After a fully contested prelim by which the State barely had enough evidence to establish probable cause, and after we found witnesses to contest the basic premise of the State’s case against Jack Holland, a weather man for a Twin Falls television station, the State today filed its motion to dismiss. Included within that motion is this proclamation:
“As part of its continuing duty to investigate this case, the State has interviewed additional witnesses who have come forward since the preliminary hearing, and thoroughly reviewed their statements and other evidence as it relates to the testimony presented at preliminary hearing. It is the State’s conclusion based upon a close analysis of all the facts now available about this incident that Mr. Holland did not commit the crime of Rape as defined in I.C. § 18-6101. Accordingly the State moves to dismiss the charge against the Defendant.”
And the truth is confirmed – Jack Holland is innocent. That “new evidence” included information from a third party concerning a similar encounter with the complaining person.
That is simply the strongest statement of innocence I have seen from a prosecutor’s office in 35 years of practice. But the cost to Jack remains enormous.
He lost his job and likely his career.
He was jailed and had to pay a bond to gain his release.
He had to hire counsel to defend the case.
And his life was derailed in the worst possible way.
And all that based on the word of a woman who knew exactly what her words might do.
Jack Holland did not commit the crime of Rape, and he should never have been charged.