💀 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.

[Himedall All-seeing Waifu]

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.

Whether or not Nick is fucking April is utterly irrelevant to the criminal case against Nick. It's not even relevant to the charges against April, only whether she was living with Nick and Kayla at the time of the search is because if she can be proven to have been living with them at the time of the search then constructive possession comes into play.

CPS = The state.
The Prosecution = The state.

They almost certainly talk to one another. They could both have a problem with her living there. And with good reason.

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.

There is also the issue of 'association with known drug offenders' that may be part of the probation agreement. This might be be the issue here if Nick wants to see his side piece. When April was released, this was not an issue, but with her charges being pushed forward, a conviction would make her a prohibited person if Nick takes this deal.

It could also be that they want them separated before their individual trials because they are all co-defendants.

This may be entirely separate from the CPS issue.

I don't know whether it's because we've had a huge influx of newbies this year but people seem unusually willing to accept unsubstantiated statements from dubious sources as fact and run with them as if they are established truth. It's effectively turned this into a chat thread rather than a credible source of information.

I chalk it up to new people learning about Balldo in 2024. After winning LOTY 2023, a lot of people were upset and tuned in. The arrest arc has just fuelled that and put Nick on a path to win again. These people are not as versed in the lore and ghey-oppery and outright lies that encircle Nick. They will learn eventually.

 

[Harm]

Back on Twitter, doing his thing.

Archive
View attachment 6697476

"YOU WANT IT TO BE TRUE THAT I POISONED MY DAUGHTER WITH COCAINE!"

The eternal victim. Why do people mistreat him so mercilessly? After all the grace, compassion, forgiveness, and poise he's exhibited towards Drexel, Null, Montagraph, Ron Toye, Vic Mignona, Aaron Imholte, Maddox, Eric July, Potentially Criminal, Elissa Clips, Legal Mindset, his wife's ruined body, and our dear John? How Christian of this random Twitter user! This is exactly like what King David went through.

The people who told him to make radical life changes to avoid this downfall were all faggots, and now the people throwing his own misdeeds in his face always wanted this to happen all along. There was nothing he could do as a dependently wealthy, self-employed trust fund kid who instigated all these detrimental life style changes himself against the wishes of everyone else despite their public and private interventions.

His real friends, like Dick Masterson who enabled his drug use and immolation of his public image, Pedophile Melton who snitched on himself and Nick, Ethan Ralph who mocks and insults his children, April Amhole who further disrupts and destroys his marriage, and Steve Gosney who turns a blind eye to the obvious life ruination for a crumb of clout, they're the ones who have his best interests at heart. When they benefit from his misfortunes, it's because they were actually rooting for him the whole time.

Only they can see the difference between being a drug addict (which Nick is absolutely not!) and having an issue with drug abuse (which Nick may have possibly temporarily done once on accident like forever ago, you prudes). Only they can get Nick the help he needs by storing his booze for him until the second he has his final drug test, then letting him get wasted on their live streams while they rake in handouts at his expense. These people will tell him exactly what he wants to hear, let him tell them anything and everything without critical feedback, push him further along the path of ruination, and then openly laugh at him online like everyone else.

Because everyone else wants him to be the addict. They've come to see him as the child endangering monster because they always wanted to see him that way. It has nothing to do with the independent collection of facts about his behavior. Oh no. They never cared about him anyways.

 

[lIllllIiiiiLLLLiiiiIIIIll]

Back on Twitter, doing his thing.

Archive
View attachment 6697476

Noooo stalker child

 

[TexOffender]

Back on Twitter, doing his thing.

Archive
View attachment 6697476

Yet a test showed she was exposed to it and you and your hoe were using it in your bedroom.

Shouldn't he be busy cooking right now since Kayla doesn't know how to cook?

 

[Swole McPole]

PIGGY DENIED

It's an absolute certainty that Ralph will have gone to his lawyer buddy, Nick Rekieta and asked him how he should deal with this threat to his liberty? While he wasn't going to pay Nick, so he wouldn't have been acting as a practicing lawyer, I've no doubt at all that Ralph was acting on Rekieta's advice when he wrote this letter to the court, begging for leniency in the matter of his contempt.

So it's not just Ralph getting denied here, it's Rekieta getting denied as well.

Are the friends of Judge Fischer sending a message here? I sure hope so.

 

[FuckedOffToff]

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.

Well, if she was supposed to be the nanny, the state may want her restricted from the kids.
The fact she's still seen with the Rekietas, even though she was just the "nanny", belies the fact her influence has gone.
Maybe they don't want her nannying again.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

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

It is not just a "bad look", it is anathema to a stable family home for the children.
Daddy drug addict having his side-piece live with them, or next door and show up for some fucking while mommy cries herself to sleep or is zombed out on pills, that is exactly the kind of situation CPS and judges do NOT want to see in a case of child neglect/endangerment.

It is also a well known fact that addicts are likely to relapse if they return to their old friend groups and activities, so making the no-contact order part of the judgement is very normal.

I am actually waiting for Kayla to get a TRO against April to prevent her from being in any of their houses, getting close to the house or herself. That would be such a genius chess move to get rid of the dumb coke whore.

 

[Windy Moors]

Thanksgiving at the Rekieta Cult Compound:

Re-posting this amazing version courtesy of
@Permanent Resident Cope:

 

[Anasûrimbor Kellhus]

Back on Twitter, doing his thing.

Archive
View attachment 6697476

"i was actually there" strung out on all sorts of drugs and alcohol. Like a druggie knows what's going on in the house.

 

[BigPeanut]

"YOU WANT IT TO BE TRUE THAT I POISONED MY DAUGHTER WITH COCAINE!"

I do, fuck that balldo wearing cracker ass white bread nigga and his whole famalam.

 

[repentance]

Regardless, something weird happened the other day that spooked Nick out of accepting a plea deal that it looked like he was willing to accept, and forced this back to next month.

Nick said prior to the hearing that he wasn't happy with the plea deal currently on offer. Perhaps he was hoping to be offered something better at the settlement conference. Perhaps he was offered something better at the settlement conference and has been given time to consider the new offer and obtain legal advice about it (as he should be).

While the various agencies involved in this case undoubtedly talk to one another, that doesn't mean that CPS gets to ask the prosecutor to impose a condition on Nick that CPS itself didn't impose. The criminal court shouldn't be considering whether or not April is a fit and proper person to be around the Rekieta spawn at all. It's not relevant to the charges before the court. The criminal court trying to exert control over matters not before it would be asking for an appeal and allegations of corruption.

 

[AnOminous]

While the various agencies involved in this case undoubtedly talk to one another, that doesn't mean that CPS gets to ask the prosecutor to impose a condition on Nick that CPS itself didn't impose.

That's absolute nonsense. They're entirely different authorities and the prosecution can put whatever conditions it likes on dropping the abuse/neglect charge. It's absolutely ludicrous to claim "stop exposing the kids to these inappropriate behaviors" isn't relevant. If Nick doesn't like it he can take it to trial and get whatever results he gets.

Plea deals often include things not directly related to the charges in question. For instance, no drinking or drugs is extremely common even if drinking or drugs, while related to the charges, aren't even a charge.

There's no particular reason even to think CPS requested this (or that anyone did and since this is currently based on nonexistent actual information it probably isn't worth much more speculation).

 

[Himedall All-seeing Waifu]

Nick said prior to the hearing that he wasn't happy with the plea deal currently on offer. Perhaps he was hoping to be offered something better at the settlement conference. Perhaps he was offered something better at the settlement conference and has been given time to consider the new offer and obtain legal advice about it (as he should be).

I recall this more as: 'I got the initial offer, and well... it was not great. It is pretty much the deal they offer to everyone at the start, so we are going to do some things, and see what happens' type of sentiment. (Paraphrase my words, not Nick's). I think he just wanted to spend time and money (that is not his) and see if he can get what he wants before he takes the final offer.

While the various agencies involved in this case undoubtedly talk to one another, that doesn't mean that CPS gets to ask the prosecutor to impose a condition on Nick that CPS itself didn't impose. The criminal court shouldn't be considering whether or not April is a fit and proper person to be around the Rekieta spawn at all. It's not relevant to the charges before the court. The criminal court trying to exert control over matters not before it would be asking for an appeal and allegations of corruption.

The deal can be just about anything they want--within constitutional reason. The terms could derive from 'don't pal around with druggies while you are on probation for drugs'. It is as much a commonsense idea as a noble one if you think rehabilitation is the State's goal.

 

[Fapcop]

The criminal court shouldn't be considering whether or not April is a fit and proper person to be around the Rekieta spawn at all.

Sure, but it’s not that unusual for courts to include some kind of stipulation like: “Don’t hang around convicted felons” or “Don’t have people with drug convictions living on your property.”

It’s entirely possible that this is what made Rekieta go: “I can’t agree to that! My children and my balldo have come to rely on April’s loving, firm hand!”

Which may be what pushed the whole thing back for more negotiations.

 

[AnOminous]

Sure, but it’s not that unusual for courts to include some kind of stipulation like: “Don’t hang around convicted felons” or “Don’t have people with drug convictions living on your property.”

Those are the kind the court can actually unilaterally impose. So long as it's legal for you to agree to it, they can request anything they like, and tell you to take it or leave it. It doesn't need to require a criminal conviction.

CPS often imposes fairly onerous and detailed reunification plans, and you can similarly like or lump those. A major difference is CPS doesn't really have the ability to arrest you directly. If you agree to something with a prosecutor, you can be violated fairly summarily (although if they do that you are generally entitled to a speedy hearing on the matter).

 

[Vibralldo]

Back on Twitter, doing his thing.

Archive
View attachment 6697476

Nick certainly wanted it to be true
That's why he did it

 

[Balldo's Gate]

2. Scarebro is verifying BBN's rumor about the no-contact with April issue:

This is not "verification" of anything

 

[Chazzed Up]

Back on Twitter, doing his thing.

Archive
View attachment 6697476

How does 'I was there' change the point of what the person he's responding to is saying? He was where, in his daughter's hair follicle conducting metabolism?

 

[Oxyjen]

She's watching Ana Kasparian

“So there’s this lawyer in Minnesota..”

Click

“Have you ever heard of The Steeltoe Morning Show, it’s a popular podcast with..”

Click

“Fresh as… a walk through the woods on an early spring morning..”

Click

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Regardless, something weird happened the other day that spooked Nick out of accepting a plea deal that it looked like he was willing to accept, and forced this back to next month.

I've not seen anything indicating he was planning to accept a plea deal.. What makes you think he was willing?

I know people are interpreting the "anathema" comment that way, but I think that's backwards. There is no universe in which Nick Rekieta characterizes pleading out as "the right thing to do."

To Nick, the right thing is to reject any plea that requires him to plead guilty to something he thinks he didn't do. That's the example he wants to set for his children. The anathema is not taking the deal, b/c he knows the odds ain't great.

This interpretation makes more sense imo.