💀 Horrorcow Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta / "u/Early-Leopard-8351" - Polysubstance abusing puppy snuffing cuckold who dosed his child, "Lawtube pope" turned zesty Dabbleverse streamer. Swinger visitor of 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Seethed at his ex-BF Aaron on REDDIT. Wife's gunted and toed bod worth $50. Drives like a Jeet.

Friday hearing outcome?

  • DENIED!

    Głosy: 40 9,9%
  • Upheld against Patrick Melton only.

    Głosy: 14 3,5%
  • Upheld against Nicholas Rekieta only.

    Głosy: 12 3,0%
  • Another win for the toe!

    Głosy: 192 47,5%
  • Continuance...

    Głosy: 146 36,1%

  • Łączna liczba głosujących
    404
  • Ankieta zamknięta .
When I was taking it, I was explicitly told I couldn’t drink but, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are schemes for making it work
You can drink on Naltrexone, it kills the fun Factor and you just get the shitty parts of getting drunk.

Naltrexone also makes withdrawals worse.

It does help with cravings, and overall makes beating the habit easier.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Ban drugs, weed, make it Singapore style, I know guys love weed, but you'll end up like this.

Just allow alcohol and that's bad as it gets. The entire 'recreational drug' thing will eat you up and destroy all you. Nick wasn't using weed and was into the worst shit, but being easy on drugs leads to what we are seeing. It's a nightmare.
 
How does a story about an alcoholic child abusing coke addict who dabbles in MDMA have to do with pot? Nigga, this isn't Facebook, take it to somewhere it's relevant to the topic.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
"They've earned it." WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

I can piece together and parse the rest, but what the FUCK is he implying? Is he being passive aggressive and sarcastic? What even is that remark?
The only thing I can piece together is he did not learn a thing from any of this. I know that's what everyone has been saying, but his perspective has not shifted in the slightest. It's insane
 
They had a search warrant.
He subjected his kids to a battering ram assault on his home instead of allowing (under protest and with lack of consent) a lawful entry.
Don't mistake my looking at this from a legal perspective as some kind of misplaced sympathy for Nick or Kayla. They absolutely should not have jeopardized the stability of their children's lives by being druggies. They fucked up. This is fully on them.

My point is Nick, who is reasonably interpreted as complying with lawful instructions, hadn't yet seen the warrant. Nor had the other co-head of household, Kayla. That matters considerably given the extremely short timeframe of these non-emergency events.
 
I think the most outraged people on here are probably the biggest drug users. Just like Nick.
Do you mean the people upset that Nick got arrested are the biggest drug users? Because if you think the people upset that Nick himself is on drugs are drug users, then I think we'd be hard pressed to find a shittier take.
 
Well at least Nicky sounds like he has some inkling that he fucked up in this latest post. Kind of wild he already plans to go live in the next day or two. Will be an interesting weekend.... wonder what his vibe on stream will be like.
 
I don't know, it's pretty simple. Story: YOU DID DRUGS (WITH KIDS AT HOME)

Also "stories" as if he were a hardened criminal. It's a single story.
I get so goddamn sick of us being portrayed as the worst people on the Internet when it seems a lot of the time we are the ONLY fucking people who CARE at ALL about decency and sanity and protecting the innocent. It just makes me want to REEEEEEEE!
 
I get so goddamn sick of us being portrayed as the worst people on the Internet when it seems a lot of the time we are the ONLY fucking people who CARE at ALL about decency and sanity and protecting the innocent. It just makes me want to REEEEEEEE!

being right all the time is a heavy burden. most can't handle it. just look at nick. oh wait...
 
It was the Priest. Man, no wonder the cops jumped. When the Pastor decides to step foreword its real shit. That is a huge deal incidentally, for those who don't understand Christian theology. Regardless of denominations, issues that happen within the church and its parishioners are the purview of the Priest, and US law actually protects Priests as much as Lawyers. They cannot be compelled in any way to divulge information they may know that was told to them in confidence. That said, the Priest also has a duty of care to ALL his parishioners, and this includes Rekieta's kids. Which means he probably first went to Rekieta and told him to shape up. When that didn't happen, his duty shifted to the children.
My father is a pastor. He had to report families twice. Both times he went with another elder of the church to the parents and talk to them. Several times they took what he was saying and got better. But twice he had to go to the police.
 
25g is the cut off for a first degree felony, but to be fair, the baggies are really small and light. I just tried to weigh a little baggy similar to what a coke bag looks like (but it's a bit bigger cause it's for body jewelry) on my gram scale and it couldn't even register it. I genuinely don't think the combined weight of the plastic would even be 2g. I was just throwing out a number and even if it did end up weighing 2g, do you honestly think the court would reduce his sentence over .4g? I mean they could probably just assume if they scraped all the shit with residue on it, it would cover that weight. They said there was a bullet and bullets can hold at least a g, though they didn't specify what if anything was in it. I mean, I suppose he could try this argument in court but it's reeeally splitting hairs.
It severely reduces the maximum if he can get it down by 2 and changes the category of crime, so it'll be tried and would factor into plea deals significantly if it's doable. No way of knowing what the packaging is though. Someone mentioned a vial and that would probably be at least a gram itself (can't recall if it was explicitly in the weighed portion), so it would really hinge on how the larger portion was packaged.

Anyway, yeah, I'm probably arguing about nothing. The sentencing guidelines with his record probably make the whole thing an expensive embarrassment rather than a lengthy prison sentence anyway.
 
Do you mean the people upset that Nick got arrested are the biggest drug users? Because if you think the people upset that Nick himself is on drugs are drug users, then I think we'd be hard pressed to find a shittier take.
I think the biggest people bashing Nick are alcoholics and drugs users that are like Jeremy in the 'there goes them before I'. And most bashers on her are for sure addicts too.
 
Every kiwi is an illegal drug user it seems, from pot to ketamine to coke, all of it. Then they go 'omg this guy got caught', while they all do it all the time. What can really be said of that? I mean most kiwis won't have kids so not quite as bad, so that's not as bad?

I know this will get flags, people hate their mirrors.
What a retarded take.
 
What's up with cops with a valid warrant allowing a "juvenile female" to close the door in their face after initially opening it anyway?
Well, presumably, a part of search warrant was the master bedroom, where the Rekieta's would most likely be keeping their drugs.

As far as the legal searches go, you can only give police consent to search parts of property you personally use.

To quote,
Residents
Even occupants who have less than full rights over the premises can, through consent, give police the legal justification they need to search parts of a residence. For example, a roommate can give consent that allows the police to search her room, the living room, and the kitchen. But if she doesn't have access to or control over her roommate's separate bedroom, she can't provide proper authorization for the police to search it.


Also:
But even when a child has authority to agree to a home search, the police probably can't use consent to search everything. For instance, officers would likely be going too far by searching a locked trunk that the child doesn't have a key to. (People v. Cooney, 235 Cal. App. 3d Supp. 1 (1991).)

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/who-can-let-the-police-search-your-home.html

So I assume that the young child would not have the grounds to give permission to the police to search her parents bedroom.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole