State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Rekieta, Kayla Rekieta, April Imholte

[AnOminous]

You are assuming the error was made by court staff, while I assume the error was made by lawyer.

There was no error. It was originally listed and made available because that would be the ordinary course of events. This wasn't some "scrivener's error" or misclick by some clerical worker. The judge himself ordered the public availability of the video, only then to make a major substantive change to his decision presumably upon pressure from both Rekieta and the prosecutor.

This wasn't putting a comma in the right place or something. It was a panicked response.

It was. Wentzel granted the public access at the courthouse because it was.

Like it or not, five judges have found otherwise so far.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

Go bitch somewhere else Karen.

The irony.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

Like it or not, five judges have found otherwise so far.

Yeah, they go along with the retroactive change, but at one point in time it was available and despite that status someone was denied access to it, despite timely request.

The judges can all back each other up and point and precedent after changing the status of the submitted evidence, that was submitted as such because White needed it to get April's testimony thrown out, and argue that her rights were violated by being questioned after being mirandized. After all, he did have a section in the filing about April's rights being violated and to show this, the video was required as evidence. The judge 100% watched it because of that argument.

I 100% agree that the filing was not an error.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

New entry in the appeal