Zumock is getting trolled, but the troll is right.
* Nick's kid tested positive at a level consistent with daily use.
We know that the test was a true positive because:
* Had there been a second test that showed negative, Nick would have released it or at least talked about it.
* If he thought the first test was a false positive, he would have had the kids grandparents re-test his children (they were the foster parents)
* If his parents refused to re-test, Nick would have had a re-test done when he got custody back. Had the daughter consumed drugs around the time of the arrest, they would have still showed up in a hair test at this point, so a negative test result at this point would at least show that she wasn't getting drugged right up until the arrest.
* He was trying to damage control the positive test before the results were even back ("Your honor - as it shows up the CPS report, the kids say if they've been exposed to drugs it must have been somewhere else! So if that drug test comes back positive uhhhh it wasn't me your honor!")
We know that Nick was the one giving the kid cocaine because:
* Nick came up with multiple contradictory explanations for the positive test (the test was a false positive [10x the cutoff btw] and also the cop wiped cocaine on the daughter's scalp [wouldn't cause a positive test]).
* Nick was trying to convince people that cocaine is a good treatment for ADHD, explaining WHY he would give his kid cocaine
* The cocaine was in a locked safe in a locked room, so the kid couldn't have gotten it herself.
* Nick accused Aaron of dosing Nick's kid through food - this basically serves as Nick's confession. He knows his daughter wasn't snorting the cocaine, but was instead being poisoned through her food and drink. Nick needs to explain how this could have happened without it being his fault, hence accusing Aaron. Also don't forget that Aaron had been out of Nick's life so long that it couldn't have been Aaron.
It's funny to me because most of the things that solidify to me that Nick was intentionally drugging his 9 year old daughter with cocaine came out as a result of him attempting to manipulate everyone and control the narrative.
Q: Why wouldn't he just say he had her re-tested and lie? The CPS case is sealed, no one would be able to fact check him
A: Nick prefers to manipulate with lies of omission, half truths, implications, etc. He will straight up lie when he has to, but his go-to is to suggest something so he can go back and say "I didn't say that" - like when he suggested the cops planted the cocaine to Chrissie Mayer, or when he suggested Aaron dosed his kid with cocaine. I've known people like Nick before and they've behaved the same way. I think they kind of see it as a game and get a dopamine rush if they can trick someone without outright lying. So he has been SUGGESTING that the test is a false positive, and SUGGESTING that the cops contaminated her hair to cause the positive, and tricking some number of people despite not actually completely facially lying.