach to law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom