💀 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.

[Spaded Dave]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=sipG5NN7Ae0

"Listen, Nick hasn't changed."
*Proceeds to justify how he's changed*
"People are just mad because they had some incorrect vision of him in their head that doesn't fit into the box they want"
*Proceeds to justify why he's had a shift in content and presentation of himself*

Listen, Nick and crew. The shit you're all catching is mostly because you faggots are trying to hold two positions at once. You're trying to say he hasn't changed while defending why it's ok that he did. Just admit that he's changed and say he's allowed to change and if people don't like it then he appreciates them being around for the ride so far but they can hop off now. It honestly is THAT simple. But they have this idea that "changing" is bad and thus they can't admit to it or....something bad will happen? Their egos will be damaged? You guys make yourselves look way more retarded by trying to pull off this double-speak.

Also, Legal Mindset talking about Internet fwendship at the end there is emblematic of an issue that is sure to turn out hilarious.

 

[Phil Leotardo]

Has anybody in chat asked Mindset / d'Adesky about running to Korea to escape his debts yet?

 

[ForTheHoard]

I still don't get where this "people are mad at him" shit comes from. He just went from a guy we laugh with to a guy we laugh at. The only people I've seen getting mad are the ones that feel like we somehow turned on Nick (Locals chat). Frankly, I don't give a shit what Nick does. I don't enjoy his content now that he shifted formats so I don't watch him anymore. Coming here to laugh at the idea of him shoving his balls inside another human being is a source of joy.

 

[Nol 2]

Listen, Nick and crew. The shit you're all catching is mostly because you faggots are trying to hold two positions at once. You're trying to say he hasn't changed while defending why it's ok that he did. Just admit that he's changed and say he's allowed to change and if people don't like it then he appreciates them being around for the ride so far but they can hop off now. It honestly is THAT simple. But they have this idea that "changing" is bad and thus they can't admit to it or....something bad will happen? Their egos will be damaged? You guys make yourselves look way more retarded by trying to pull off this double-speak.

Also, Legal Mindset talking about Internet fwendship at the end there is emblematic of an issue that is sure to turn out hilarious.

Capos following the orders from the godfather. Or in this case, Cardinals following orders from the law Pope

 

[Strix454]

Again, if it was me, I'd be looking to settle. But I haven't got paypigs galore looking to fund my follies. And I suppose there's the issue of damages? How great is Monty's reputation in the first place? I'd be worried that regardless of how low regard somebody's held in, a jury will think it's going to be damaged by the allegation -- from a lawyer, no less -- that you're a paedophile.

The problem is that to a jury up there, neither side is going to seem much better than the other. Its a conservative rural area and they are both going to seem like weirdo faggots suing each other over their mutual faggotry. Gay Bar Swinger Nick isn't going to come across as someone they can empathize with. He is also rich which can count against people in that kind of place in this kind of situation. To some people in the jury pool, Nick is going to come across as the bosses son. The entitled rich prick whose whole life is a degenerate party.
If Nick also defended that women who stole all that money up there, there are going to be people in the jury pool (the smarter ones) in a place like that who will know and remember him.

 

[Kosher Salt]

This seems to suggest that it's not quite as cut and dried as you make it seem here:

"Labeling a statement an opinion does not automatically make it an opinion or make it safe from the possibility of it being defamatory. If a reader or listener could reasonably understand that the communication as stating a fact that could be verified, the communication will not be considered an opinion, especially if it is sufficiently derogatory to hurt the subject’s reputation. Also, a communication that is presented in the form of an opinion may be considered defamatory if it implies that the opinion is based on defamatory facts that have not been disclosed.
In other words, the fact that a statement is one’s opinion does not necessarily make one immune from a defamation lawsuit."

Which, I imagine means context is everything , and they'd let a jury decide whether Nick's claims that Monty likes to suck little boy cock was opinion or not.

Whether a statement contains a factual allegation is a question of law that has to be decided by the court before a jury's allowed to see it. Juries decide questions of fact. If the court determines that as a matter of law, the statement doesn't contain any factual issue, it cannot possibly help the jury in their fact-finding and would only serve to potentially confuse them.

How great is Monty's reputation in the first place? I'd be worried that regardless of how low regard somebody's held in, a jury will think it's going to be damaged by the allegation -- from a lawyer, no less -- that you're a paedophile.

American courts have actually been very consistent on this point: Calling someone a pedophile is a protected opinion.

Also if I remember correctly it was even more clear from the context of Nick's statement that he meant it as an opinion. In fact I got the impression that he was using it as a specific example of an opinion that's salacious but nevertheless not defamatory.

 

[Spaded Dave]

That video of Drex defending Nick sparked a memory about a conversation from a stream years ago. I'm not sure if this is the exact one I'm remembering, but it's the first one I found and it will do just fine to show the hypocrisy side-by-side. This is from a stream 3 years ago with 30k views, none of which I'd bet are Locals wine moms.

TLDW: Drex goes on about how they are "complete opposites" and "reacted differently to the world" and straight up calls Nick trad. The cope I'd predict would be that this all totally just refers to the state of being married though and I'm just projecting any extra meaning/implications.

 

[Kopasea]

Being a relative newbie in internet lore, I spent the last few days going over Dick Masterson's thread and the parallels are extensive. Nick hasn't had his cuties moment, but I'm expecting it soon. He does have one thing going in his favor though. Locals, while a pit of degenerative parasocial idiots, allows him to voice his hypocritical copes outside the public eye (whereas Dick did it on Twitter).

As far as Nick's old audience, there are definitely members in locals who have been there for a while. I've also been going through some of his old streams and Andrew_Wahoo (grumpy dwarf pictured previously) was in chat.

 

[Phony Chicken]

"Listen, Nick hasn't changed."
*Proceeds to justify how he's changed*
"People are just mad because they had some incorrect vision of him in their head that doesn't fit into the box they want"
*Proceeds to justify why he's had a shift in content and presentation of himself*

Listen, Nick and crew. The shit you're all catching is mostly because you faggots are trying to hold two positions at once. You're trying to say he hasn't changed while defending why it's ok that he did. Just admit that he's changed and say he's allowed to change and if people don't like it then he appreciates them being around for the ride so far but they can hop off now. It honestly is THAT simple. But they have this idea that "changing" is bad and thus they can't admit to it or....something bad will happen? Their egos will be damaged? You guys make yourselves look way more retarded by trying to pull off this double-speak.

Also, Legal Mindset talking about Internet fwendship at the end there is emblematic of an issue that is sure to turn out hilarious.

Honestly, from their perspective, as people that know and communicate with Nick regularly, privately, he likely hasn't changed. Their problem is they aren't viewing it from the perspective of everyone that doesn't know Nick privately. To those/us, he has changed. For the worse.

Given the recent posting of actual legal filings he's done, how bad they were, and how he's poorly handling the Monty suit, I'm more of the opinion now that he's a bad lawyer and always has been and it was just hidden by his charisma. To be a good con artist/grifter you need charisma because it distracts people from looking into what a piece of shit fraud you may actually be.

 

[Armitage]

Honestly, from their perspective, as people that know and communicate with Nick regularly, privately, he likely hasn't changed. Their problem is they aren't viewing it from the perspective of everyone that doesn't know Nick privately. To those/us, he has changed. For the worse.

Given the recent posting of actual legal filings he's done, how bad they were, and how he's poorly handling the Monty suit, I'm more of the opinion now that he's a bad lawyer and always has been and it was just hidden by his charisma. To be a good con artist/grifter you need charisma because it distracts people from looking into what a piece of shit fraud you may actually be.

Really anyone who knows about law already realized that he is not a great legal mind. Look, I liked him and found him entertaining, however his legal reasoning wasn't that great. For the longest time I never minded this, but I only looked into his videos on particular topics, such as Greer, where you don't need to be a great legal mind. But I never expect legal youtubers to be great legal minds, I just want to be entertained, if I want good legal analysis I will go elsewhere. He never needed to be a good lawyer for what he does, just have reasonable takes, bring it in a form that is digestable for the lay person and be entertaining, as long as he did that I think he would be fine as a law youtuber. For me the biggest issue is that to me he is no longer entertaining in his content and as such I don't watch his content anymore expect clips in this thread to laugh at him.

 

[not william stenchever]

Which, I imagine means context is everything , and they'd let a jury decide whether Nick's claims that Monty likes to suck little boy cock was opinion or not.

To be fair the only knowledge I have of "what the fuck is a montagraph" is Nick saying that the individual in question a big fan of fellating underage boys.

Only after learning about this lawsuit did I find out he's also known for fucking melons.

 

[Anticipointment]

In the Elissa clips video Drex says Nick has “assless chaps”?

 

[Swole McPole]

American courts have actually been very consistent on this point: Calling someone a pedophile is a protected opinion.

This is so mindboggling to me (given how dramatically different it is to the UK) that I had to Google it. This was the first case I turned up. Coincidentally, it's also a Minnesota case.

It seems to make the opposite claim to the one that you're making here. Am I misunderstanding something?

Briefly: Pat has an 18 year old girlfriend. Defendant calls him Pat The Paedophile online. Pat loses his job as a cop so sues defendent for calling him Pat the Paedo. Court enters judgement as a matter of law because calling someone a paedo is defamatory per se. and jury awards general damages and special damages. Special damages is overturned on appeal, the rest stands.

This bit in particular stood out to me:

"With this rule in mind, we hold that in almost every circumstance a reasonable listener would believe that calling a person a pedophile imputes serious sexual misconduct or criminal activity to that person. It is, therefore, defamatory per se."

Here: http://injurylawstpaul.com/messages/154.htm
A better, fuller discussion of the case here: https://casetext.com/case/longbehn-v-schoenrock-1
News coverage: https://www.pinejournal.com/news/former-moose-lake-police-officer-wins-retrial-in-defamation-lawsuit

I'd definitely be settling if it was me.

 

[Kopasea]

In the Elissa clips video Drex says Nick has “assless chaps”?

Wow! I missed that the first time. https://youtu.be/sipG5NN7Ae0?t=63

 

[Swole McPole]

If you want other things to talk about that are funny you could talk about Andrew "Legal Mindset" d'Adesky. His bankruptcy lawsuits got found recently by @Balldo's Gate and give a clear reason why he fled to Korea. He is a less spergy version of Ralph and #1 youtube ballwasher of Nick.
Ver archivo adjunto 4282968

Damn, this is a certified scumbag. Lives in his aging mothers house, racking up his credit card bills and then fucks off to Korea to evade service when the bailiffs come a calling?

He should rename his channel Illegal Mindset.

 

[dustnight]

He should rename his channel Illegal Mindset.

heh funny you should mention that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLB3EMSZ9ZA

 

[Catgirl Tyranid]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=sipG5NN7Ae0

Of course Nick has fucking changed. At a bare minimum he went from being Conservative presenting with Libertarian values to Libertine. He made the stupid decision to thrust shameful behavior into the spotlight and was surprised when his long time supporters didn't toe the line. There is a mountain of difference between acknowledging / referencing your degeneracy and wearing it like a hat that deserves to be shown off because of how big the feather is.

I'd say that every thread has people who typically are involved in a thread because they like the person and their content. Nick typically used to talk about interesting cases with some knowledge of them. I think his laziness was already turning people off, but the increased sex talk was annoying the True and Honest Fans. Him being revealed as a sexual weirdo who allowed his wife to post her cottage cheese ass and posted his own is what turned the thread against him.

Those that are pissed at Nick are pissed because he's decided that he'd rather have skanks in Locals send him a steady stream of lewds than engage with 90% of his fan base that don't want the focus of the show to be his life.

If you want other things to talk about that are funny you could talk about Andrew "Legal Mindset" d'Adesky. His bankruptcy lawsuits got found recently by @Balldo's Gate and give a clear reason why he fled to Korea. He is a less spergy version of Ralph and #1 youtube ballwasher of Nick.
Ver archivo adjunto 4282968

On the one hand, defrauding banks out of any amount of money is based as fuck. On the other, Lol, get fucked d'Adesky. Claiming you can't be found is surefire way to get people digging into your background you idiot.

 

[Retink Retunk]

Here's the dumb thing that Drex and Nick seem to not get, because let's pretend that Nick hasn't changed even if he clearly did, just because you don't talk about certain things on your show doesn't mean you're fake, it just means you choose not to discuss those things and/or that a lot of your audience doesn't want to hear about those things.

Do these two think that every content creator who doesn't talk about the weird porn their into to be fake? And sure, there are some people who will be into hearing about it, but the vast majority of people don't want to know, and if they want something like that, there's a copious amount of it out there in much better forms than Nick can offer.

 

[Real Name 1973]

It's probably been posted here but does anyone have the clip where Nick says his channel income doesn't matter because rumble already paid him? (something like that)

Seems increasingly relevant as he drives more of his audience away.

 

[RACISM]

You may not create new tags. Please change the following tags: balldo

Damn, that's a shame.