Nick is repaying his government's kindness of trying to bury the bodycam footage for him by trying to extort hundreds of thousands of dollars from them.
No good deed goes unpunished, that's what you get for trusting the balldo, etc.
The bodycam is NOT Rekieta property.
The bodycam is owned by the people of minnesota.
Nick is NOT a party to the FOIA lawsuits.
Junkie can sue the government for FREE SPEECH?
Good luck.
Junkie cannot sue the women or Null, no parity, no relationship.
Why are the FARMS even entertaining what wet brain claims?
PAGE 2, LINE 10, Hardin Filing:
"Additionally, the Court held that the records Mr. Hardin requested were also available from the Kandiyohi County Sheriff, the original custodian, as 'public data on individuals.'"
SIGNED---Page 8 by OLIVER W. BROMKE [a South Dakota Law Firm]
MY COMMENT: The very fact the subject of bodycamera footage threatens to sue a governmental custodian simply because they are the subject in the video is THE BASIC PREMISE as to why bodycamera footage can NEVER be private and non public: 1. Video created and stored by a government entity; 2. In furterance of the governmental job; 3. WE THE PEOPLE PAID for the hardware, software, vidro, documents, records, etc that retain the video; 4. The opportunity for an individual to sue the government for doing their job in a public capacity protecting the public should then be able to sue like the video.is private simply because they are the subject is opposite of public policy of an informed and protected public community.
Or something like that. I hurt my brain.
It makes no sense that MN or addict is trying to claim that BOdYCAM footage is private merely because they are the subject in the video or because it was not entered as evidence? It exists. Criminal case settled. Done.