You don't bring tuna to Thanksgiving dinner
And it wouldn't surprise me if Celeste and Bob just have a caterer provide a full Thanksgiving spread or take the family out for Thanksgiving lunch.
If you go back through the thread, you will note that people floated that theory months ago, before BBN even was a thing. People were also mocking Nick for having April attend her court hearings, from Nick's streaming room, in full view of the state and everyone.
I hope it's not Kinochet, because I hope Kinochet has already killed himself
The suggestion months ago was that CHIPS had a problem with April living with the Rekietas and that April being a visible part of Nick's life wasn't a good look in terms of the CHIPS case. Her presence or absence has only ever been relevant to the criminal proceedings in respect to her own charges and whether or not she would flip on Nick and Kayla.
Have Ralph attend as Tiny Tim. But instead of 'God bless us, everyone' it's GOD BLESS THE GOAALLLL
And his friend isn't even alive to fix the cabinets, what a tragedy indeed.
CPS = The state.
I have had my account since 2017, and have only stated I think April being gone as a plea condition could be true. Not that it's bonafide fact. To their credit, BBN has also said this could be bullshit. I see nobody here accepting it as the gospel. I think you're being unfair. I think most people here express the right amount of skepticism. Anything coming from the KC, for example.
Nick would call his family prudes and throw a passive aggressive hissy fit if she wasn't allowed
I've seen quite a few plea deals but I have never seen a solitary instance in which living with or without someone else was a condition of it except in domestic violence situations. I think in terms of the prosecution, at least, that the state telling him to get rid of April is highly unlikely.
Space Mutiny is just starting!
I lost any expectation of anything being done to benefit the children when they returned the kids to his home. Regardless of whether she tested positive for cocaine or not (she did, but let's pretend for a second she didn't), Nick is still obviously abusing substances and has admitted to doing them on Twitter and other places. Despite being caught with a multitude of substances in his house, he has not sought rehab or any help whatsoever despite public evidence (his streams) from days before the arrest showing him incoherent, and months upon months prior to that showing him trashed every single time he went live. He's an addict. And a bunch of young children shouldn't be in his home. So I have no faith in April being removed. And I also don't think Nick would have said it was a good day if he had any meaningful consequences come down on him. He still wouldn't have admitted anything he didn't like happened, but he'd have probably spent a lot more time malding in tweet replies etc.
Neat, he's like of those pull string dolls, you can get him to reply to your tweet at any time by stating just one simple fact.
It makes sense, but we really don't know it's true. While it would be unusual to single out a specific person in a deal like this, they can put any conditions they like on a deal. They're not obligated to give a good deal.
It doesn't have to be relevant. They could have him put on a gorilla suit and dance around like a fairy.
I've seen exactly that, usually directly from CPS, though, with or without domestic abuse, i.e. get rid of the multiple druggie lovers immediately or else. Naming a specific person on paper would be unusual, but they'd probably make it very clear they're not going to resolve the case without certain conditions being met, conditions that are entirely sensible under the circumstances and are basically "don't do EXACTLY WHAT YOU GOT ARRESTED FOR," which is expose your kids to a bunch of sick shit, with the drugs just being the only one they're directly criminally prosecuting.
