💀 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: 158 22.4%

  • Around 2 years

    Votes: 279 39.6%

  • 3-5 years

    Votes: 94 13.3%

  • As long as a pug lives, Karen farmer.

    Votes: 174 24.7%
  • Total voters
    705
AnOminous said:
White actually just made a good point. Maybe he's not as much of an idiot as he seemed when he was using Balldo Law instead of real law.
Click to expand...
He seemed actually prepared, despite the state screwing him over by being a no-show (unless they coordinated that ahead of time, but I doubt it -- White seemed legitimately surprised, thinking he was going to have to split his time.)

EDIT: I can't answer how often it happens, but the body language from Cochran was INCREDIBLY hostile from the get go. The most open seemed to be Kirk (I think was the guy's name?), and Frisch seemed skeptical on procedural grounds more than the ultimate question, so I think all Cochran would have to recommend is that they reject it because he can seek relief elsewhere, and Frisch would jump on board with not having to actually deal with the merits.
 
Terror_Mouse said:
Apparently it was; I didn't remember it either because it felt like such an obvious answer "of course the public can intervene in a criminal trial, it happens all the time." But, apparently, that isn't necessarily the right answer.
Click to expand...
It seems nonsensical not to allow the trial court dibs on ruling whether or not something like this bodycam footage gets released. After all, it's the court trying the case. Usually, the trial court is the proper place to resolve things regarding that case.

Otherwise you're throwing it right on another judge who knows nothing about the case.
 
I will say: This was White's best performance yet (despite my write up being biased against him). Maybe he's just not good at actual trial work, and he's better in a setting like this? I know some lawyers are better at depositions than in court stuff, or brief writing than examination, etc. Again: I don't think he knew the state was going to try to throw him under the bus, but he rallied.
 
Terror_Mouse said:
Again: I don't think he knew the state was going to try to throw him under the bus, but he rallied.
Click to expand...
I don't know what the state is thinking here. Maybe they actually don't really care about the case at all. Just no-showing like Rekieta indicates a rather lackadaisical attitude. Or maybe they even realize it's making the county look corrupt, whether or not that's the case.
 
John Andrews Stan said:
It’s one of the reasons I am disturbed by how eager certain peoole were to start using the beleaguered eldest child’s full legal name on Kiwi Farms on the very day he turned 18. Fucking up the kid’s search results is a nice gift of ammo to Nick as he continues mischaracterizing KF users as creepy kid stalkers.
Click to expand...
Thanks for saying that, somebody had to! It gives off "Olsen Twins Countdown" vibes.

So far it's just two retards who've done that (usual mong suspects), but it's still gross. Gee, why does Null get accused globally of enabling creepy stalkers? It's a mystery! Including the older in-laws in posts is one thing as they have willingly involved themselves in the saga and you really can't tell the story without them.

The kid hasn't done anything! If he starts his own X defending his dad and the wonders of coke, balldos, and polyamory, then fuck it, he's fair game. Until then, leave the kid alone, his daddy has already disgraced the name he gave him.

Just because something is within TOS doesn't mean it's cool to do and that we shouldn't make fun of those who do it. That is also within TOS.
 
Terror_Mouse said:
I will say: This was White's best performance yet (despite my write up being biased against him). Maybe he's just not good at actual trial work, and he's better in a setting like this? I know some lawyers are better at depositions than in court stuff, or brief writing than examination, etc. Again: I don't think he knew the state was going to try to throw him under the bus, but he rallied.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he did really well. That being said, he had to spend most of his time answering questions like "Do you agree with us that your opponent should lose by default?" and "Your opponent says they looked at the footage, but can't find where they used the specific word 'reviewed' to describe looking at it, so he's wrong. Do you think he's wrong, too?"
 
There's always the off chance not showing was an honest mistake, because it sounds like at the start they tried to track the person down and couldn't. We might never find out why they missed it, but if they couldn't even get in touch, that sounds like a double booking, something coming up or maybe something more serious -- not just "LOL, fuck'em."

Of course, they could also just have not answered their phone because, "LOL, fuck'em."
 
Terror_Mouse said:
There's always the off chance not showing was an honest mistake
Click to expand...
This case has had a lot of honest mistakes. Filing the body cam as evidence in the first place. Ignoring requests from the state administration ruling body saying the body cam should be released. Letting people see the body cam footage. At some point honest mistakes turn into either negligence or malice.
 
AnOminous said:
If he dodged the fucking deer there'd be no damage at all. "Dodged" is a weird way to say "I crashed into it." Fucking dipshit. Probably drunk and speeding too.

This jackass literally can't NOT play gay word games about absolutely everything, even the most trivial shit.

While in some cases you can take real law school courses for CLE, there is literally brain-dead shit even Nick could do on nitrous. It's not hard.
Click to expand...
(Emphasis mine)

As someone who lives in an area with more deer than people this just isn’t true. So many people have hurt themselves, hurt others, totaled cars, and/or destroyed property attempting to avoid deer. We literally teach people out here not to swerve or panicstomp the brakes bc it has done so much more damage and it’s difficult to get insurance to cover “swerved and hit an elderly couple head on in the opposite lane to avoid the deer” as opposed to “hit a deer and fucked my front end”.

I don’t particularly believe him tbh, I suspect he swerved being a retard, but people freak the fuck out when they see a deer.
 
Yaniv’s Hairy Balls said:
(Emphasis mine)

As someone who lives in an area with more deer than people this just isn’t true. So many people have hurt themselves, hurt others, totaled cars, and/or destroyed property attempting to avoid deer. We literally teach people out here not to swerve or panicstomp the brakes bc it has done so much more damage and it’s difficult to get insurance to cover “swerved and hit an elderly couple head on in the opposite lane to avoid the deer” as opposed to “hit a deer and fucked my front end”.

I don’t particularly believe him tbh, I suspect he swerved being a retard, but people freak the fuck out when they see a deer.
Click to expand...
There was no deer. Nick is a wetbrained retard who can't drive, especially in something with shitty visibility and a touchy accelerator. He clipped a rail or a sign or a parking bollard and that's how his car got fucked up, simple as.
 
dustnight said:
I really hope @Null can get a full transcript of this at least.
Click to expand...

FWIW the official recording will be legally downloadable in the next few days by searching "039" (without quotes) at this link:

https://mncourts.gov/courtofappeals/oralargumentrecordings

Unfortunately it'll just be audio and only the Minnesota Supreme Court publishes oral argument video, but with any luck there's still a chance to see that too someday for a good laugh at White's constant autistic fidgeting, if Hardin ends up filing a petition for review getting around the Court of Appeals hands being tied by a mere "error-correcting function" and the Minnesota Supreme Court surprisingly opts to hear it for just for the rare chance to make new law given both sides' admission today that there are issues of first impression here.

:optimistic:
 
she-brought-the-bull.webp

She brings the bull, oil on canvas, bought by an anonymous collector
 
I hope I'm wrong because its very sad, but if Nate dies, Rekieta is going to use the moment to suggest that LawTube "come together in forgiveness (except Kurt)" to be all good pals again.
He wants his meal ticket back. The panel-less shows aren't worth the effort. He knows by his lonesome, he's a bitter sad bitch.

Again, explicitly, I hope he'll pull through, but I'm imagining this scenario.
 
Penguin Soldier said:
Nick is fascinating case in the never ending debate I have with myself on people's ability to change. The older I get the more I lean towards the idea that people by in large do not change. That's not to say who you are is set in stone from birth, but the circumstances surrounding your life that were out of your control and the choices you make a long the way are rarely reversible once made, if that makes sense.

I believe he was always like this, and was destined to be like this, because he doesn't possess the strength to not be. That strength is also what's required to actually change for the few that can (and usually if you have it to begin with you wouldn't need to change), meaning he's never going to. Which I guess really boils down to if one believes that kind of inner strength can be developed, or of its something you either have or don't.

Anyway, I apologize for my ramblings. I was feeling very pensive this morning.

TLDR: Nick's a fag, then, now, forever.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your thoughts (as a newbie to Nick's nonsense). His fall from grace coincides with my exploration of narcissism in my own history. That makes him even more fascinating as a case study. A subject in a glass cage that can be observed without getting any of him on us. (Let's face it, what else is he good for, at this point?). As far as change, my thinking is that change is extremely hard and out of the reach of people who lack the self-awareness to see that it's necessary. He doesn't possess that awareness, in my opinion, on ANY level, which essentially makes it impossible. As with any addict, he'd need to hit a rock bottom. It will eventually come, but he has a long way to fall, yet.
 
Sneed Force One said:
I hope I'm wrong because its very sad, but if Nate dies, Rekieta is going to use the moment to suggest that LawTube "come together in forgiveness (except Kurt)" to be all good pals again.
He wants his meal ticket back. The panel-less shows aren't worth the effort. He knows by his lonesome, he's a bitter sad bitch.

Again, explicitly, I hope he'll pull through, but I'm imagining this scenario.
Click to expand...
He's not so good at pretending these days. But hey Runkle saw Nick's live streams where Nick is constantly trying to humiliate Kurt and yet brought him on the stream, so maybe they're dumb enough to fall for his act.

Regardless, Nick wouldn't last long before fucking things up, I'm sure. It's like being friends with Ralph, I mean sure you can believe his bullshit but he can't control himself.

Nick hasn't brain-damaged himself quite as badly as Ralph has, and did used to have a greater intelligence than Ralph was "blessed" with (i.e. very, very little), but still, he's on the same path, just different circumstances.
 
Yaniv’s Hairy Balls said:
As someone who lives in an area with more deer than people this just isn’t true. So many people have hurt themselves, hurt others, totaled cars, and/or destroyed property attempting to avoid deer. We literally teach people out here not to swerve or panicstomp the brakes bc it has done so much more damage and it’s difficult to get insurance to cover “swerved and hit an elderly couple head on in the opposite lane to avoid the deer” as opposed to “hit a deer and fucked my front end”.
Click to expand...
Dodging only worked for me because it was a long straightaway that I was familiar with and there was clearly nobody coming
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom